Human rights - UN not doing its duty
FOR today, the 50th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations (UN), the UN commissioned a book to celebrate its ideals and achievements.
Given the symbolic weight which attaches to this publication, it is saddening to see that the UN's willingness to censor itself, in the interests of not offending China, extended even to the banning of a quotation by the Dalai Lama. The remarks in question, about the importance of universal human rights, were made during the 1993 UN Conference on Human Rights.
One author sought to include this material as a matter of 'conscience'. The reply he received, showing wilful blindness to the issues at stake, refused to include the name of the Dalai Lama: 'There are many suitable quotations from other prominent individuals which could be used expressing the same point.' This kind of evasiveness does no credit to the UN.
The world is accustomed to condemnations of the United Nations on the grounds of waste, fraud and mismanagement; such revelations elicit only weary sighs. However, the UN's most serious defect is political and not administrative: its propensity through political caution and compliance, to undermine the human rights standards affirmed in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The UN's internal culture of secrecy is at its most damaging in the implementation of what are known as 1503 procedures.
These are the rules which regulate the UN Commission on Human Rights, charged with the review of reports of serious human rights violations by individual countries.
The Rules of Silence, a report published today by ARTICLE 19, the International Centre Against Censorship, concludes that the closed sessions of the commission do more to spare offender nations than to protect victims and informants, which is the rationale for the confidentiality of the proceedings.
In the specific cases of Iraq, Rwanda and Sudan, the report demonstrates that more open and forthright questioning, followed by publication of the findings of the commission, might have served to alert the world community to the growing malignancy of internal repression.
The UN's own defective internal management practices have led to periodic scandals. Lack of accountability and public access to information has allowed corruption, sexual harassment and discrimination to flourish.
The UN's inadequacy in tackling problems related to the status of women is particularly glaring in the run up to the Beijing Conference on Women.
It has been widely noticed that, so far, the UN has not brought sufficient pressure on China to ensure that appropriate facilities are made available to the independent women's groups scheduled to attend this international women's event.
Most criticism of the UN is coupled, fairly enough, with praise for the humanitarian work undertaken by individual agencies. It is nevertheless an open secret that UN officials engaged in relief operations are often confronted with evidence of human rights abuses committed or connived at by host governments. The report notes that UN officials in these circumstances face difficult decisions, and have sometimes failed to report these violations for fear of jeopardising relief operations.
This dilemma is very real. The complex logistics of relief are hard to manage in any underdeveloped country. A less than co-operative relationship with a host government can throw up a plethora of obstacles to UN work. But the UN's primary role is to act as guardian of human rights: political bargaining, and even the delivery of relief, must not deflect the UN from this obligation. There is a need for clear guidelines for UN field staff, who should be instructed to report human rights violations to competent organisations specialising in monitoring and campaigning for such rights.
CATHERINE DRUCKER Campaigns Co-ordinator ARTICLE 19 the International Centre Against Censorship
