The B’nai Brith Canada Institute for International Affairs has a mandate to protest the abuse of human rights throughout the world and advocate on behalf of worldwide Jewish communities in distress. The Institute has a special focus on pro-Israel advocacy and education.
Rochelle Wilner President	Frank Dimant Chief Executive Officer	Amos Sochaczevski National Chair	Ruth Klein National Director

STATEMENT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE

in preparation for the 59th session of the
United Nations Commission on Human Rights

B. THE NEED FOR REFORM OF THE UNCHR

The Institute has tracked ongoing bias against Israel throughout the United Nations, but nowhere is this more evident than in the dealings of the UN’s Commission on Human Rights. The Institute has formulated specific recommendations for reform of the Commission, as outlined below.

The need for reform has been well-illustrated in the election of Libya to the Chairmanship of the Commission. This extreme anomaly has been recognized by Canada, as evident in its negative vote on the issue, as one of only three countries who stood firm on the issue. However, now that Libya’s chairmanship is widely accepted as a fait d’accompli, it appears that the everyday business of the Commission will proceed as if nothing untoward has happened. Only reform of the Commission can ensure that does not happen.

When one recalls the terror attack on Pan Am flight 103 — orchestrated by Libya — that killed 271 people, including citizens of Commission members Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, India, Ireland, Japan, Poland, South Africa, and Sweden, the number of abstentions from these states on Libya’s election reflects callousness as well as weakness. 171 people were killed in the bombing of a French airliner, which was followed by the indictment in 1996 of six Libyans with ties to their government, but the French delegation still remained on the sidelines in the vote on Libya’s election.

Libya’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Najat Al-Hajjaji, assumed the position of Chair with expressions of hope that the Commission will deal with human rights in all countries, and not just in some of them. Libya could well be hoping to gain respectability by advocating that course. However, it must also be wary of alienating states that have just supported its election, while the composition of the Commission — with the odds highly stacked in favour of numerous serial human rights violators — makes meaningful support for any real overhaul highly unlikely.

In terms of the members of the Commission, both this year and in the past, a closer analysis of their records on human rights issues puts the most basic integrity of the UNCHR in question. According to the Freedom House Comparative Measures of Freedomⁱ, of the 53 current members, only 22 can be categorized as “free” in terms of their political rights and civil liberties, with a further 17 that could only be classed as “partly free”, and a staggering total of 14 which received an outright “fail”. Of the latter group, five members — Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Syria — as well as the Commission’s current Chair, Libya, received the lowest possible ratings on both measures of the Freedom House Scale.

Surprisingly, only one of the latter collection of the world’s worst offenders — Sudan — made it to the agenda of this year’s Department of Foreign Affairs Consultations, and only then sharing the spotlight with Somalia and Zimbabwe in the same 90 minute time slot. As has become customary, “Israel/West Bank and Gaza” was scheduled for an entire session on its own. Scheduling restraints unfortunately meant that discussion of numerous egregious human right abuses was excluded this year. The new arrangement meant that even countries examined at the Department’s 2002 consultations, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria, were excluded in 2003.

Out of 11 geographic roundtables at the Consultations dealing with 21 geographic situations, only 7 related to Commission members. The Department has allowed for the possibility of further discussions on other geographic situations if requested by enough interested NGO’s. However, if such “mini” consultations do take place, they will be out of the spotlight of the national Consultations and thus the topics discussed will be viewed as of lesser gravity.

It has been explained that the country-specific situations were chosen in order to reflect which countries are most likely to be the subject of a UNCHR resolution. However, while this is a logical model for optimum utilization of the Consultations, its replication of the Commission’s priorities merely validates the politicization of the UNCHR and its agenda.

As analysts have noted, countries that have repressive ruling elites and the most egregious human rights abuses commonly vie for membership on the Commission so that they can block discussion of their own regime’s abuses. The resultant inclusion on the Commission of countries that lack the most basic political freedoms and civil liberties is unconscionable, while the election of Libya to the Chairmanship makes a mockery of the entire system.

In view of the above, a broad-based overhaul of the conditions of membership and the prerequisites for chairmanship needs to be undertaken if the Commission is to retain any vestiges of integrity and moral authority. Canada can play a significant role in this area.

¤ Canada should publicly press for reforms that will establish the following minimum criteria as a prerequisite for membership, and even more so for chairmanship:

1. Free elections of head of state and/or government and legislative representatives
2. A political opposition that is able to organize and campaign freely
3. Freedom from domination by the military, or oppression based on totalitarian ideologies, religious tyranny, social hierarchy or economic exploitation
4. Protection of rights of religious, cultural, ethnic and other minorities
5. Freedom of expression through media independent of the state
6. Freedom of association and of assembly
7. Rule of law with an independent judiciary and police force, free from corruption and nepotism, with protection from state terror and intimidation
8. Personal autonomy and economic/social rights

¤ Canada should publicly state its concerns on serving with countries that do not meet these criteria, a trend it has already initiated by voting against Libya’s election as Chair

¤ Canada should press for procedural changes at the UNCHR that will ensure sitting members cannot block investigation of their own abuses

¤ Canada should ensure that its annual NGO Consultations address the most egregious human rights abuses, even if the political will of the Commission blocks such discussions.

Table Of Contents | Introduction | The Need For Reform Of The UNCHR | The UNCHR Agenda | The Mandate of The Special Rapporteur
Canada’s Voting Record At The UNCHR | Positions Of The Department Of Foreign Affairs | Terrorism | Racism And Racial Discrimination
Freedom Of Expression | Conclusion | Summary Of Recommendations | Footnotes