Compromises cast doubt on new human rights body

By Mark Turner and Hugh Williamson 
May 5, 2006
The Financial Times
Original Source: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/ca4202a2-dc63-11da-890d-0000779e2340.html

Cuba, China and Russia appear almost certain to win seats on the UN’s inaugural Human Rights Council, prompting questions about how committed the new body will be to protecting people from oppression, torture and other abuses.
The outcome of the council’s May 9 elections will be watched closely by UN supporters and critics alike, amid fears that compromises in establishing the body will undercut efforts to restore credibility lost in the Human Rights Commission in Geneva.
The 47-member council is the centrepiece of the UN’s faltering reform process and its failure or success may be the most visible testimony of the attempts by Kofi Annan, the secretary-general, to breathe new life into the institution.
The UN secretariat and non-governmental organisations have rallied behind it, despite disappointment that its rules fell short of their ambitions for tough membership conditions. They argue that the council, whose members need to win 96 votes in the 191-member General Assembly, make pledges and submit their records to review marks significant progress.
Human Rights Watch, the New York-based pressure group, says greater scrutiny has already dissuaded some of the worst offenders from standing, such as Sudan, Zimbabwe, Libya, Syria and Nepal. “That in itself is a major step forward,” said Kenneth Roth, its director.
At the same time, many countries that have declared their candidacy also have poor human rights records, both domestically and in their commitment to standards elsewhere in the world. Mr Roth singled out Cuba, Russia and China as the offenders most likely to win but also highlighted the candidacies of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Azerbaijan.
Even some democratic candidates, with relatively good records at home, had a weak record of standing up for the rights of others. India and South Africa, for example, “obviously don’t think people in other parts of the world are good enough to enjoy the freedoms they have at home”, Mr Roth said of their voting records.
The US, which did not vote for the establishment of the council and is not standing for a seat, has been the institution’s most prominent sceptic. But some Europeans, who generally back the new body, also have doubts.
US officials acknowledged yesterday that the “shocking images” of abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq had damaged US human rights leadership in the world but said there had been “relatively few actual cases” of ill-treatment of foreign detainees.
Giving evidence to a UN committee on US compliance with international law on torture, John Bellinger, a legal adviser at the State Department, said the Bush administration was absolutely committed to the eradication of torture, which was prohibited by law. “There are no exceptions,” he said.