From Commission to Council
Much has happened in the world since my last article in March. The high-born and the low-born have departed this earthly life, for better or for worse - Prince Ranier of Monaco, Pope John Paul II, Saul Bellow, Terry Schiavo, and thousands more in Darfur, Sudan. Some of these deaths - all duly noted in news reports, some ad nauseam - have followed natural courses. The case of the thousands of deaths in the Darfur region of Sudan, however, is a clear case of man's inhumanity to man - the willful killing of one group of people by another without any just cause. It is a clear case of a government looking on idly while a despised portion of its population is decimated.
In the past decade, Africa has seen the massacres of millions of people. The catastrophe in Rwanda in the 1990's has given way to the equally inglorious butchery in Darfur. With these calamities in mind, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan says the institution needs a new human rights commission to battle suffering around the world. In a recent speech to the Commission, Annan called for sweeping reforms of the body which, he conceded, has become less effective in protecting people around the world.
Annan chastised the Commission for its failure to stop human rights abuses and for making no meaningful gestures to curtail the ethnic violence plaguing certain areas of the world. According to Annan, the UN Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) had become too politicized, thereby undermining its ability to fulfill its obligations under the Charter.
The UNHRC has "reached a point at which [its] declining credibility has cast a shadow on the reputation of the United Nations system as a whole, and where piecemeal reforms will not be enough or will not do," he said. And, unless significant changes are made within the UNHRC, "we may be unable to renew public confidence in the United Nations itself."
The Commission's members, composed of 53 member states, are nominated by regional groups. Annan proposes to discard the larger Commission in favor of a smaller Human Rights Council, whose members would be selected by a two-thirds majority of the General Assembly. Those elected should have a solid record of commitment to the highest human rights standards. How votes are to be taken to assure such solid recommendations was not outlined by Annan, thus leaving open to question whether such an arrangement would guarantee a more 'human rights' oriented Council than the Commission is.
One major complaint against the present Commission is that some of the world's worst violators of human rights are members of the Commission. Other human rights organizations accuse current Commission member countries of working to protect their own national interests to the detriment of victims of abuse who are in need of protection.
One has only to look at the present Commission roster of member nations to see the absurdity of it ever fulfilling its intended mandate. Among its present members are Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, China and Russia, all countries accused of widespread violations of human rights.
While Annan assured journalists in a question-and-answer session after his speech no country would escape scrutiny by the new Human Rights Council, he declined to name any countries whose human rights records are suspect - "I'm not going to do that."
This begs the question as to what nations would - or could - qualify to serve on a human rights council. Must the nations be 'democratic' countries with written constitutions that guarantee basic human rights to all peoples as in the West? Then surely many nations will feel ostracized and disqualified from membership on the council. This will not play well with the United Nations General Assembly as a whole.
Annan is correct when he says human rights are the core of the United Nations' identity. But, he knows as well that the United Nations is in deep trouble what with the breaking of scandal after scandal, impeaching the very men and women who supposedly now serve to protect the rights and dignities of citizens of the world. Greed and corruption have run rampant within the UN organization itself, with key members under suspicion of gross negligence and outright larceny.
It may be that Annan hopes to rebuild respect for the United Nations beginning with the establishment of a new, more efficacious Human Rights Council. But as the details from the Oil-for-Food debacle become known, as blame is assessed in the Congo sex abuse scandal, and other misdeeds are brought to the attention of the caring world, Annan may be fighting an uphill battle for which he is not imminently qualified to lead, since he apparently has baggage of his own to carry.
We shall see.
Annan chastised the Commission for its failure to stop human rights abuses and for making no meaningful gestures to curtail the ethnic violence plaguing certain areas of the world. According to Annan, the UN Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) had become too politicized, thereby undermining its ability to fulfill its obligations under the Charter.
The UNHRC has "reached a point at which [its] declining credibility has cast a shadow on the reputation of the United Nations system as a whole, and where piecemeal reforms will not be enough or will not do," he said. And, unless significant changes are made within the UNHRC, "we may be unable to renew public confidence in the United Nations itself."
The Commission's members, composed of 53 member states, are nominated by regional groups. Annan proposes to discard the larger Commission in favor of a smaller Human Rights Council, whose members would be selected by a two-thirds majority of the General Assembly. Those elected should have a solid record of commitment to the highest human rights standards. How votes are to be taken to assure such solid recommendations was not outlined by Annan, thus leaving open to question whether such an arrangement would guarantee a more 'human rights' oriented Council than the Commission is.
One major complaint against the present Commission is that some of the world's worst violators of human rights are members of the Commission. Other human rights organizations accuse current Commission member countries of working to protect their own national interests to the detriment of victims of abuse who are in need of protection.
One has only to look at the present Commission roster of member nations to see the absurdity of it ever fulfilling its intended mandate. Among its present members are Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, China and Russia, all countries accused of widespread violations of human rights.
While Annan assured journalists in a question-and-answer session after his speech no country would escape scrutiny by the new Human Rights Council, he declined to name any countries whose human rights records are suspect - "I'm not going to do that."
This begs the question as to what nations would - or could - qualify to serve on a human rights council. Must the nations be 'democratic' countries with written constitutions that guarantee basic human rights to all peoples as in the West? Then surely many nations will feel ostracized and disqualified from membership on the council. This will not play well with the United Nations General Assembly as a whole.
Annan is correct when he says human rights are the core of the United Nations' identity. But, he knows as well that the United Nations is in deep trouble what with the breaking of scandal after scandal, impeaching the very men and women who supposedly now serve to protect the rights and dignities of citizens of the world. Greed and corruption have run rampant within the UN organization itself, with key members under suspicion of gross negligence and outright larceny.
It may be that Annan hopes to rebuild respect for the United Nations beginning with the establishment of a new, more efficacious Human Rights Council. But as the details from the Oil-for-Food debacle become known, as blame is assessed in the Congo sex abuse scandal, and other misdeeds are brought to the attention of the caring world, Annan may be fighting an uphill battle for which he is not imminently qualified to lead, since he apparently has baggage of his own to carry.
We shall see.
posted by wdriver | 7:18 PM
|
0 comments
