| |
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
|
|
Guest Commentary: June 14, 2001
Has the UN Commission on Human Rights Lost Its Course?
The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
|
When the United Nations Commission on Human Rights was established in 1947, the United States and the world had just witnessed one of the darkest periods in recent history -- a period when the commitment of the allied nations to the defense of human rights was tried and tested by a man whose ruthless and heinous acts defied any definition of humanity.
This experience left an indelible mark in the American consciousness and strengthened U.S. resolve. Since then, the United States has been without equal in articulating a vision of international human rights and in exercising the will and ability to carry it out, so that the principles outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights become a reality for all.
The U.S. commitment is enduring and will not be affected by its recent ouster from the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. As President Bush said on May 20th of this year: "...repressed people around the world must know this about the United States: We might not sit on some commission, but we will always be the world's leader in support of human rights."
Nevertheless, the vote which took place on May 3rd will have an impact on U.S. capabilities and options in promoting democracy and human rights -- the extent of which remains to be seen.
Without the U.S. as a full participatory member of the Commission, are the oppressed left to depend on the European Union countries to defend their interests? Given the conciliatory approach of the Europeans toward such pariah states as Iran, Libya, Sudan, China and Cuba, will they condemn repressive regimes and hold them accountable for their crimes?
Will the Commission become irrelevant? Will it simply become a tool for gross violators to act with impunity and legitimize their reigns?
If the U.S. is to minimize this corrosive effect and protect the integrity of the Commission, so that it can persist as a tool of justice and righteousness, not of oppression and subjugation, we must decipher the root causes of the anti-U.S. sentiment which permeated through this year’s session. We must determine the compendium of factors affecting the work of the Commission and seek recommendations on a U.S. course of action.
The Administration is conducting a policy review and is looking closely at new approaches, opportunities, and tactics that will enable the U.S. to continue to aggressively pursue its human rights objectives worldwide. We hope our State Department witnesses will discuss some of these during today’s session.
Having led a Congressional delegation to this year’s 57th session of the Commission on Human Rights, I was able to witness first-hand some of the trends that are undermining the integrity and effectiveness of the Commission and outlined them in my findings.
Some of the issues I raised and discussed in my findings were recognized by Ambassador Jacob Selebi on April 24, 1998 when he served as Chairman of the 54th session of the Commission. At that time, Ambassador Selebi underscored the continuing persecution of human rights defenders; group solidarity hindering scrutiny of some human rights situations; countries’ lack of cooperation with Commission investigations.
As a result, I would like to propose that U.S. efforts include a coordinated campaign to press for institutional reforms at the Commission such as: ineligibility of countries whose governments have been censured or criticized by the Commission for persistent human rights violations; eliminating secret ballots; eliminating or re-organizing the regional and sub-regional blocs and quota slots which favor dictatorships over democracies; and reverse the dominant culture requiring that resolutions be passed by consensus.
We realize that there was not much enthusiasm about an amendment to the State Department Authorization bill, passed by the House, linking the payment of our United Nations arrears to the return of the U.S. to the human rights commission.
However, some would highlight that, in recent years, linking of such arrears to reforms in the UN as a whole has led to some much needed changes in the UN system and UN management. They would add that linking of UN arrears to reforms in the Commission should, at the very least, be given due consideration, as the U.S. devises a strategy to address the problems plaguing the UN Commission on Human Rights.
Others, however, argue that it would set a bad precedent for other countries in the future to decide that they are going to withhold their funding. They add that it would further fuel the anti-U.S. sentiment which led to our ouster.
What other options are available to the U.S. to generate support and create the political will to move forward on such reforms?
The lobbying efforts of oppressive regimes have become much more sophisticated with the Chinese leader and Cuban Foreign Minister, for example, traveling this year to member countries of the Commission just prior to votes on resolutions concerning the human rights abuses by their regimes.
They offered cooperative agreements, trade deals, and all kinds of incentives to curry favor with these governments. The message was clear that those who did not follow the script would suffer the consequences.
For years, China has been able to avoid a discussion on its systematic violations of all the individual, religious, civil and political rights of its people by these coercive means.
Similar tactics were used by the Sudanese regime to secure its selection as a member of the Commission for next year's session.
Unfortunately, these methods are not only effective with other tyrants and repressive governments, but some will underscore that they have been used effectively to co-opt democracies as well.
Another concern regarding the agenda of the Commission are efforts by members to divert attention from the universal rights which are the crux of the Commission. There are attempts to "legislate" on "right to development", specifically in such areas as right to work, wages, housing, and other economic issues.
Several members of the U.S. delegation have pointed to a "right to development" resolution introduced by the Non-Aligned Movement at the 57th session as one of numerous examples of how the Commission's work and agenda is being distorted. The resolution offered by the Non-Aligned Movement names, among other obstacles to development, the existing intellectual property rights regime and other such impediments to the unlimited transfer of technology.
Lastly, this hearing will address the role of NGOs and how violator countries are using the NGO process to manipulate the agenda.
Oppressive regimes are funding and securing approval for government-sanctioned and government-selected groups credentialed as NGOs but which are actually promoting the regimes' agendas. They are creating coalitions to remove legitimate human rights groups who are critical of their poor human rights records.
For example, after Freedom House arranged a press conference with Chinese democracy activists during the last year's session, China, with the support of the Sudanese and Cuban regimes, brought proceedings against Freedom House to bar it from participating at future sessions. At this year's 57th session, the Cuban regime filed formal complaints against Freedom House for, among other things, its increasing efforts to bring former dissident leaders from former Eastern bloc countries to meet with human rights dissidents and political opposition leaders in Cuba.
The U.S. must be prepared to counter these efforts. It must continue to do what is right and just. It must continue to lead and fight for the rights endowed to all human beings.
Note: Rep. Ros-Lehtinen chairs the House International Relations Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights. The above column has been adapted from a statement she delivered at a hearing of the Committee, June 6, 2001.
 How to contact Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)
Reading a past guest commentary? Click here for the most current one.
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
