|
UN negotiators have circulated a draft resolution for a Human
Rights Council that would include standards for membership, means for timely
interventions in crises and a year-round existence.
The proposed 45-member council is meant to replace the widely discredited 53-member
Human Rights Commission, and its creation is seen as a critical test of whether
the United Nations can adopt meaningful reform and redeem its scandal-tarnished
reputation. The resolution was presented Thursday.
The commission is scheduled to begin its annual six weeks of sessions in Geneva
on March 13, and diplomats believe the new council must gain General Assembly
approval by Feb. 15 to be able to replace the existing body on time.
The commission has been a persistent embarrassment to the United Nations because
membership has been open to countries like Cuba, Sudan and Zimbabwe - current
members who are themselves accused of gross rights abuses.
In introducing his recommendation for the new council last March, Secretary
General Kofi Annan said such countries sought participation on the panel to
block examination of their own records, a practice he said "casts a shadow
on the reputation of the United Nations as a whole."
Thursday's proposal, a refinement of a draft circulated in December, leaves
open for further negotiation a critical element of Annan's recommended plan
- a requirement that new members be elected by a two-thirds vote of the 191-member
General Assembly.
Put forward as a way of weeding out notorious rights violators, the requirement
is a step backed by the United States, European countries and human rights groups.
"The new text substantially advances the discussion and gives a good basis
to achieve a stronger human rights council, assuming there is a decision to
have members of the council elected by a two-thirds majority," said Peggy
Hicks, the global advocacy director of Human Rights Watch.
The proposal maintains the right of regional country groupings to put forward
a slate of candidates, but adds the requirement that there be individual secret
ballot votes in the General Assembly on each country. Every country on the council
will also be subject to a review of its rights records at least once during
its three-year term.
Nations would not be eligible for immediate re-election after consecutive terms.
diplomats believe the new council must gain General Assembly approval by Feb.
15 to be able to replace the existing body on time.
The commission has been a persistent embarrassment to the United Nations because
membership has been open to countries like Cuba, Sudan and Zimbabwe - current
members who are themselves accused of gross rights abuses.
In introducing his recommendation for the new council last March, Secretary
General Kofi Annan said such countries sought participation on the panel to
block examination of their own records, a practice he said "casts a shadow
on the reputation of the United Nations as a whole."
Thursday's proposal, a refinement of a draft circulated in December, leaves
open for further negotiation a critical element of Annan's recommended plan
- a requirement that new members be elected by a two-thirds vote of the 191-member
General Assembly.
Put forward as a way of weeding out notorious rights violators, the requirement
is a step backed by the United States, European countries and human rights groups.
"The new text substantially advances the discussion and gives a good basis
to achieve a stronger human rights council, assuming there is a decision to
have members of the council elected by a two-thirds majority," said Peggy
Hicks, the global advocacy director of Human Rights Watch.
The proposal maintains the right of regional country groupings to put forward
a slate of candidates, but adds the requirement that there be individual secret
ballot votes in the General Assembly on each country. Every country on the council
will also be subject to a review of its rights records at least once during
its three-year term.
Nations would not be eligible for immediate re-election after consecutive terms.
The proposal also says that the General Assembly should "take into account"
whether applicant countries have been cited by the United Nations or "whether
there are situations that constitute systematic and gross violations of human
rights."
Source: International
Herald Tribune
|