Appendix I: A Review of the 51st Session of the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
| Published date | 01 March 2000 |
| Author | Bret Thiele,Mayra Gómez,David Weissbrodt |
| DOI | 10.1177/092405190001800109 |
| Date | 01 March 2000 |
| Subject Matter | Part C: Appendices |
Part
C: Appendices
Appendix I: A Review of the 51st Session of the United Nations
Sub-Commission on the Promotion
and
Protection of
Human
Rights
David Weissbrodt, Mayra Gomez, andBret Thiele'
IIntroduction
The United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
(Sub-Commission)' met at the European Headquarters of the UN in Geneva, Switzerland,
from
2 August through 27 August 1999 for its fifty-first
session.
The Sub-Commission is
asubsidiary body of the Commission on
Human
Rights
(Commission).
II Sub-Commission's Actions on Country Situations
The Sub-Commission has for many years adopted resolutions identifying at least a few
countries where human rights violations require expressions of UN concern. In 1999 the
Sub-Commission changed its approach by issuing morechair statements and by adopting
three thematic resolutions naming several countries.
A. Chair Statements
One highlight of the fifty-first session was the Sub-Commission's use of constructive
dialogue andnegotiation with governments to producechair statements by consensus rather
than resolutions. In order to
escape
the criticism of a country specific resolution,
governments were often more willing to negotiate, to make significant concessions, and
to commit themselves to concrete
measures
expressed in chair statements. In response to
such a statement of the Sub-Commission's chair, therelevant government would publicly
David Weissbrodt is Fredrikson and Byron Professor of Law, University
of
Minnesota; Member
of
the UN
Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection
of
Human Rights; Mayra Gomez is Ph.D. Candidate,
Department
of
Sociology, University of Minnesota; and Bret Thiele is J.D. cum laude, University of
Minnesota Law School, 1999.
The Sub-Commission was formerly known as the Sub-Commission on Prevention
of
Discrimination and
Protection
of
Minorities. Pursuant to a recommendation
of
the Commission on Human Rights
of
28 April
1999, the Economic and Social Council in July 1999 decided to change the name. See http://www.un.org/
esa/coordination/ecosoc/doc99-23.htm. See also David Weissbrodt, Mayra G6mez and Bret Thiele,
'Highlights
of
the 50th Session
of
the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention
of
Discrimination and Protection
of Minorities', Law &
Ineq.
J, Vol. 17, 1999, p. 445; David Weissbrodt, Mayra G6mez and Bret Thiele,
'Brief
Summary
of
the 50th Session
of
the United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention
of
Discrimination
and Protection
of
Minorities', Netherlands Quarterly
of
Human Rights, Vol. 16,
No.4,
1998, pp. 553-562;
International Service for Human Rights, No. 55, UN Sub-Commission, 51st Session, Geneva. 2-27 August
1999, Results
of
Resolutions &Decisions, August 1999.
Netherlands Quarterly
of
Human Rights. Vol. 18/1, 109-135, 2000.
©Netherlands Institute
of
Human Rights (SIM). Printedin the Netherlands. 109
NQHR
112000
state its intent to move forward on a number
of
agreed initiatives that would improve the
human rights situation within their country.'
This year, the Sub-Commission issued chair statements on the human rights situations
in Belarus, Indonesia, Mexico, and Togo, as well as a statement on persons in Nepal
claiming to be refugees from Bhutan and a more general statement on the problem
of
political kidnappings, but which mentioned the country
of
Colombia by name.' Several
of
these chair statements, including Belarus," Bhutan,' Indonesia," and Togo? began as
country resolutions that were eventually withdrawn.
In 1998, the Sub-Commission adopted a resolution on the human rights situation in
Belarus that expressed concern about the lack
of
democratic protection within the country
as well as the oppression
of
political dissent.8The 1999 chair statement on the human
rights situation in Belarus reflected negotiations that had taken place with the Belorussian
Government. The statement indicated the Government's willingness to invite the Special
Rapporteur on the independence
of
judges and lawyers to visit the country; to invite the
Working Group on Arbitrary Detention; to take all steps necessary to join the Council
of
Europe as well as to sign and ratify the European Convention on Human Rights; to 'make
best efforts' to withdraw its reservation to Article 20
of
the Convention Against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; to 'undertake a series
of
legislative reforms to improve the protection
of
human rights and democracy'; to hold
free and fair parliamentary elections; and finally, to prepare a written report for the Sub-
Commission at its fifty-second session which will serve to update the members as to the
progress that it has made with regard to these objectives.
The human rights situation in Togo was another country situation which was considered
at the Sub-Commission and which also resulted in the adoption
of
a chair statement."
Some members
of
the Sub-Commission were concerned with reports
of
persistent human
rights violations within the country, including political killings and kidnappings, as well
as an enduring climate
of
impunity maintained by the Government. Those concerns were
supported by an Amnesty International report
of
May 1999 which reported on a massacre
in June 1998.10 The Government
of
Togo denied the killings and enlisted the support
of
Mr. Jacques Chirac, President
of
the French Republic, who happened to be visiting the
country in July 1999. At the Sub-Commission, Louis Joinet (expert from France)
approached the Togolese Government and negotiated the establishment
of
an international
commission
of
inquiry to investigate the allegations
of
disappearance and political killing.
This innovative approach to verifying human rights violations will require the
2The use of such a negotiated approach in 1999 was encouraged by the success
of
the Sub-Commission in
1998 in withdrawing a resolution on Bahrain on condition that the Government
of
Bahrain would agree to
rescind its reservation to Article 20 of the Convention Against Torture, Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading
Treatment or Punishment and would invite the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention to visit the
country. The Government
of
Bahrain fulfilled both agreements prior to the beginning
of
the Sub-
Commission's 1999 session.
All available online at: www.unhchr.chlhuridocdalhuridoca.nsf/FramePagelBody+SC+En?OpenDocument.
4UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/L.6, 1999.
SUN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/L.18, 1999.
6UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/L.19, 1999.
, UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.211999/L.7, 1999.
8See Resolution 1998/1, UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1998/45, 1998, at pp. 15-16.
9Availableonline at: www.unhchr.chlhuridocda/huridoca.nsf/FramePage/Body+SC+En?OpenDocument.
\0 Amnesty International, Togo: Rule of Terror, AI Doc. AFR 57/01/99 (1999); http://www.amnesty.org/
ailib/aipub/1999/AFR/I5700199.htm.
110
To continue reading
Request your trial