The UN's thugs
 
May 11, 2006
National Post
Original Source: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id=ff52b28a-8b71-4ddc-a02b-84ad759b39aa


It is unclear whether the new United Nations Human Rights Council is an improvement over the Commission on Human Rights it replaced. We remain, however, doubtful. Although it was widely reported this week that just six rights-abusing nations had been elected to seats on the new council, in fact at least 15 of its 47 members have dubious human rights records. First-tier abusers from the now-defunct commission, such as Syria, may not have won places on the new council, but the new body has its share of second-class repressors.
The world's most abusive regimes used to collude with one another at the old commission; each backing the others' election to membership, so that together they could veto investigations of their separate human rights records. This prompted Secretary-General Kofi Annan to disband the commission last year in favour of the new council with a host of new rules designed to guard against abuse.
For instance, instead of being elected by regional caucuses, council members had to receive a majority of votes from the 191-member General Assembly. This was supposed to prevent human rights abusers getting together regionally to back each other's selection. Nonetheless, on Tuesday the General Assembly managed to choose some of the most oppressive states in the world -- Azerbaijan, China, Cuba, Pakistan, Russia and Saudi Arabia -- and others with questionable commitments to human freedom: Algeria, Djibouti, Senegal, Tunisia, Nigeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia. How can the world have any faith in the new safeguards?
Investigations of national human rights records are now to be automatic. Members of the council must have their national human rights records examined at least once during their three-year term. They must fully co-operate with the examinations, too. And the council itself can expel rights violators from its number. The old commission could only apply to the General Assembly to have egregious members removed.
Still, as recently as last December, Algeria denied visas to outside observers seeking entry to watch dissident trials. While that may not be as serious as barring the UN's own rights inspectors, it reveals the thin commitment on the part of at least one country that won election to the new UN rights body.
Saudi Arabia still practises public floggings and beheadings for religious crimes and political dissent. Its courts routinely conduct secret trials, and the suppression of women is widespread.
Torture, police abuse, and excessive use of force by security forces are widespread in Azerbaijan. The Russian government continues its brutal repression of the breakaway province of Chechnya, abolished direct elections for governors, curtailed voting in parliamentary elections and uses the criminal justice system to imprison rivals.
Pakistan still condones so-called honour killings, legal discrimination against and mistreatment of women and religious minorities and lack of due process. China still aggressively censors the Internet ... has no independent judiciary, leads the world in executions and bans independent trade unions, according to New York-based Human Rights Watch. Meanwhile, Cuba denied basic rights to free expression, association, assembly, privacy, movement and due process of law. Open criticism of Fidel Castro remains a crime.
These don't sound to us like worthy guardians of worldwide human rights. Indeed, they sound like nations so well practised at circumventing laws, treaties and other safeguards that they will soon find a way around Mr. Annan's reforms.