Reflections on Three Years as Human Rights Ambassador
| Date | 01 December 2003 |
| DOI | 10.1177/016934410302100408 |
| Published date | 01 December 2003 |
| Subject Matter | Part C: Appendix |
REFLECTIONS ON THREE YEARS AS HUMAN
RIGHTS AMBASSADOR*
1. DECISION TO APPOINT A HUMAN RIGHTS AMBASSADOR;
INITIAL REACTIONS
1.1. Press and Human Rights Experts
On 22 September 1999, the Amsterdam daily newspaper De Volkskrant
opened with the following headline: ‘Dutch first: Human Rights Ambassa-
dor’. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jozias van Aartsen, in New York for the
United Nations General Assembly, announced that he was planning to
appoint a human rights ambassador. Human rights are a sensitive issue, said
Van Aartsen, and we must give them plenty of attention. Initial reactions in
the Netherlands were far from enthusiastic. Two days later, De Volkskrant
reported that Van Aartsen’s announcement had been met with considerable
scepticism. Human rights experts were convinced that it was part of a hidden
agenda. The Chair of the Dutch Section of the International Commission of
Jurists felt that it was nothing more than a sop to public opinion; Professor
Van Boven was reluctant to use the word ‘window-dressing’, but it was clearly
in his mind; Amnesty International’s Lars van Troost did not see it as a
particularly useful addition; and in the Financieel Dagblad (Amsterdam) of
1 October 1999, J.W. van der Meulen wrote that human rights would not
benefit at all from the appointment of an ambassador. On the contrary, he
argued, instead of helping to shape Dutch human rights policy, the measure
could well prove to be counterproductive.
Wordt Vervolgd, Amnesty International’s the Dutch language monthly
magazine, joined the melee. Columnist Joop Heij set out Amnesty’s
demands. The ambassador’s tasks must conform to the wishes of non-
governmental organisations. The ambassador was not to be a substitute for
existing policy instruments, and should not take over any of the tasks
currently performed by Dutch diplomatic missions or representations to
international organisations. Nag, that was what the new ambassador could
do. The words ‘scapegoat’ and ‘quick fix’ also appeared in the article. But
there were a few kind words too. Heij was concerned that the ‘new Messiah’
should be given enough staff.
PART C: APPENDIX
Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, Vol. 21/4, 763-772, 2003.
@ Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (SIM), Printed in the Netherlands. 763
* Speech delivered by Rene´e Jones-Bos, Netherlands Ambassador for Human Rights, on
Human Rights Day, at the presentation of the Max van der Stoel Human Rights Award 2002.
Tilburg, 10 December 2002.
To continue reading
Request your trial