Controversial changes to UN rights body passes

Canada, U.S. rally little support

By Steven Edwards
November 16, 2007
CanWest News Service
Source: http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=88cdec73-c6c9-4858-a95c-f2e8cbfe45dc&k=11105


UNITED NATIONS -- Canada and a handful of other countries were rebuffed Friday in their attempt to stave off flawed and politicized rule changes for the United Nations Human Rights Council. 

The 165-7 vote saw only the United States, Australia, Israel and three Pacific island states join Canada in opposition to the new rules, while three countries abstained.

The vote took place in the UN's social, humanitarian and cultural committee, which is one of the UN's six key policy bodies. The General Assembly usually rubber-stamps the committee's rulings to make them final.

The 47-member human rights council replaced the UN's discredited Human Rights Commission last year. The switch was heralded at the time as evidence that the world body can reform itself.

Since then, the council has proposed a package of rule changes as part of an institution building initiative. However, countries including Canada have vehemently rejected the change on the grounds that it would weaken the body's monitoring powers.

For example, under the new rules, there would no longer be special human rights investigators for Cuba and Belarus. It would also be more difficult to provoke council criticism of any country except one -- Israel -- which Islamic and Arab states selected as being in need of special focus.

The United States has so far declined to stand for election to the council, while Canada is in the second year of a three-year term.

On Friday, Canadian officials focused on how the council chair used procedural manoeuvring last June to sideline Canadian delegates as they sought to call a vote at that time on the package.

We categorically reject the manner in which the ... package was pushed through at the council, said Henri-Paul Normandin, who is Canada's deputy representative at the UN. Canada was denied its sovereign right to call a vote ... (and) in using the ends to justify the means, the human rights council set a very dubious precedent.

Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, said a national election conducted in the same way the council sidelined Canada would be declared unfree and unfair.

The proceedings of all United Nations bodies should be models of fairness and transparency, he said.

It is a virtual given that the so-called automatic majority that Muslim nations can muster at the UN means Israel would stand little chance of winning a council seat.

The victims around the world, oppressed by tyrannical regimes who utterly disregard human rights, deserve and need a real human rights council, said Daniel Carmon, Israel's deputy representative to the UN.

China and Belarus were among many countries that insisted the entire human rights council -- including Canada -- had agreed to the rules changes in June. Though not perfect, (the package) reflects the common understanding of all sides, said Dan Zhang of China.

Monitoring groups such as Geneva-based UN Watch say European democracies went along with the package because they believe -- as does Canada -- that the council remains an improvement over the former commission.

Britain, for example, praised the council's new Universal Periodic Review, in which all countries will be scrutinized. Portugal, speaking for the European Union, also highlighted that innovation, expressing hope it would subject the world's worst human rights violators to real scrutiny.

Like the commission before it, the council is meant to uphold the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The UN tossed out the commission after abuser states and many with an anti-Israel agenda infiltrated it. 

But the council has devoted entire sessions to condemning Israel. It has looked at Sudan and Burma, but taken no action against the likes of Zimbabwe, North Korea, Iran, Belarus and Cuba, which human rights groups regularly criticize.