View previous stories
	Shrinking Safe Haven for War Criminals by Human Rights Watch Europe   Brussels, June 28, 2006   ‘Universal Jurisdiction’ Prosecutions Bring Justice for Victims   Prosecutors in Europe are using the concept of universal jurisdiction to pursue foreign war criminals in national courts, a strategy that is gaining momentum across the continent and should be expanded, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The theory is that some crimes are so horrendous that they should be tried regardless of the geography of victims and perpetrators.   “Opponents have proclaimed the death of universal jurisdiction, but in fact it’s alive and well in Europe,” said Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch. “This principle is a vital weapon in winning justice for the victims of the world’s worst atrocities.”   In the 101-page report released today, “Universal Jurisdiction: The State of the Art,” Human Rights Watch looks beyond shrill debates about the concept and examines how it is working in practice. Based on interviews with judges, investigators, lawyers and officials in eight European countries, the report describes how some governments, including Britain, Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands, have created special war crimes units to conduct investigations across the globe.   Universal jurisdiction is the power of a national court to try genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or torture – even if neither the suspect nor the victim are nationals of the country where the court is located, and the crime took place outside that country. It was most famously utilized in the 1998 arrest of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet on torture charges in London at the request of a Spanish court.   Opponents of universal jurisdiction, including the Bush administration, claim that it is a dangerous political tool that will be misused against American officials and service personnel. However, the report shows that universal jurisdiction is first and foremost an effective road to justice for victims who have nowhere else to go.   Recent cases successfully prosecuted in Europe include: two Afghan military officers convicted in the Netherlands of war crimes committed in Afghanistan; an Argentine officer convicted by a Spanish court of crimes against humanity in Argentina; and Rwandan businessmen convicted before a Brussels court of participating in the Rwandan genocide.   In its analysis of Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the U.K., the report reveals which national authorities are meeting the challenges of prosecuting war criminals who committed crimes in other countries, and which need to do more to ensure that their countries do not become safe havens for war criminals.   “Accused war criminals should realize that the arm of justice has gotten longer,” said Dicker. “Governments like those in the Netherlands and Britain have made a real effort to prosecute suspected war criminals. But more needs to be done; countries like Germany and France are lagging behind in the fight to give victims their day in court.” Visit the related web page
	Human Rights Council Renewal by Louise Arbour United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights   19 June 2006   Annan inaugurates UN’s strengthened Human Rights Council with appeal for ‘new era’.   The new United Nations Human Rights Council held its inaugural session today, with Secretary-General Kofi Annan calling for “a clean break from the past” and a “new era” as the enhanced body seeks to give teeth to the protection of rights for all, an issue that often seemed to elude its much-criticized predecessor.   “What must be apparent, above all, is a change in culture,” Mr. Annan told representatives from over 100 countries at the first meeting of the 47-member body in Geneva, appealing for an end to the confrontation and distrust that pervaded the now-replaced Human Rights Commission.   “Never allow this Council to become caught up in political point-scoring or petty manoeuvre,” he entreated those present. “Think always of those whose rights are denied - whether those rights are civil and political, or economic, social and cultural; whether those people are perishing from brutal treatment by arbitrary rulers, or from ignorance, hunger and disease.   “The truth is that those denials go together. All too often, it is those who seek to improve the welfare of their communities who become the victims of oppression; and it is the lack of freedom and of legal safeguards that inhibits economic and social development,” he declared.   The creation of the new Council was a major plank in Mr. Annan’s UN reform package “In Larger Freedom,” which he issued in March last year and which was later endorsed by the World Summit at UN Headquarters in New York in September.   Although its final form does not contain all the elements Mr. Annan sought, it is regarded as a significant improvement on the Commission, with several features to make it stronger and more effective. These include its higher status as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly, its increased number of meetings throughout the year and an examination of the human rights records of its own members.   “It is hardly an exaggeration to say that the eyes of the world - especially the eyes of those whose human rights are denied, threatened or infringed - are turned towards this chamber and this Council,” Mr. Annan said today.   He noted that in his report he had stressed that human rights form the third of the three pillars, with economic and social development and peace and security, on which all UN work must be based.   “I argued that these three are interlinked and mutually reinforcing, and are the pre-requisites for our collective well-being. No society can develop without peace and security,” he said. “No State can be secure if its people are condemned to poverty without hope. And no nation can be secure or prosperous for long, if the basic rights of its citizens are not protected.   “In short, lack of respect for human rights and human dignity is the fundamental reason why the peace of the world today is so precarious, and why prosperity is so unequally shared,” he added.   Mr. Annan held out the prospect of even greater enhancement of the Council, noting that at the moment it is a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly, pending a review within five years.   “I venture to hope - and I suggest it should be your ambition - that within five years your work will have so clearly established the Human Rights Council’s authority that there will be a general will to amend the Charter, and to elevate it to the status of a Principal Organ of the United Nations,” he declared.   He stressed that although human rights are an inherently sensitive topic, that does not mean they are inherently intrusive, or antithetical to State interests. “Nor should we accept the widely parroted notion that there is a built-in tension, or a necessary trade-off, between freedom and security, he said.   “This Council represents a great new chance for the United Nations, and for humanity, to renew the struggle for human rights,” he concluded. “I implore you, do not let the opportunity be squandered.”   In an opening address, General Assembly President Jan Eliasson urged Member States to continue working in a spirit of compromise and responsibility. “Now you have to show determination and courage to translate intentions and words to the changing of realities and taking action,” he said. “This requires from all of us statesmanship and preparedness not only to examine each other but also to examine ourselves.”   UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour called on members to look beyond national interests. “Through its deliberations, the Council should search for, articulate and implement a broad concept of universality of rights and freedoms, designed to reflect first and foremost individual human dignity, rather than cater to the narrow pursuit of national self-interest and regional factionalism.”   Luis Alfonso de Alba of Mexico was elected as Council President. “We are at a crossroads of an historic nature,” he told the session. “We can and should contribute to improve the respect of human rights all around the world, and at the same time, we can and should contribute to the reform and strengthening of the multilateral system.”   The Council also elected four Vice-Presidents: Tomas Husak (Czech Republic) (Eastern European group), Mohammed Loulichki (Morocco) (African group), Blaise Godet (Switzerland) (Western Europe and Others Group) and Musa Burayzat (Jordan) (Asian group), who will assume the role of rapporteur.   June 19, 2006   Human Rights Council Renewal, by Louise Arbour.   Today, armed with a powerful new mandate, the members of the new Human Rights Council take their seats, embarking on a major enterprise aimed at strengthening the U.N. human rights system and equipping it to respond better to the challenges of our time. The council represents a defining moment for the Organization"s work for "the protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all."   Yet it is profoundly wrong to believe we start from scratch. The 61-year old U.N. human rights system has a proud legacy, which the now-defunct commission helped form. It has codified a wealth of international human rights norms and standards, established numerous independent mechanisms to monitor those standards, and stood up for human-rights defenders, victims and the vulnerable in countries around the world. The challenge now will be to ensure the new Council lives up to that rich historic legacy, while doing what is needed to promote and protect human rights in today"s conditions.   Several new features give us reason to believe the council will be a significant improvement on its predecessor. Even the way its members were elected last month marked a welcome departure from "business as usual." Commission members were preselected behind closed doors and then "elected" by acclamation. By contrast, the new members of the council had to compete for seats, and successful candidates had to win the support of a majority of all member states, in a secret ballot.   For the first time in history, candidates gave voluntary commitments to promote and uphold human rights, and will be expected to meet them or else face possible suspension from the council.   The resolution establishing the council stresses the importance of ending double standards, a problem that plagued the past commission. What the politicized debates of the past often obscured is the irrefutable fact that all states have human rights problems, and all must be accountable for their shortcomings.   The test, then, is not membership, but accountability. To that end, a new universal periodic review mechanism will offer the Council -- and the world -- the opportunity to examine the records of all 191 member states of the United Nations. This is a dramatic development with the potential to improve human rights throughout the world.   Perhaps most significantly, the council will meet throughout the year, whereas the commission"s limited six-week schedule severely impaired its effectiveness and flexibility. With this precious additional time, the council will be able to undertake preventive initiatives to defuse simmering crises and to devote particular attention to shoring up responses on the ground in situations where there are early signs of a human rights crisis. And the council will also have an improved mechanism for meeting to deal with urgent human rights crises in real time.   But all these changes will amount to very little unless members of the new council are prepared to look beyond their immediate political interests and embrace the cause of human-rights victims worldwide. That will require principled leadership from every one of them. The choice of Ambassador Luis Alfonso De Alba of Mexico, a strong human-rights advocate, as first president of the council, is a welcome sign members mean business. Stewardship of the new body has been placed in safe, impartial and competent hands.   The road ahead is fraught with challenges -- many of which will require intense debate and discussion. Starting with a review of the commission"s work, members must make difficult choices. The new body should build on the commission"s recognized strengths and retain its established best practices and features. Any weakening of the human rights system"s mechanisms is emphatically not what is needed.   At the heart of the matter is how council members can lend more teeth to the implementation of existing and evolving human rights standards. It is to be hoped they will give equal priority to all human rights -- economic, social, and cultural, as much as civil and political. Above all, this improved and more effective framework requires the member states to be ready to act, rather than just declare.   The commission met the challenge of its age in setting global human-rights standards. Let the era of the council be the era of implementation. Member states have promised as much. The public expects as much. Victims and the vulnerable, in all parts of the globe, deserve nothing less.   (Louise Arbour is the United Nations high commissioner for human rights). Visit the related web page
	View more stories