Consideration of reports, observations and information submitted by States parties under article 9 of the Convention (continued)
Eleventh periodic report of Zambia
World Conference on Human Rights (continued)
CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS, OBSERVATIONS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF THE CONVENTION (agenda item 4) (continued)
Eleventh periodic report of Zambia (CERD/C/239/Add.2, HRI/CORE/1/Add.22)
1. Mr. Mwenda and Mr. Sinyinza (Zambia) took places at the Committee table.
2. Mr. MWENDA (Zambia) thanked the Committee for having allowed his country to postpone the submission of its report the previous year. Zambia's last report had been submitted in 1985 and he was therefore not certain whether the current members remembered the questions that had been asked by the Committee at that time, but he assured them that those questions had been taken into account when the eleventh periodic report (CERD/C/239/Add.2) had been drafted. The Zambian delegation had also prepared a core document in accordance with the guidelines regarding the form and contents of reports to be submitted by States parties which provided a general overview of Zambia.
3. Zambia was composed of 70 or 71 tribes, but, officially, it had only seven main languages which the people could use to communicate. It had nine provinces, including two urban provinces where most of the foreign population lived. It had a governmental policy relating to social services, education and health care. Fees were charged for surgery, but other health services were provided free by the districts or were subsidized by churches. Primary education was free of charge.
4. Zambia had serious drug problems in both urban and rural areas, largely as a result of the influx of refugees. Surrounded as it was by eight countries (Angola, Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Tanzania, Zaire and Zimbabwe), it received many refugees from those countries and from South Africa. They were treated in accordance with United Nations standards. Although Zambia provided many services for refugees, it did not have the resources needed to educate them. It also had problems connected with migratory flows and a very large number of illegal migrants whom it expelled and who then returned by crossing a different border. However, refugees who followed official procedures could obtain recognized status.
5. With regard to the implementation in Zambia of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, article 3 of the Constitution was based on the Charter of the United Nations and thus covered the main aspects of the Convention. There were two important points to be taken into account. First, accession to an international convention did not automatically mean that it was applicable if its provisions had not been incorporated into civil and administrative law. In Zambia, however, the judiciary, the Commission for Investigations referred to in paragraph 5 of the eleventh report, the Industrial Relations Court (para. 7) and the criminal courts did apply the provisions of the Convention. Under the Constitution, remedies were guaranteed only in the case where the author of an act of racial discrimination was performing the functions of public office. The Penal Code nevertheless guaranteed a remedy to all individuals, regardless of whether the discriminatory act had been committed by a person acting in an official or in a private capacity. A person who had committed such an act of discrimination was liable to imprisonment for up to two years.
6. He would be glad to provide the Secretariat with documents pertaining to judgements of Zambian courts which had awarded compensation in cases involving violations of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, even though the provisions of the Convention had not yet been incorporated in civil and administrative law.
7. Although foreigners did enjoy certain civil rights in Zambia, they were not entitled to exercise political rights, such as the right to vote and the right to stand for elections.
8. Mr. LAMPTEY (Country Rapporteur), welcoming the resumption of the dialogue between the Committee and Zambia that had been interrupted for 10 years, said he hoped that it would continue in future, like the dialogue Zambia had been maintaining with the ILO Committee responsible for receiving information on Convention (No. 111) concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation, which Zambia had ratified in 1958.
9. Zambia was an African country with a predominantly black population, but its 8.2 million inhabitants nevertheless constituted a multi-ethnic society, a "federation of tribes", as its founding President had called it. For most of its existence as a sovereign State, Zambia had been governed by a single party and, from 1964 to 1991, it had been under a permanent state of emergency. Such a climate had obviously had negative effects on the protection of fundamental human rights. In the absence of dialogue, the Committee had not been able to determine how that situation had affected action to combat racial discrimination in the country. It must, however, be recognized that Zambia had made extraordinary sacrifices under former President Kaunda in its support for the liberation struggle in South Africa and the dismantling of apartheid. Zambia continued to welcome a large number of refugees.
10. Circumstances had changed fundamentally since 24 August 1991, when the new Constitution abolishing the single-party State had been proclaimed. In November 1991, President Frederick Chiluba had been elected and had pledged to respect human rights. The new Constitution contained several provisions on the protection of fundamental human rights. Against that background, the declaration of a state of emergency by the Chiluba Government on 4 March 1993 was a matter of concern. He wondered what impact the new emergency situation was having on racial discrimination, as defined by article 1 of the Convention. The arrest and deportation by the Chiluba Government of West Africans and Zairians without UNHCR screening was also cause for concern.
11. He would like to know the truth about the complaints of harassment made by members of the Asian community and the reasons for the claimed decline in the non-African component of the Zambian population in the past 30 years.
12. The eleventh periodic report did contain a great deal more information than earlier reports, but it was not in keeping with the guidelines on the form and contents of the reports to be submitted by States parties under article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. He urged Zambia to take those guidelines into consideration in drafting its next report.
13. He requested the representative of Zambia to clarify how the Convention had been incorporated into Zambian law. He noted in that connection that, like Ghana, Zambia had a common law system based on its British colonial heritage; in the common law countries, treaties became ipso facto part of national law, through the simple act of ratification. It would be helpful to know the exact situation in Zambia in that respect.
14. With regard to the administrative or other authorities competent in the field of human rights, he would appreciate examples of recommendations of the Commission for Investigations (Ombudsman), which was responsible for handling complaints of racial discrimination. The Committee would also like to have documentation pertaining to the effectiveness of the presidential tribunal in dealing with civil service matters relating to tribalism. It would also be helpful to know whether the Industrial Relations Court had dealt with any cases involving racial discrimination and, if so, whether compensation had been made to the victims.
15. Section 70 (1) of the Penal Code of Zambia fully satisfied the requirements of article 4 (a) of the Convention, but the other requirements of article 4 were not covered. According to paragraph 10 of the report, the civil remedy provided for in article 23 of the Constitution was available to an individual only if the person who discriminated against him was acting by virtue of a law or in the performance of public duties, and that did not fully cover the requirements of article 6 of the Convention. It would be interesting to know what remedy was available to an individual who had been discriminated against by a person who was not performing the functions of public office.
16. In respect of article 23 of the Zambian Constitution of 1991, the prohibition on differential treatment of persons on the basis of their race, tribe, or place of origin did not apply to certain laws, including those on adoption, marriage and divorce. That would appear to be contrary to the spirit and letter of the Convention. The Committee would thus appreciate information on any laws which established differential treatment on the grounds of race, tribe or place of origin.
17. Mr. FERRERO COSTA said that he welcomed the resumption of the dialogue between the Committee and Zambia after a long interruption of 10 years, as well as the preparation of the eleventh periodic report and the core document. Zambia had many problems linked to underdevelopment. Per capita GNP was $390 per year. Under such circumstances, Zambia deserved credit for having stated that its intention was to respect human rights and, in particular, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
18. He nevertheless pointed out that Zambia's report failed to provide certain information and was not fully in accordance with the Committee's consolidated guidelines on reports to be submitted by States Parties under article 9, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The oral introduction by the representative of Zambia had, of course, helped to some extent to fill in the gaps. He hoped that clarification would be provided in the next report on the ethnic composition of Zambia.
19. In the first place, he wished to know more about the functions, including any judicial functions, of the Commission for Investigations referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the report: there appeared to be a contradiction between the fact that the Chairman of the Commission had the same status as a judge of the High Court and the fact that the Ombudsman submitted a report together with its recommendations to the President. Secondly, while Zambia's stated intention to conform to the provisions of article 4 of the Convention was most welcome, it was clear that article 70 (1) of the Penal Code was only partly in conformity with those provisions. Thirdly, the status of the Convention in relation to national legislation should be clarified; according to paragraph 12 of the report, the Convention or its provisions had to be incorporated into internal law or national legislation. Fourthly, paragraphs 14 to 16 of the report gave the impression that racial discrimination might exist between the various ethnic groups and races. He would appreciate knowing whether Senegalese nationals and citizens of Asian origin - two categories mentioned several times in the report - were the victims of legal provisions or discriminating practices. More information was also needed on the immigration and deportation laws and procedures in force in Zambia (para. 16 of the report).
20. As the Convention had not been translated into any local languages and human rights reports had not been publicly debated (para. 17), it would be of interest to know whether the country had a common language. If not, the Convention could never be universally accessible or benefit all the country's citizens. Even if the Government accepted the principle of universal access to education, it was unable for economic and financial reasons to guarantee such access to everyone (para. 11 of the core document). It could therefore be asked whether the allocation of the few resources available did not give rise to some discrimination between the various ethnic groups in the country. In that connection, the Zambian Government might wish to provide the Committee with information on the enjoyment by the country's various ethnic groups of the civil, social, political, cultural and economic rights embodied in article 5 of the Convention.
21. Zambia should also provide additional information on refugees that would be in keeping with the relevant guidelines of the Committee. Lastly, he welcomed the resumption of the dialogue with Zambia and said he hoped that it would be intensified in future.
22. Mr. de GOUTTES said that he appreciated the frankness of the representative of Zambia in acknowledging that his country had been late in submitting its periodic reports and welcomed the resumption of the dialogue with that country. Although the report under consideration included five different reports - the seventh to the eleventh - it was regrettably succinct and did not provide enough information on the general social, economic and political situation in the country. Zambia had serious substantive problems: a precarious economic situation, which partly explained the difficulties the country was having in meeting all its obligations under international conventions; a large refugee population; illegal immigration, repatriation and expulsions; continuing inequities between the African and Asian populations and between the various African ethnic groups; and the state of emergency declared in March 1993, which, according to reports, including those of Amnesty International, had resulted in the arrest of political opponents of the regime.
23. In addition to that general situation, about which the Committee would like to have additional information, three specific questions came to mind. First, in respect of the Commission for Investigations referred to in the report, whose broad powers of investigation in the area of racial discrimination were of particular interest to the Committee, it would be useful to know how many complaints relating to racial discrimination the Commission had investigated and what power it had to impose penalties; similarly, with regard to the Industrial Relations Court, the Committee would like to know the number of sentences pronounced and the number of cases in which compensation had been awarded for acts of racial discrimination. Secondly, were the charges of racial insults, hatred or contempt, as provided for in article 70 (1) of the Zambian Penal Code, sufficient with regard to the requirements of article 4 of the Convention or were the acts referred to in the Convention punishable under other provisions of the Penal Code? The report did not make it clear whether the provisions of the Zambian Penal Code covered the entire set of obligations under article 4 of the Convention. It would also be helpful to know the number of complaints, trials and convictions for racial offences.
24. Mr. WOLFRUM said that he also welcomed the resumption of the dialogue with Zambia and hoped that it would continue regularly in the future. After the excellent introduction by the Country Rapporteur and the many questions asked by other members of the Committee, he would ask only a few. He wished to know whether Zambia's difficult economic situation, which had already been mentioned, affected the entire country or certain regions in particular or, in other words, whether some ethnic groups were harder hit than others. Turning to the report, he asked who decided on the composition of the Commission for Investigations, mentioned in paragraph 5, whether it included independent experts, what their term of office was and whether their functions could be terminated or not. He also wished to know what significance a conclusion, decision or report of the Commission actually had and whether it was authorized to refer cases to the courts, as similar commissions in the United Kingdom were. He would appreciate more details on the Industrial Relations Court, including its composition and functions.
25. Referring to paragraph 8, he asked whether any judgements had been handed down under article 70 (1) of the Penal Code. He would also like to know what steps the Zambian Government had taken to improve the training of police officers so that they would show greater respect for human rights. It was his understanding that the President of the Republic had created a commission of independent experts to investigate violations of human rights committed since 1972 and he would appreciate information on the composition of that commission, its objectives and the results of its investigations. Having also noted that the eleventh report was not in keeping with the Committee's guidelines, he reminded the Zambian delegation that the Centre for Human Rights offered advisory services to countries to help them draft their reports. He wished to know whether, in drafting the report; the Zambian authorities had requested the assistance of the three non-governmental organizations referred to in paragraph 13.
26. Mrs. SADIQ ALI said that she wished to know the geographical distribution of the many tribes living in Zambia. She would also like some information on the situation of the copper mines in the Copper Belt and its repercussions on the various ethnic groups which had left their rural areas to work in that region. She would like to know whether there were still as many English farmers in the south of the country or whether reforms had been adopted under which land had been distributed to the local population. With regard to the issue of nationality, she asked whether Europeans and Asians had the right to hold dual nationality. She also wished to know why Zambians were hostile to Asians and why the Zambian authorities expelled refugees from the territory. Lastly, she would appreciate more information on violent acts committed by the police and on whether the Zambian authorities had taken measures to give the police human rights training.
27. Mr. van BOVEN, noting that Zambia's report was not in conformity with the Committee's guidelines, said that there was a handbook on the drafting of reports that might be useful for States parties and that States parties could use the advisory services of the Centre for Human Rights. He also pointed out that the core document (HRI/CORE/1/Add.22) emphasized the social and economic difficulties which the country faced and which undoubtedly made it difficult for it properly to fulfil its human rights obligations. In their next report, the Zambian authorities should provide information on the number of complaints of discrimination brought before the Commission for Investigations. Turning to paragraph 8 of the report, he noted that, while article 70 of the Penal Code covered article 4 (a) of the Convention, no reference had been made to the implementation of article 4 (b) and (c). He would appreciate some clarifications on that point. Having noted from the report that non-governmental organizations in Zambia were endeavouring to ensure the exercise and protection of human rights, he wondered whether it might not be appropriate to establish a national commission to promote the objectives of the Convention, in accordance with general recommendation XVII (43) of the Committee on the establishment of national bodies to facilitate the implementation of the Convention.
28. With regard to the dissemination of the text of the Convention, he noted that the advisory services of the Centre for Human Rights were available to the Zambian authorities for the translation of the Convention into local languages. As to the conduct of the police, he also thought that it would be useful to give police officers human rights training and recalled that the Centre for Human Rights might have a role to play in that regard. Lastly, since Zambia had ratified the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, it should make the declaration provided for in article 14 of the Convention in order to recognize the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by that State of any of the rights set forth in the Convention.
29. Mr. DIACONU said that he welcomed the Industrial Relations Act, which prohibited employers from terminating the services of an employee on grounds of race, colour, sex, marital status, religion, political opinion or affiliation, tribal extraction or social status; he hoped that that provision applied to all aspects of labour relations. Similarly, while endorsing section 70 of the Penal Code, under which discrimination on the grounds of race was a punishable offence, he wished to know whether Zambian legislation included provisions which declared illegal and prohibited organizations and propaganda which promoted and incited racial discrimination and which prohibited public authorities or public institutions, whether national or local, from promoting or inciting racial discrimination (art. 4 (b) and (c) of the Convention).
30. Noting that, according to paragraph 10 of Zambia's report, a civil remedy was available to an individual only if the person who discriminated against him was performing the functions of public office, he asked whether a civil remedy was available when the person in question was an ordinary citizen. If not, provisions of article 6 of the Convention were not being implemented in full. He also noted that, if a convention had not been incorporated into national legislation, an individual did not have the right to seek a remedy; nevertheless, the Zambian courts had sometimes given a remedy where an international convention to which Zambia had acceded, but which had not yet been translated into national legislation, had been violated. On the whole, however, there was no legal mechanism under which a remedy could be sought whenever a violation of human rights had been committed. Lastly, he would appreciate more information on the customary law of groups and on the principles of natural justice referred to in paragraph 22 of the report.
31. The CHAIRMAN, drawing attention to paragraphs 11 and 12 of Zambia's report, said that it was very important to incorporate the provisions of the Convention into national legislation so that they could be implemented throughout the country and invoked in the event of violation. He invited the Zambian authorities to use the advisory services of the Centre for Human Rights to translate the Convention into the various local languages so that all Zambians would be informed of their rights. He also recommended that they should use those services to prepare the periodic reports to be submitted to the Committee.
32. Mr. MWENDA (Zambia) said that he wished to make it clear that the state of emergency declared in 1993 was not intended in any way to apply discriminatory measures or to stamp out political opposition. No political party had been prohibited and freedom of expression had been maintained. Only persons suspected of having been involved in a conspiracy had been arrested. The state of emergency had been declared for several reasons, among them the disturbances that had occurred in one region where a battalion had been sent to force back any possible incursion from South Africa. Two soldiers from that battalion had been killed and other soldiers had beaten villagers living in the area where the incidents had occurred.
33. In reply to the question on the expulsion of refugees, he explained that the expulsion measures had been applied not to refugees, but to smugglers who had entered the country illegally to steal the precious gems it produced.
34. In response to a question concerning the Asian community, he recalled that the previous Government had declared a state of emergency following some unrest and that a law had been enacted making economic sabotage a crime. Economic sabotage was difficult to define and it had been thought that members of the Asian community were guilty of it because they had been hoarding capital and thus preventing money from circulating. The money and goods confiscated from them had subsequently been returned. The Asian community was well integrated into the population and he was not aware of any conflicts between the Zambian population and the Asian population. The absence of conflict explained the fact that there was no legislation on that matter. Certainly, when there had been riots in Zambia, many shops belonging to Asians had been ransacked, but the majority of shopkeepers were Asian. Government stores had also been looted, especially because they sold food.
35. He informed the Committee that two commissions were currently very active in Zambia. The first was mandated to amend the Constitution and the second to investigate police abuses. The police still had the bad habits it had acquired under the colonial regime and human rights training for police officers would take a long time. Having himself been the victim of police brutality and harassment, he could not deny the existence of such acts, but he could affirm that the authorities were aware of the problem and were firmly determined to solve it.
36. It had been noted that article 23 of the Constitution was not entirely in conformity with article 6 of the Convention and that individuals did not have all possible remedies available to them. That observation would be conveyed to the Government and to the Constitutional Commission, which would certainly give it due consideration, since Zambia's goal was to have the most democratic Constitution possible.
37. With regard to the brevity of the report, he said that it had actually been drafted with a view to starting up a dialogue rather than covering the entire 10 years that had elapsed since the previous report, prepared for 1983. Nevertheless, note had been taken of all the observations and questions and the next report would be as detailed as possible. The Zambian authorities would, moreover, like to continue to benefit from the technical assistance services, which had already been of great value to them. Zambia had taken note of the guidelines; it was in a position to apply them and would endeavour to do so.
38. With regard to the question of cultural factors, he explained that Zambia was highly urbanized - 48 per cent of the population lived in towns and cities - and that, while the country was very big, the towns were located along a narrow stretch on either side of the railway line and the rural population were very scattered. Resources followed the same pattern, with the urban population benefiting from more schools and health services, but being more affected by the economic crisis. Since the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank had failed to approve the system of food price subsidies, Zambia had had to raise agricultural prices; the urban population was suffering as a result, while the rural population was better off. Zambia had always had an egalitarian development policy which economists were now criticizing. The next report to the Committee would provide an update on the distribution pattern of schools, clinics and other services. It would provide a great deal of new information because by that time the country would have adopted a different development policy and would be governed by the Constitution which was currently being drafted and of which it expected a great deal.
39. Mrs. SADIQ ALI reminded the representative of Zambia that she had also requested that the next country report should provide information on the distribution of the various ethnic groups.
40. Mr. WOLFRUM thanked the representative of Zambia for his full replies, but would have also liked an answer to the question relating to paragraphs 11 and 12 of the report which stated that "Zambia has no separate Bill of Rights for the protection of human rights". The question with regard to the application of article 6 of the Convention had not been answered either. Those points had to be clarified. Mr. Mwenda had not provided enough information on the role of non-governmental organizations and he should bear in mind that the Chairman had requested that the report and the Convention should be published. He also reminded him that the Committee had formulated a general recommendation on the training of police personnel, which might be useful for his country. He hoped that Zambia's next report would provide details on the impact of action taken by the Ombudsman on the protection of human rights on the prohibition of racial discrimination and on the legal system.
41. Mr. MWENDA (Zambia) said that, to understand the situation in his country, it must be borne in mind that it was going through a transitional phase. Furthermore, it had gained its independence in 1964, at a time when nearly the entire African continent had still been under colonial rule; it was only natural that eliminating discrimination, racial or otherwise, had always been a guiding principle of Zambia's policy. He was convinced that Zambia was one of the countries where the different racial communities were the most fully integrated.
42. In respect of the prohibition of racist groups in accordance with the Convention, he noted that Zambia had long had a one-party system. As it was now possible to establish parties, it was important to ensure that no parties based on racist principles were set up. He reaffirmed that his country had fully grasped the objectives of the Convention and the Committee and that that would be evident from the next report.
43. The CHAIRMAN said that the Committee had completed its consideration of the first part of Zambia's periodic report. Mr. Lamptey would draft the conclusions on that report, which would then be considered and, as appropriate, adopted by the Committee.
44. Mr. Mwenda and Mr. Sinyinza (Zambia) withdrew.
WORLD CONFERENCE ON HUMAN RIGHTS (agenda item 8) (continued) (A/CONF.157/23, A/CONF.157/PC/82, A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.15, A/CONF.157/PC/98, A/CONF.157/TBB/4)
45. Mr. de GOUTTES said that he would like to know the specific ways in which the Committee had contributed to the Conference and, in particular, what documents had been submitted. He also wished to know whether the topic of early warning and urgent procedures had been discussed at the Conference. The Final Document of the World Conference (A/CONF.157/23) did not contain any invitation to treaty bodies to use such procedures. They were simply referred to in paragraph 8 of part II of the document. He wondered whether the fact that the "World Conference on Human Rights welcomes ... that other ways of responding to acute violations of human rights be considered by the relevant organs of the United Nations system" should be interpreted by the Committee as encouragement to take its initiative further.
46. Mr. van BOVEN said that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (A/CONF.157/23) were not really innovative, particularly compared to what had been done in 1968 with regard to the Tehran Proclamation, which had proposed new directions and had opened up new possibilities. Document A/CONF.157/23 was more of a summing up than a new departure. Its value lay in the number of States which had joined in the consensus on the Declaration and the Plan of Action - practically the entire world had participated - and in the fact that the concerns of certain groups, women and children, for instance, had been taken into account. That had come about through the determined efforts of the defenders of those groups.
47. The section of document A/CONF.157/23 on action to combat racial discrimination left something to be desired. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination was not even mentioned; in paragraph 21 of part II, the Conference simply welcomed the decision - fortunate, of course - taken by the Commission on Human Rights to appoint a special rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia and related intolerance. It would be appropriate for the Committee to establish contact with the Special Rapporteur and he wondered whether the Committee had received a reply to the letter in that regard it had sent to the Commission on Human Rights.
48. He had noted that an appeal had been made to States to make the declaration provided for under article 14 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, but that appeal was intended exclusively for States parties, which were still too few in number.
49. He had had the opportunity to attend the NGO forum organized in conjunction with the Vienna Conference and had made a statement there in which he had turned the limelight on the Committee. Unfortunately, NGOs had not been able to participate very actively in the Conference. He also found it regrettable that their efforts and importance had not been adequately acknowledged in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. The Declaration and Plan of Action were still a success because they were the result of enormous efforts to arrive at a consensus which had been far from certain at the start.
50. He fully endorsed the idea of establishing a post of high commissioner for human rights. He had not expected the Conference to take up that idea since institutions of that kind took a long time to set up, but he looked forward eagerly to what the General Assembly would have to say.
51. Mr. SHAHI said that, while the Final Document of the World Conference on Human Rights (A/CONF.157/23) would surely not make history, it was important because it had prevented a retreat on human rights. Indeed, the meetings of the Preparatory Committee for the Conference and the Conference itself had been held against the tragic background of the Bosnian drama and a marked tension had arisen during the Conference between different groups of countries. The western delegations, which were usually in the vanguard of human rights progress, had lost a great deal of their credibility because of their inability to intervene in Bosnia. Those delegations had therefore adopted a defensive attitude and their efforts had apparently been limited to preventing any regression. They had not taken any bold steps with regard to measures to strengthen United Nations human rights mechanisms. The Asian delegations, for their part, had been suspicious of any effort to make those mechanisms more effective, fearing that such efforts would lead to interference and violations of State sovereignty.
52. With regard to the contribution to the World Conference made on behalf of the Committee, he had proposed, in his capacity as independent expert, that a study should be carried out on how the United Nations system could be more effective in intervening in cases of massive violations of human rights. However, the secretariat had shown little enthusiasm for such a study.
53. At the fourth meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the Conference, the treaty bodies had been practically excluded from the debates and only States had been authorized to speak. On that same occasion, the Chairpersons and representatives of the human rights treaty bodies had jointly submitted a set of amendments (A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.15) to a working paper the text of which had been prepared by the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Mr. Fall (A/CONF.157/PC/82, annex). However, document A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.15, which had taken account of the Committee's concerns and proposals, had been replaced by another document drafted on behalf of the human rights treaty bodies (A/CONF.157/TBB/4). He had not represented the Committee at the Conference, but had been at the head of the Pakistan delegation, had done everything possible to have his delegation introduce those amendments which had been proposed by the Committee and endorsed by all the treaty bodies and which dealt with early warning measures and the possibility of informing the Security Council of cases of massive violations of human rights. That initiative had unfortunately failed owing, apparently, to the busy schedule of the Conference. In any event, document A/CONF.157/TBB/4 contained important recommendations, although no committee was mentioned by name. The document also made no reference to early warning and urgent procedures in the case of massive violations of human rights. To his knowledge, moreover, not a single representative of the Committee had been present at the meeting where that new document had been drafted.
54. He agreed with Mr. van Boven that the Final Document of the Vienna Conference did not have the same scope as that adopted in Tehran in 1968 and that it was not much more than a recapitulation of the various positions of those present. In that connection, he recalled that at the regional meeting in Djakarta, the group of Asian States had insisted on the need to take account of the cultural practices and characteristics of various societies, as well as their historical past, and had tenaciously maintained that human rights instruments were based on western philosophies.
55. The CHAIRMAN thanked Mr. Shahi for the efforts he had made as the representative of the Committee at the meetings of the Preparatory Committee of the Conference and as the head of the Pakistan delegation. He reminded the Committee that, as its Chairman, he had been officially invited to attend the Conference, but that he had not been able to participate because of the lack of financial resources and because his Government had appointed another person to represent it at the Conference.
56. Mr. de GOUTTES said he wondered whether paragraph 8 of part II of the Final Document of the Conference (A/CONF.157/23) did not contain an implicit reference to the early warning and urgent procedures, which had been endorsed by the Committee.
57. Mr. YUTZIS said that he was not satisfied by an implicit reference to measures which the Committee considered fundamental and he was concerned about what Mr. Shahi had described. In that connection, it was vital to ascertain the origin of the opposition to a methodology that had been endorsed by all the treaty bodies.
58. Noting that the participation of the Chairman of the Committee in the World Conference had not been financed by the Secretariat, he said that he wondered whether that was a special case.
59. Mr. LAMPTEY said that he wished to know why the Secretariat had not financed the participation of the Chairman of the Committee in the World Conference when it had provided funds on other occasions.
60. The results of the Vienna Conference were hardly surprising. It must be kept in mind that the Conference had gathered together nearly 200 Member States of the United Nations, each having its own interests and concerns, which evolved over time in response to events. While the Final Document had failed to give explicit recognition to a matter of particular importance to the Committee, it still represented a good consensus for 1993 and it was best to welcome that and be satisfied with it. A universal standard would eventually be adopted even if it took years or even centuries.
61. Mr. WOLFRUM said that he agreed with the question asked by Mr. Lamptey and Mr. Yutzis. He would be grateful if the representative of the Secretary-General would reply to it.
62. Like Mr. Lamptey, he emphasized the importance of the fact that the Final Document of the Vienna Conference represented a consensus. Furthermore, he agreed with Mr. de Gouttes that the Committee should not take offence at the vague wording of paragraph 8 in part II of the Final Document of the Conference.
63. Mr. SHAHI said that it was certainly possible to interpret the words "The World Conference on Human Rights welcomes ... that other ways of responding to acute violations of human rights be considered by the relevant organs of the United Nations system" (A/CONF.157/23, para. 8) as a way of recognizing the urgent procedures advocated by the Committee. However, that wording was not entirely satisfactory.
64. According to document A/CONF.157/PC/82, the Chairpersons and representatives of the treaty bodies had proposed that, in the section pertaining to the possibility that human rights expert bodies might bring serious violations of human rights to the attention of the Security Council, the words "when (such violations) threaten international peace and security" (annex V, para. 6) should be deleted. It was unfortunate that the amendment deleting those words had ended up the same way as document A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.15.
65. He shared Mr. Yutzis' disappointment and assured him that he had done everything possible, both during the meetings of the Preparatory Committee and during the Conference itself, to defend the Committee's position. Regrettably, his efforts had failed as a result of deep distrust of recourse to the Security Council and the fact that it had been impossible for the treaty bodies to submit amendments.