This year’s UN Commission on Human Rights is more than halfway finished. Structural problems and political gamesmanship may preclude the Commission from really fulfilling its mandate.
Analysis: In years past, the Commission made enormous contributions to the recognition of human rights. It produced the seminal Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. It penned the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 1966. It is perceived as the UN’s preeminent human rights forum.
This year, the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan distinguished himself by delivering a speech marked by candor and passion. “Every time…the world says ‘never again.’ And yet it happens,” Mr. Annan said in reference to the apparent genocide in Kosovo. “No government has the right to hide behind national sovereignty in order to violate the human rights or fundamental freedoms of its peoples.”
These remarks contrast with political confrontations and rhetorical speeches that have lately flourished at Commission meetings. Is this body still effective in its mandate to promote and protect human rights around the world?
In its 55 year history, the Commission has increased its membership from 18 nations in 1946 to the current 53. The presence of so many States has led to more talk, tougher resolution negotiations, and ultimately, less decisive action. All this tends to transform the Commission into a miniature General Assembly with all its attendant faults.
Moreover, qualification for Commission membership sometimes depends solely on geography rather than a demonstrated dedication to human rights. As a result, current members, elected for three-year terms, include various countries with human rights records that are questionable at best. Are the Sudan, Cuba, China, and the Democratic Republic of Congo really interested in upholding human rights around the world when they suppress them within their own borders?
Many seem content to misuse the Commission to disparage rivals and give speeches filled with empty statements.
Every human right has a corresponding duty. Member States should similarly remember that their right to contribute to the Commission entails obligations. In this assembly, they should subordinate national agendas to forging consensus on the most pressing human rights problems. Anything less – pointing fingers, evading issues, and politicizing proceedings – undermines the Commission’s relevance and purpose.
