|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 16, 2007
AL-008-2007
A Statement by the Asian Legal Resource Centre
WORLD: UN Human Rights Council Elections: blank ballots urged in order to exclude gross rights abusers
Fourteen of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council's (HRC) 47 seats are up for election before the UN General Assembly (GA) on May 17, 2007. Four of these are from the Asian region, with Bahrain, India, Indonesia and the Philippines coming to the end of their current one-year terms on the Council.
However, as is the case with all other regions except for the Western group, the Asian group is only presenting the same number of candidates as there are seats available. In only offering this so-called clean slate, the Asian group is ensuring that there is no democratic choice available and attempting to force the selection of its candidates. They include Qatar - which will replace Bahrain - and India, Indonesia and the Philippines, which are vying for re-election. If any national election were conducted in this way – for example by having only one candidate in a Presidential election – it would be considered a farce and a mockery of democracy. It must be noted that despite having refrained from putting forward a clean slate, the Western group has only presented three candidates for two seats – not an overwhelming choice either. It is ironic in the extreme that it can it be deemed acceptable for the world's apex human rights body to be formed as the result of such elections.
In the inaugural elections to the HRC, held on May 9, 2006, all groups presented more candidates than there were seats available; 18 Asian States competed for the region's allocated 13 seats. However, one year later, any pretence of the observance of democratic ideals has been discarded.
Under GA resolution 60/251 establishing the HRC, the body's membership is to be decided as the result of elections by the members of the GA, in which the contribution of candidates to the protection of human rights and their voluntary pledges and commitments shall be taken into account. There should therefore be an active evaluation of each candidate's human rights record before they can be elected, which implies that candidates with records that are not deemed as living up to "highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights," as stated in the resolution, should not be selected. The clean slate approach, however, attempts to negate this entire process, which is at the heart of the safeguards that have been put in place to attempt to make the HRC a more viable body than its predecessor, the Commission on Human Rights.
The Commission was abandoned in part because it contained members that were accused of being gross violators of human rights and were thought to be on the body in order to be best placed to shield themselves from criticism concerning their rights records. In establishing the HRC, the international community had given signs that it was attempting to eliminate this problem, however, the emergence of the use of clean slates so early in the HRC's history sets a dangerous precedent, as there is no way to guarantee that regional groups will not put forward countries known to be amongst the worst violators of rights in the future. It could be argued that this is already the case. Additionally, the use of clean slates gives rise to vote trading between states with respect to membership within various other UN bodies, with those States most likely to seek membership on the HRC as opposed to other bodies, being those that most wish to defend their records. So not only do clean slates provide no guarantees against the worst violators of rights ending up on the HRC, they actually encourage such an outcome. This will surely undermine all the reasons for which the reforms to the UN's human rights system are being conducted.
What can be done to circumvent the clean slates approach? Blank ballots and write-in votes should be used. In order to be elected to the HRC, candidates must secure no less than an absolute majority of 97 positive votes in the GA. Failure to secure this number will mean that a candidate would have to compete in a second round against other high-scoring candidates that have also failed to reach the 97 vote mark. Any member of the GA that receives write-in votes from another member can also compete in such a round, even if they are not officially running for the elections.
All the members of the General Assembly are therefore urged to conduct their own evaluation of each candidate's human rights records and, where any of these fail to attain the highest standards of protection and promotion of human rights, cast blank ballots. The HRC elections use secret ballots. States are also urged to cast write-in votes to members of the GA that are deemed to have human rights records that live up to the afore-mentioned standards. While it is true that the HRC's Universal Periodic Review is still under creation, and that this mechanism will be designed to evaluate States' rights records in order to inform the votes of GA members, the fact that this mechanism has yet to begin its work cannot be used as an excuse by States to delay or abscond from their duty to evaluate the records of any and all candidates. There is without doubt already enough information available to inform States concerning each others' records. Any State that cannot live up to such a basic requirement and conduct such evaluations should likely not be qualified to vote in the first place.
In order to assist States in their evaluation of candidates from the Asian region's records, the ALRC has produced statements, which can be found here:
Indonesia: http://www.alrc.net/doc/mainfile.php/alrc_statements/416
The Philippines: http://www.alrc.net/doc/mainfile.php/alrc_statements/415
It is vital that States show the political will to make the Human Rights Council work, rather than cripple it in its infancy. The outcome of these elections will provide an important indicator concerning the body's future.
# # #
About ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at local and national levels throughout Asia.
Posted on 2007-05-16
remarks:5 |
