United Nations Assembly votes to create new Human Rights Council by UN News / Reuters 10:43am 16th Mar, 2006   20 March 2006    Ahead of elections for new Human Rights Council, Annan urges support for its work.    Upcoming elections for the new United Nations Human Rights Council will mark a fresh departure from its predecessor, the much-criticized UN Commission on Human Rights, Secretary-General Kofi Annan wrote today in a leading newspaper, urging all Member States to fully support the work of the new body.    In an historic move last week, the General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to set up the 47-member Council, which is scheduled to hold its first session on 19 June and which has a higher status and greater accountability than the much criticized Commission that meets yearly in Geneva.    “In just seven weeks time, on May 9, the UN will elect its first Human Rights Council. That moment can, and must, mark a new beginning for all the UN''s human-rights work,” Mr. Annan wrote in an Op-Ed published in The Wall Street Journal, noting that 170 nations, including all of Washington’s NATO allies, voted last Wednesday for the resolution creating this new Council.    “In short, there is every reason to hope that the new Council will combine the best features of the old system with some much-needed changes. All those who want it to fulfill this promise now have seven weeks to make it happen. Let no one who cares about human rights remain on the sidelines of this struggle.”    Despite last week’s overwhelming vote to set up the Council, Mr. Annan noted that “sadly, the US voted against, joined only by Israel, the Marshall Islands and Palau.” Belarus, Iran and Venezuela abstained.    However, he wrote that it was “very encouraging” that despite the United States ‘no’ vote, US Ambassador John Bolton had explained its position “in a constructive speech” and pledged that his country will work cooperatively with other Member States to make the Council as effective as possible.    “Ever since Eleanor Roosevelt helped to draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the US has been a leading champion of human rights at the UN. I hope and believe it will remain so,” Mr. Annan wrote, referring to the wife of former US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.    The Secretary-General outlined why he believed “some Americans were disappointed with the text,” noting that this was “essentially because they fear that in the new Council, as in the Commission that it replaces, some notorious human-rights abusers will win seats and shield themselves from scrutiny.”    While acknowledging that this concern was shared by many other countries, he noted that General Assembly President Jan Eliasson had persuaded Member States to “include other provisions which will make it more difficult for gross human-rights violators to sit on the Council.”    In particular, he noted that Council members must be elected, "directly and individually by secret ballot by the majority of the members of the General Assembly," and said this means that “nations will not get on the Council as they did on the Commission, simply because there is no rival candidate from their own region.”    Another safeguard, wrote Mr. Annan, is that Council members are required to "uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights," and to submit their own human-rights record to the Council''s scrutiny during their term of membership.    The General Assembly will have the power to suspend Council members that do commit gross and systematic violations during their term – a power it did not have over the Commission, he noted.    While the Commission was “entirely reactive, the Council is mandated to contribute to preventing human-rights violations,” he noted.    But he emphasized that much would ultimately depend on the support of Member States.    “Taken together, these provisions should make it very hard for a notorious violator to win election, and should deter the worst offenders even from running. How effective they are depends, of course, on how seriously the UN membership takes them.”    15 March 2006    United Nations General Assembly President Jan Eliasson said today’s establishment of a new Human Rights Council to replace the much-criticized Human Rights Commission sends a message that despite prevailing tumultuous environment, all countries share universal values of human rights and the world body can reform itself.    Speaking to reporters after the Assembly voted by 170 to 4 for the Council, a visibly relieved Mr. Eliasson said that “above all human rights goes to the heart of the United Nations,” and thanked Member States for “lifting themselves from the national perspective to the international.”    Calling human rights “the soul of the United Nations,” he said it was a key pillar along with peace and development. “Today we strengthened that third pillar,” he said.    “I would hope that the fact that we could come to this decision, even if it was not a decision without a vote, is a sign that this General Assembly can take decisions and can accept responsibility,” he added.    The resolution was adopted by a vote of 170 in favour with 4 against – the United States, Israel, the Marshall Islands and Palau – with Venezuela, Iran and Belarus abstaining.    Addressing the Assembly after voting against the resolution, United States Ambassador John Bolton said the Secretary-General had established “ambitious but appropriate goals” to reform the Commission on Human Rights, but he said that the current text was not sufficiently improved.    However Ambassador Bolton pledged that his country “will work cooperatively with other Member States to make the Council as strong and effective as it can be,” adding: “We remain committed to support the UN’s historic mission to promote and protect the basic human rights of all the world’s citizens.”    Acknowledging the US reservations, Mr. Eliasson nevertheless said that he saw “much goodwill” from the US voiced strong hope that Washington would be on board. “I was assured that the United States will work with the Council, seek to support it when it can, and to strengthen it and certainly not do anything to harm it. This was also stated publicly,” he said.    In opening remarks to the Assembly before the vote, Mr. Eliasson, who led the often contentious negotiations on the Council, highlighted several elements that would make it a “significant improvement” over the much-maligned Commission.    In particular, he noted the Council’s higher status as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, its increased number of meetings throughout the year, equitable geographical representation and also the voting rights associated with membership.    The new Council will have 47 members. The first elections are planned for 9 May and the first session will take place on 19 June, according to the resolution.    In opening remarks to the Assembly before the vote, General Assembly President Jan Eliasson, who led the often contentious negotiations on the issue, called today’s session a “decisive moment” not only for human rights but for the standing of the UN as a whole.    Highlighting several elements that would make the Council a “significant improvement” over the much-maligned Commission, he noted the Council’s higher status as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, its increased number of meetings throughout the year, equitable geographical representation and also the voting rights associated with membership.    “Members of the Council would be elected by the majority of the members of the General Assembly, in other words by an absolute majority. Each candidate would be voted on individually and directly and would have to obtain at least ninety-six votes of support in a secret ballot,” Mr. Eliasson said.    “The General Assembly, by a two-thirds majority of members present and voting, could suspend the rights of membership of a Council member who commits gross and systematic violations of human rights,” he added.    The new Council will have 47 members. The first elections are planned for 9 May and the first session will take place on 19 June, according to the resolution.    In a statement, Mr. Annan, who is travelling in Africa, thanked the Assembly President for his efforts in bringing this “sensitive matter to a conclusion,” but acknowledged that this was “only the first step in a process of change,” adding that “now the real work begins.”    “The true test of the Council’s credibility will be the use that Member States make of it. If, in the weeks and months ahead, they act on the commitments they have given in this resolution, I am confident that the Council will breathe new life into all our work for human rights, and thereby help to improve the lives of millions of people throughout the world,” Mr. Annan noted.    He went on to say that while the resolution “gives us a solid foundation, on which all who are truly committed to the cause of human rights must now build,” no country would be wholly satisfied with every paragraph, although such was “the nature of international negotiations.”    Secretary-General Kofi Annan today expressed confidence that the United States will be able to work with the new United Nations Human Rights Council despite its opposition to a draft framework for the body that he has called an essential element in reforming the world organization.    “My understanding is that the US, even though they may not be able to vote for the Council as it is now currently proposed, it will be able to work with the Council,” Mr. Annan told reporters in South Africa just hours before the General Assembly was to vote on setting up the body to replace the much-criticized UN Commission on Human Rights.    “I think in a normal democratic process, if you can get unanimity, welland good,” he said in Johannesburg after meeting with former South African President Nelson Mandela during a two-week visit to Africa. “But if you can’t, and an overwhelming majority of the members go for something, I think it should work…    “And I am sure the US, which has done so much for human rights, will find a way to work with the other Member States to make the council what it ought to be.”    The United States feels that as proposed the Council does not go far enough and has called for renegotiation, a move that Mr. Annan has said “chagrined” him, warning that the new body could “unravel” in renegotiations.    As proposed, the Council would have a higher status and greater accountability than the Commission that meets yearly in Geneva. It would be a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, meet year round as opposed to the six-week annual session of the Commission, and its members would be elected by a majority of all 191 UN Members.    In presenting his proposed reforms a year ago, Mr. Annan wanted election to be by a two-thirds majority, and failure to achieve this has been cited by the US as one of the main elements in its opposition.    But while conceding his inability to reach this goal, he has repeatedly stressed that the Council as proposed by General Assembly President Jan Eliasson after months-long consultations with Member States could be a basis for more effective human rights protection.    “The President of the General Assembly has done a great work, working with all the member states to come up with a document that gives a credible basis to move forward,” he said today.    March 15, 2006    UN creates new rights council, by Evelyn Leopold. (Reuters)    The United Nations General Assembly created a new U.N. human rights body by an overwhelming majority on Wednesday, ignoring objections from the United States.    Ambassadors broke out in sustained applause when the vote was announced: 170-4 with 3 abstentions. Joining the United States in a "no" vote were Israel, Marshall Islands and Palau -- but not American allies in Europe or Canada.    Belarus, Iran and Venezuela abstained.    As the pre-eminent international rights watchdog, the 47-seat U.N. Human Rights Council is to expose human rights abusers and help nations draw up rights legislation.    It would replace the 53-country Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Commission, which in recent years has included some of the world"s most notorious rights violators.    U.N. General Assembly President Jan Eliasson feared Cuba, which had readied amendments, would open the floor to changes that would doom the resolution. But diplomats said Eliasson and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan telephoned Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque to persuade him to drop the changes. In the end Cuba voted in favor.    Annan first proposed the new council last year as part of sweeping reforms of the world body. But his blueprint was watered down in the resolution.    Eliasson, who negotiated the text over many months, acknowledged that it was a compromise. But he called the council "a body that would advance the founding principles that were initiated by the General Assembly with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights" of 1948.    "The establishment of the Human Rights Council is a decision whose time has come," he said.    Austrian Ambassador Gerhard Pfanzelter, representing the EU, pledged that EU and associates "commit themselves not to cast their vote for a candidate that is under sanctions imposed by the Security Council for human rights-related reasons." This was one of Bolton"s demands not included in the text.    Members of the new council will be elected by the 191-member General Assembly by a majority vote of all nations, not just those present and voting. At present they are approved according to regional slates.    A systematic violator of human rights could be suspended from the council by a two-thirds General Assembly vote. There is no such review now.    The seats would be distributed among regions: 13 for Africa, 13 for Asia, six for Eastern Europe, eight for Latin America and the Caribbean and seven for a group of mainly Western countries, including the United States and Canada.
	Next (more recent) news item
	Next (older) news item