View previous stories
	First Arrest for the International Criminal Court by Ernest Sagaga The International Criminal Court The Hague - Netherlands   17 March 2006   On 17 March 2006, in Kinshasa, Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, a Congolese national and alleged founder and leader of the Union des Patriotes Congolais (UPC) was arrested and transferred to the International Criminal Court as part of the judicial proceedings under the Rome Statute (the “Statute”). Thomas Lubanga is alleged to have committed war crimes as set out in article 8 of the Statute, committed in the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo since July 2002.    Pre-Trial Chamber I issued a sealed warrant of arrest against Mr Lubanga on 10 February 2006.  The Chamber found that there were reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Lubanga had committed the following war crime: conscripting and enlisting children under the age of fifteen years and using them to participate actively in hostilities. The Chamber also requested that the Democratic Republic of the Congo arrest and surrender him to the Court. The Registrar notified the Congolese authorities of the decision on 14 March 2006, as instructed by the Pre-Trial Chamber.    On 17 March 2006, Pre-Trial Chamber I  unsealed the warrant of arrest against Mr Thomas Lubanga.     As provided under article 59 of the Statute, Mr Lubanga appeared before the competent judicial authority in Kinshasa. The Congolese authorities cooperated with the Court in the spirit of the Statute by promptly executing its request. The French Government agreed to cooperate with the Court and, for the purpose of executing the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I, provided a military aircraft to transfer Mr Lubanga. MONUC also provided support to the operation.   Mr Lubanga is the first person to be arrested and transferred to the International Criminal Court since the entry into force of the Statute in July 2002. The Prosecutor of the Court initiated investigations in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2004 after the Congolese Government referred the situation in that country to the Court.    The Court issued its first warrants of arrest in July 2005 in the situation in Uganda against five leaders of the Lord’s Resistance Army. Investigations are also ongoing in the situation in Darfur which was referred to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court by the United Nations Security Council on 31 March 2005. Email Ernest Sagaga Visit the related web page
	New Rights Council offers Hope for Victims by UN News / Human Rights Watch   15 March 2006   True test of New Human Rights Council will be use member states make of it says, Secretary General.   Following is the text of a statement by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, issued today in Antananarivo, Madagascar, on the Human Rights Council:   Today, by this historic resolution, the General Assembly has established the new Human Rights Council that world leaders resolved to create at the summit last September. This gives the United Nations the chance -- a much-needed chance -- to make a new beginning in its work for human rights around the world. I congratulate General Assembly President Jan Eliasson, and thank him for his patience and tenacity in bringing this sensitive matter to a conclusion. No country will be wholly satisfied with every paragraph in the resolution, but such is the nature of international negotiations. It preserves important strengths of the Commission on Human Rights, such as the system of special procedures and the participation of non-governmental organizations, while also setting forth important innovations to address the Commission''s weaknesses. Taken as a whole, the resolution gives us a solid foundation, on which all who are truly committed to the cause of human rights must now build. I believe they will succeed in building a framework within which Governments from all parts of the world can work together to promote human rights, more effectively than ever before.   This is only the first step in a process of change. In the coming weeks, States wishing to be elected to the new Council will put forward their pledges and commitments to protect and promote human rights. It will be up to their fellow Member States to evaluate these promises, and to hold the successful candidates to them. The General Assembly will vote on all candidates, and thereafter will have the responsibility to suspend any of the Council’s members that commit gross and systematic violations of human rights. The members will have committed themselves to uphold the highest standards of human rights, cooperate fully with the Council, and have their own human rights records reviewed during their term of membership. The universal review mechanism will allow the Council to hold all Member States to their human rights obligations fairly and equally, without selectivity or double standards. The Council will meet regularly throughout the year, and can hold special sessions when needed. This should enable it to deal with human rights crises immediately, whenever they arise.   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.   15 March 2006 (Human Rights Watch)   The creation of a new Human Rights Council by the United Nations General Assembly is a major step forward for the protection of victims worldwide, Human Rights Watch said today. The group urged U.N. members to make the new body as effective as possible by electing the best candidates from all regions of the world and by establishing strong rules and procedures. "The new council should be a great improvement over the old Commission on Human Rights, but today"s vote is only the beginning," said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. "Its ability to protect the weakest will now depend on the commitment of governments to curb rights violations."   U.N. member states must now elect to the council only those countries which will concretely pledge to promote and protect human rights, utilizing the new standards and procedures built into the resolution.   "We call on all countries to pledge not to vote for governments that systematically repress their people," said Roth. "States like Nepal, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, or Zimbabwe, which are current members of the old commission, cannot be allowed on to the new council."   In turn, new council members must adopt rules which will enable fair and transparent proceedings; establish a practice of condemning human rights abuses and making strong recommendations for improvement; and design a universal review procedure which thoroughly and fairly examines the human rights records of all countries.   For five months following the commitment made at the U.N. World Summit in 2005, the 191 U.N. members negotiated the creation of a new Human Rights Council, leading to the resolution adopted today. The overwhelming majority of countries, including those of the European Union, Latin American democracies, Canada, India, South Africa, and Japan, supported the proposal, which was adopted by a vote of 170 to four, with three abstentions.   The United States voted against the proposal. However, Human Rights Watch welcomed the fact that the U.S. did not insist on amendments that would have led to the unraveling of the resolution. Human Rights Watch also expressed satisfaction with the U.S. commitment to work with the new council, noting that it can play an important role in setting up the best possible council.   Human Rights Watch now urges all U.N. member states to ensure that elections to the council, slated for May 9 deliver the best possible candidates from each region of the world, including by:   * Insisting that regional groups present their nominations to the council at least thirty days prior to election, to allow for public scrutiny of their human rights records;   * Insisting that regional groups present more candidates than spots on their slates so that governments have a real choice of countries;   * Insisting that candidates commit to cooperate fully with the mechanisms of the Human Rights Council by granting unimpeded access to U.N. human rights investigators;   * Insisting that candidates set forth a concrete and positive human rights agenda at home and for service on the council.   Once elected, the new council must address the worst human rights situations in the world regardless of political considerations, including by convening emergency sessions to ensure a timely and effective response. In addition, it should develop an effective universal review procedure that will provide neutral, objective scrutiny of the human rights records of all countries in the world – starting with council members – and make robust recommendations.   The Commission on Human Rights, due to resume its session on March 20, must roll over, en bloc, the mandates of its various procedures and mechanisms to the council. This will help keep the best features of the present system, such as the independent special rapporteurs, in place.   "Today"s resolution marks an historic step towards enhanced human rights protection within the U.N. system," said Roth. "The challenge now is to make the Human Rights Council function effectively, so human rights victims around the world will gain the forum they urgently need to seek relief from abuses."   Background:   The new Human Rights Council represents a significant improvement over the existing Commission on Human Rights. Since election to the council will now require the high threshold of an affirmative vote by an absolute majority of the 191 members of the United Nations – that is, ninety-six positive votes – it should enable human rights supporters to block the election of many states that severely violate human rights. Council members must pledge to uphold the highest human rights standards, subject themselves to review of their human rights record during their term on the council, and can be suspended for gross violations.   Other key elements of the proposal include:   * The council will meet at least three times a year for ten weeks – an improvement on the commission"s single annual six-week meeting – with a right for one-third of the council members to call additional sessions "when needed."   * The old commission"s system of independent "special rapporteurs" and other special procedures, which is one of the great strengths of the U.N. human rights system, will be retained, as will the tradition of access for human rights NGOs.   * Members of the council are committed to cooperate with the council and its various mechanisms – an improvement on current practice, in which some members of the commission refuse to grant unimpeded access to U.N. human rights investigators.   * The right of the council to address serious human rights situations through country-specific resolutions is reaffirmed.   * A new universal review procedure will scrutinize the records of even the most powerful countries – an important step toward redressing the double standards that the commission was often accused of applying.
	View more stories