TWN
Info Service on UN Sustainable Development (Oct17/03)
2 October 2017
Third World Network
HRC adopts a raft of resolutions on human rights
Published in SUNS #8543 dated 2 October 2017
Geneva, 29 Sep (Kanaga Raja) - The United Nations Human Rights Council
on Thursday extended the mandates of the Independent Expert on the
promotion of a democratic and equitable international order as well
as that of the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral
coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights.
In other resolutions, the Council also extended the mandates of the
Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation
and guarantees of non-recurrence, the Special Rapporteur on the implications
for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal
of hazardous substances and wastes, as well as the Working Group on
Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances.
These resolutions together with several others concerning other issues
were adopted at the current thirty-sixth regular session of the Council
which concludes on Friday (29 September).
At its session on Friday morning, the Council, by a roll-call vote
of 22 in favour, 11 against and 14 abstentions, decided to extend
for a period of one year the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry
on Burundi; adopted by a roll-call vote of 27 in favour, 7 against
and 13 abstentions a rather lengthy resolution on Syria (56 operative
paragraphs and 18 preambular paragraphs); and adopted by consensus
a resolution extending the mandate of the independent international
fact-finding mission on Myanmar.
The Council is meeting again in the afternoon to take action on a
number of other resolutions before concluding its thirty-sixth session,
including one on Yemen.
[Just before closing its session, the Council adopted without a vote
a resolution on Yemen, in which it requested the High Commissioner
to establish a Group of Eminent International and Regional Experts
for a period of at least one year, and renewable as authorized. A
further report with details will appear in an upcoming issue of SUNS.]
EXTENSION OF VARIOUS MANDATES
The resolution (A/HRC/36/L.3) on the mandate of the Independent Expert
on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order
(introduced by Cuba) was adopted by a vote of 32 in favour, 15 against
and no abstentions.
Those that voted in favour were Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil,
Burundi, China, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia,
Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia,
South Africa, Togo, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.
Those that voted against the resolution were Albania, Belgium, Croatia,
Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Republic
of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States.
In the resolution adopted, the Human Rights Council recognized that
democracy, respect for all human rights, including the right to development,
transparent and accountable governance and administration in all sectors
of society, and effective participation by civil society are an essential
part of the necessary foundations for the realization of social and
people-centred sustainable development.
It reaffirmed that everyone is entitled to a democratic and equitable
international order, and that a democratic and equitable international
order fosters the full realization of all human rights for all.
The Council requested the Independent Expert (currently Mr Alfred
de Zayas) to prepare a final report on his studies conducted during
the last six years of his mandate, and to share it with the Human
Rights Council at its thirty-seventh session.
It decided to renew the mandate of the Independent Expert on the promotion
of a democratic and equitable international order for a period of
three years, in conformity with the terms set forth by the Human Rights
Council in its resolution 18/6.
The Council invited the Independent Expert to continue to develop
close cooperation with academia, think tanks and research institutes,
such as the South Centre, and with other stakeholders from all regions.
The resolution (A/HRC/36/L.14) on human rights and unilateral coercive
measures (introduced by Venezuela on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement)
was adopted by a vote of 30 in favour, 15 against and one abstention.
Those that voted in favour were Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil,
Burundi, China, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia,
Nigeria, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, South
Africa, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.
Those that voted against were Albania, Belgium, Croatia, Georgia,
Germany, Hungary, Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Republic
of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States.
The lone abstention was Togo.
In the resolution, the Human Rights Council stressed that unilateral
coercive measures and legislation are contrary to international law,
international humanitarian law, the Charter and the norms and principles
governing peaceful relations among States.
The Council expressed its grave concern at the negative impact of
unilateral coercive measures on human rights, development, international
relations, trade, investment and cooperation.
It reaffirmed that no State may use or encourage the use of any type
of measure, including but not limited to economic or political measures,
to coerce another State in order to obtain from it the subordination
of the exercise of its sovereign rights and to secure from it advantages
of any kind.
It was alarmed by the fact that most current unilateral coercive measures
have been imposed, at great cost, in terms of the human rights of
the poorest and of persons in vulnerable situations, on developing
countries by developed countries.
The Council was deeply disturbed by the negative impact of unilateral
coercive measures on the right to life, the rights to health and medical
care, the right to freedom from hunger and the right to an adequate
standard of living, food, education, work and housing.
It decided to extend for a period of three years the mandate of the
Special Rapporteur, as set out in Human Rights Council resolution
27/21.
RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT
The resolution (A/HRC/36/L.13/Rev.1) on the right to development (introduced
by Venezuela on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement) was adopted by
a vote of 31 in favour, 11 against and four abstentions.
Those that voted in favour were Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil,
Burundi, China, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia,
Nigeria, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, South
Africa, Togo, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.
Those that voted against were Belgium, Croatia, Georgia, Germany,
Hungary, Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands, Switzerland, United Kingdom
and the United States.
Albania, Portugal, Republic of Korea and Slovenia abstained in the
vote.
In the resolution, the Human Rights Council stressed that the responsibility
for managing worldwide economic and social issues and threats to international
peace and security must be shared among the nations of the world and
should be exercised multilaterally, and that, in this regard, the
central role must be played by the United Nations as the most universal
and representative organization in the world.
It welcomed the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
and emphasized that the 2030 Agenda is informed by the Declaration
on the Right to Development and that the right to development provides
a vital enabling environment for the full realization of the Sustainable
Development Goals.
The Council expressed concern about the increasing number of cases
of human rights violations and abuses by some transnational corporations
and other business enterprises, underlining the need to ensure that
appropriate protection, justice and remedies are provided to the victims
of human rights violations and abuses resulting from the activities
of those entities.
It underscored the fact that they must contribute to the means of
implementation for the realization of the right to development.
The Council affirmed that the thirtieth anniversary of the Declaration
on the Right to Development presented a unique opportunity for the
international community to demonstrate and reiterate its unequivocal
commitment to the right to development, recognizing the high profile
it deserves, and redoubling its efforts to implement this right.
The Council decided to continue to act to ensure that its agenda promotes
and advances sustainable development and the achievement of the remaining
Millennium Development Goals and of the Sustainable Development Goals,
and in this regard lead to raising the right to development, as set
out in paragraphs 5 and 10 of the Vienna Declaration and Programme
of Action, to the same level and on a par with all other human rights
and fundamental freedoms.
It decided that the Working Group on the Right to Development, taking
into account Human Rights Council resolution 9/3, shall finalize consideration
of the criteria and operational sub-criteria, preferably no later
than its nineteenth session, in relation to the elaboration of a comprehensive
and coherent set of standards for the implementation of the right
to development, and shall take appropriate steps to ensure respect
for the practical application of these standards, in order for them
to evolve into a basis for consideration of an international legal
standard of a binding nature, through a collaborative process of engagement.
It encouraged relevant bodies of the United Nations system, within
their respective mandates, including United Nations specialized agencies,
funds and programmes, relevant international organizations, including
the World Trade Organization and relevant stakeholders, including
civil society organizations, to give due consideration to the right
to development in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development, to contribute further to the work of the Working Group,
and to cooperate with the High Commissioner and the Special Rapporteur
in the fulfilment of their mandates with regard to the implementation
of the right to development.
NEW WORKING GROUP ON PRIVATE MILITARY, SECURITY COMPANIES
The resolution (A/HRC/36/L.15, introduced by Tunisia on behalf of
the African Group) on the mandate of the open-ended intergovernmental
working group to elaborate the content of an international regulatory
framework on the regulation, monitoring and oversight of the activities
of private military and security companies was adopted without a vote.
In the resolution, the Human Rights Council decided to establish a
new open-ended intergovernmental working group, for a period of three
years, with a mandate to elaborate the content of an international
regulatory framework, without prejudging the nature thereof, to protect
human rights and ensure accountability for violations and abuses relating
to the activities of private military and security companies, to be
informed by the discussion document on elements for an international
regulatory framework on the regulation, monitoring and oversight of
the activities of private military and security companies, as prepared
by the Chair-Rapporteur, and further inputs from Member States and
other stakeholders.
It also decided that the working group shall meet for five working
days and submit an annual progress report to the Human Rights Council
in conformity with its annual programme of work.
It acknowledged the importance of providing the working group with
the expertise and expert advice necessary to fulfil its mandate, and
decided that the working group shall invite experts and all relevant
stakeholders to participate in its work.
STAFF COMPOSITION AT HUMAN RIGHTS OFFICE
The resolution (A/HRC/36/L.1, introduced by Cuba) on the composition
of staff of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
was adopted by a vote of 31 in favour, 15 against and one abstention.
Those that voted in favour were Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil,
Burundi, China, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador,
Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia,
Nigeria, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia,
South Africa, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.
Those that voted against were Albania, Belgium, Croatia, Georgia,
Germany, Hungary, Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Republic
of Korea, Slovenia, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States.
Togo abstained in the vote.
In the resolution, the Human Rights Council noted with concern that
the dependence of the Office of the High Commissioner on extra-budgetary
resources is at the heart of the imbalance in the composition of its
staff.
It expressed concern at the imbalance in the geographical representation
in the composition of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights.
It also expressed serious concern at the continuous prominent imbalance
in the geographical representation of senior management personnel
of the Office of the High Commissioner.
It requested the High Commissioner, within his administrative responsibilities,
to redouble his efforts with a view to redress the current imbalance
in the geographical composition of the staff of the Office, paying
particularly attention to the senior management level and the posts
not subject to geographical distribution.
The Council welcomed the decision to continue to pay special attention
to the achievement of a gender balance in the composition of the staff.
It underlined the importance of continuing to promote geographical
diversity in recruitment and promotion in the Professional category
and, in particular, in senior management positions as a principle
of the staffing policies of the Office of the High Commissioner.
The Council recognized that efforts to achieve savings and the efficient
utilization of resources should not adversely affect the full implementation
of mandated programmes and activities and the measures taken for improving
the geographical composition of the staff.
It reaffirmed the vital importance of geographical balance in the
composition of the staff of the Office of the High Commissioner, taking
into account the significance of national and regional specificities
and various historic, cultural and religious backgrounds and of different
political, economic and legal systems to the promotion and protection
of the universality of human rights.
It stressed that extra-budgetary resources, in particular when they
are related to the establishment of new posts, shall be used in a
manner consistent with the mandates, programmes and activities of
the Organization, including the principle of equitable geographical
distribution of the staff, and in compliance with the existing budgetary
rules and regulations.
The Council also requested the High Commissioner to submit a report
to the Human Rights Council at its thirty- ninth session, on the geographical
composition of the staff of the Office of the High Commissioner and
the actions taken within the current staff selection system to achieve
an equitable geographical representation of the Office, as requested
by the Council in the present and past resolutions.