VI Africa
| Author | Wolfgang Benedek |
| Published date | 01 March 1994 |
| Date | 01 March 1994 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/016934419401200109 |
| Subject Matter | Part B: Human Rights News |
Human Rights News
since it was not given the opportunity to make observations on it; in this manner the
Commission was violating its own Regulations (ibidem, pp. 50-54). Concerning the Report
on Peru, the representative (i) deemed it 'out of place, generalizing, partial and showing
scarce punctiliousness in view of the magnitude and delicacy of theprinciples that we all wish
to preserve' (ibidem, p. 99); (ii) complained that the Commission had a sort of automatism
to handle communications which made them rapidly become violations allegedly confirmed;
(iii) stated that because the Commission had not granted an extension for Peru to present
observations to the Report, 'it seemed evident that the critical observationsof the Commission
with regard to the emergency measures taken by Peru have no value' (ibidem, p. 101). The
Government of Argentina, although not criticizing the Commission directly, addressed the
possibility of the Commission not making a clear distinction between authoritarianand
democratic governments and stated that it was a serious mistake 'to handleconcrete situations
from the point of view of academic abstractions' (ibidem, pp. 58-65). The Government of EI
Salvador was also unsatisfied with the Commission's performance (ibidem, pp. 86-90).
Finally, the representative of Honduras agreed with his colleagues that 'the Commission used
procedures and working methods which, instead of collaborating in the improvement of
human rights, cause serious problems to our countries'; he added that this made necessary
that said procedures and methods be reviewed and amended 'to prevent frictions that might
turn into unnecessary confrontations with those countries that are mentioned in the Annual
Reports' (ibidem, p. 123).
It
is clear that part of these States' message to the Commission is
that countries returning to democracy after a period of authoritarian or dictatorial
governments have to be handled with a velvet glove lest the military might feel tempted to
come back. The Commission's answer will be known in the next Annual Report.
VAFRICA
Wolfgang Benedek
14th
Session of the African Commission on
Human
and Peoples' Rights
The 14th session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR),
was the first since the inaugural session to take place at the headquarters
of
OAU, in
Addis Ababa, from 1st to 10th December 1993. It was attended by all Commissioners
except Alioune Beye, who had in the meantime been appointed special representative of
the
UN
Secretary General for Angola. However, only half of the Commissioners took the
effort to fully participate also in the 5th workshop on NGO-participation in the African
Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights which preceded the session
of
the
Commission from 28 to 30 November 1993, although the African Commission was the
co-organizer of the International Commission of Jurists which is responsible for this series
of
workshops. The NGO workshop was attended by about 50 African and international
NGOs and a large number
of
other individuals and addressed by the Secretary-General
of
OAU and the Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Africa, as well
as the Ethiopian Minister
of
Justice, who told the puzzled NGOs bluntly that their task
was to provide assistance to governments rather than to criticize them.
Two
main issues were on the agenda of the 5th NGO workshop, the purpose of which
also is to promote dialogue between NGOs and the African Commission: NGOs strategies
for the promotion and protection of human rights in Africa, and the discussion of a draft
additional protocol for the establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples'
Rights. In the context
of
the first topic, a background paper on confidentiality in human
rights procedures was discussed, together with 'ethical standards for human rights NGOs'
85
To continue reading
Request your trial