Country and area spesific recommendations

Persistent insecurity throughout the country; the virtual inexistence of a criminal justice system; and the absence of any national entity capable of enforcing the rule of law have been major causes of concern for the Afghan people and for humanitarian agencies since the fall of the Taleban in 2001. The Afghan Transitional Authority (ATA) has not been able to extend its authority beyond the limited area around the capital controlled by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). Large parts of the country remain under control of various warlords – fighting for control of territories and resources. This armed struggle includes continued attacks by groups reportedly linked to the Taleban.

 

The absence of any national or international force capable of enforcing the rule of law outside of Kabul is widely seen as a major factor hindering the return of the remaining internally displaced people, the protection of human rights, the humanitarian access and Afghanistan´s transitional process towards a system based on the rule of law.

 

US-led forces are still engaged in combat. Its bombings continue to cause civilian casualties, and the forces continue to carry out arbitrary arrests and detentions.

 

Against this backdrop, Afghanistan is scheduled to hold elections in October 2004. Instability and the precarious security situation may threaten both their legitimacy and viability. We ask the Norwegian government to support international observers.

 

Rape and sexual violence against women and girls remain at high levels, and is often actively supported or passively accepted by authorities, armed groups, families and communities. In some cases violence results in death or deliberate killing of women and girls.

 

Ending impunity is crucial to build a future based on peace, civility and the rule of law. Atrocities against civilians and combatants have not been subject to full and impartial investigations, and no one has yet been brought to justice for such crimes.

 

The international community has acknowledged that re-establishing the rule of law is an essential pre-requisite for peace and security in Afghanistan, after 23 years of armed conflict. We believe there is an urgent need for legal reform to ensure that all Afghan laws comply fully with international law. At present, Afghan courts lack legitimacy and there is a general perception that the judicial system is unable to properly serve the interests of justice. Our concern for the provision of the death penalty in Afghanistan is aggravated by that fact.

We call on the Norwegian government to:

·       urge the international community to assist the ATA in providing security throughout the territory of Afghanistan, while fully respecting international law, and by building and developing functioning institutions, including courts, capable of implementing its human rights obligations.

·       urge the US-led forces to undertake measures to end arbitrary arrests and detentions as well as indiscriminate use of arms, and to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of such acts. Furthermore to ensure treatment of detainees in accordance with humanitarian and human rights law.

·       urge the ATA to ensure that their obligations under international law are reflected in national legislation.

·       ensure full and prompt implementation of Security Council resolution 1325 on Women, peace and security, in particular to ensure that women are represented at all levels of decision-making, and to guarantee the protection of the human rights of women and girls as they relate to the constitution, the electoral system, the police and the judiciary.

·       support the establishment of an international and independent commission of inquiry as an important step towards ensuring accountability, as  recommended by the Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial, summary and arbitrary executions.

·       urge the ATA to declare a moratorium on the death penalty.

Displacement of civil population is increasingly being used as a weapon in politics and armed conflicts. This makes it more important than ever to promote the fundamental human right to return. There are three durable solutions for displaced persons: return; integration in the country of asylum/area of displacement; or resettlement in a third country/elsewhere in the home country. Return is the most common and often the solution preferred by refugees and internally displaced. This is also the case in Burundi.

 

After a decade of fighting, about 140 000 IDPs remain in camps. The number being dispersed throughout the country is unknown. Many of the IDPs have been forcibly put into camps by the government. Close to 475 000 refugees have found refuge in neighbouring Tanzania.

 

Prospects for the return of IDPs have improved significantly, after the signing of a ceasefire agreement between the government and several rebel groups. At the same time, however, thousands of people are being displaced in Bujumbura Rural Province every week, as one particular rebel group, the FNL, still refuses to make peace with the government. With the overall increase of stability in the rest of the country, however fragile, thousands of IDPs and refugees are returning home. The UNHCR has also signed another repatriation agreement with Burundian and Tanzanian authorities, which opens up for intensified return to greater areas of the country.

 

Donors have pledged funds to support the reintegration of the displaced, and the UN is working with the government to implement a return strategy for both IDPs and refugees. The presidential election in November will take place in a society that faces great challenges in regards to the return of both IDPs and refugees. Conflicting land claims and the lack of preparation of communities in areas of origin to receive returnees may complicate the return process. A sustainable return process is vital to sustain peace.

We call on the Norwegian government to:

·       urge the involved parties (Tanzanian and Burundian authorities and the UNHCR) to do their utmost to ensure that all return happens in safety and dignity. Both UNHCR and the UN mission in Burundi, ONUB, should strengthen their protective roles towards returnees and IDPs.

·       demand that at this point, all parties (Tanzanian and Burundian authorities and the UNHCR) show cautiousness in regards to the return process to Burundi. A big scale return now, before the conditions are suitable, may threaten the fragile stability in Burundi.

·       urge Tanzanian authorities to show good will towards the Burundian refugees who want to resettle in Tanzania, instead of returning to Burundi. Especially those who have had refuge in Tanzania since 1972.

·       call on all donors to increase the economic support necessary to ensure a successful return process.

·       demand that the Burundian government ensures full freedom for IDPs and returnees to move within their home country and choose their place of residence. Likewise their right to choose to resettle durably elsewhere in the country or integrate in areas of displacement, instead of returning home.

Grave violations of basic human rights of the Palestinians continue despite repeated condemnation of Israeli policies by the international community. Increasingly harsh forms of collective punishment are inflicted on the Palestinian population. One such form of collective punishment is the building of fences and walls around Palestinian population centres denying the Palestinian population the ability to exercise human rights while Israeli citizens settled on occupied Palestinian land have free movement.

 

In December 2003, Israel declared that in 2004, 520 km of the planned 728 km would be completed with the entire project finished in 2005. Its route deviates from the Green Line, the post 1948 demarcation line between Israel and the West Bank. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) published its ruling concerning the wall on July 9th 2004. The court held that the construction of the wall inside occupied territory is contrary to international law and that it violates the human rights of the Palestinian population. It further stated that the building of the wall must stop, the wall must be dismantled and the affected Palestinians must be compensated for their losses. Israel does not recognise the ICJ-ruling.

 

The UN and human rights groups have documented the harmful impact on the population. The Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem documented that 875 600 Palestinians are directly harmed by the wall and 263 200 Palestinians are caught in enclaves. Significant areas of the West Bank have been de facto annexed by Israel. The wall has a profound impact; it separates local towns and villages from their lands, health services, schools, water resources, workplaces and livelihoods.

 

Another form of collective punishment is the Israeli use of excessive force. This continues to cause large-scale destruction of civilian property. UN sources have documented the destruction of an estimated 4500 homes over the past three years by the Israeli army. As a result thousands of Palestinian civilians have been left homeless and the destruction is in particular harming large parts of the refugee population. Palestinian refugees lack protection provided to other refugee groups by the UNHCR. A special UN agency, United Nations Work and Relief Agency, provides basic services for the Palestinians, but does not offer sufficient protection. Recent peace initiatives have ignored UN resolution 194 and the right of return for Palestinian refugees. 

 

Israeli authorities have put restrictions on the movement of international human rights and humanitarian aid workers, as well as journalists. Israel has actively created obstacles to the necessary work of humanitarian aid organizations, and the state has worked to reduce the presence of internationals in the occupied Palestinian territories. This Israeli policy towards UN agencies, donor NGOs and human rights organisations is unacceptable and a violation of humanitarian law. The Fourth Geneva Convention states that parties in a conflict have an obligation to provide unhindered access to humanitarian organisations working in conflict areas.

We call on the Norwegian government to:

·       urge the international community to take steps to stop the Israeli occupation and  illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian land, remove the wall and provide compensation for loss of income to those affected by the construction, and immediately withdraw from Palestinian occupied areas according to UN resolutions 242 and 338.

·       urge the international community to deploy international human rights monitors to provide protection for Palestinians.

·       affirm the right of return of refugees in accordance with international law and UN resolution 194.

·       demand that Israel immediately lifts the restrictions on access to the Gaza Strip and closed military zones to provide full and unrestricted access for humanitarian aid organisations and human rights monitors.

The respect of human rights in Iran is adversely affected by the political stalemate between supporters and opponents of reform. Socio-political and human rights reforms, favoured by President Khatami and parliment, are often blocked by the Guardian Council, the highest legislative body whose function is to ensure that laws uphold Islamic tenets and the Iranian Constitution. The interuption and the control by the Guardian Council concerning the nomination of candidates to the parliamentary election this spring and its repeated rejection of legislative reforms, has further undermined the position of President Khatami and fuelled the social unrest and frustration especially among the younger segments of the population.

 

Scores of political prisoners, including prisoners of conscience, continue to serve sentences imposed in previous years following unfair trials. Scores more have been arrested in 2004, often arbitrarily and many following student demonstrations. Many political prisoner arrested during the year have been detained without charge, trial or regular access to their families and lawyers. Judicial authorities curtail freedom of expression, opinion and association, including of ethnic minorities like the Kurds, scores of publications have been closed, Internet sites have been filtered and journalists imprisoned. During the year the pattern of harassment of political prisoners´ family members reemerged.

 

The use of torture is widespread and systematic. The death penalty is being carried out, often in public, on long-term political prisoners, apparently to intimidate political or ethnic groups such as Kurds and Arabs.

 

The visits by UN human rights experts in 2003 contributed to increasing awareness of human rights issues in Iran. However, judicial and other authorities made no public response to their recommendations.

We call on the Norwegian government to:

·       Condemn Iran´s use of secret trials, torture and capital punishment.

·       Urge the Iranian government to respect human rights such as freedom of expression, opinion, association, and religion.

·       Condemn the persecution of writers, students, reform politicians, intellectuals and ethnic and religious groups, especially the Bahais.

·       Urge the Iranian government to sign and ratify the UN Convention on the Elimination on All Forms of Discrimination against Women and its Optional Protocol.

·       Urge the Iranian government to implement the recommendations put forward by the UN human rights experts that visited Iran in 2003.

We are worried about the escalation and regionalisation of the Chechen conflict, which has now clearly become a threat to peace and security in the Caucasus and beyond. The conflict can only be solved by genuine political means. A solution requires the involvment of the international community. 

 

It is deeply regrettable that certain radical groups have increasingly targeted Russian and other civilians over the last months. We expect that the Russian Federation will undertake investigative, judicial and correctional measures against the persons responsible for the atrocities. We insist that these measures must be in accordance with international human rights and humanitarian law.

 

A political solution to the Chechen conflict requires genuine political processes in which political figures deemed legitimate by wider segments of the Chechen electorate are allowed to take part. Federal servicemen carry out human rights abuses against Chechen civilians – including internally displaced persons. The abuses, including widespread and disproportionate violence against civilians, forced disappearances, extra-judicial exectutions and torture, must cease, and past abuses be fully addressed by the courts and prosecutors in order to put an end to impunity. The rise in harassment of victims who seek redress through domestic courts and the European Court of Human Rights is highly counter-productive in this regard, and must end.

 

Failure to deal with these issues can only lead to increased antagonism, tension and further destabilization in the region.

 

Today’s human rights violations too frequently lead to tomorrow’s security problems. More attention should be given to independent human rights monitors and other independent observers in society, including the media. Regrettably the opposite is happening, as independent human right groups and indepent media increasingly experience harassment and closures and impeded access to conflict areas.

We call on the Norwegian government to

·       Express in a statement and otherwise promote the understanding, that:

o     The gross and systematic violations of international human rights and humanitarian law in the Chechen Republic are not considered as legitimate or appropriate regardless of the Russian Federation’s references to terrorism, and that the situation now constitutes a threat to regional peace and security more than ever;

o     the Russian Federation has failed to comply with UN resolutions, in particular it has failed to co-operate fully with the special rapporteurs and working groups of the Commission on Human Rights. They should be given access, as should humanitarian and human rights NGOs and the press;

o     An international commission of inquiry of human rights and humanitarian law violations must be established, in accordance with Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolution no 1323 (2003), and that in addition all relevant domestic and international mechanisms to document and respond to abuses should be utilised. The harassment of victims seeking redress through domestic remedies and the European Court of Human Rigths must end;

o     The causes of the conflict must be address, i.a. through dialogue with genuine representatives of the Chechen population;

o     Russian authorities must ensure that IDPs from the Chechen Republic are given a real choice between return, resettlement or reintegration.

·       Address the deterioration in freedom of expression in the Russian Federation in general. The hampering of objective reporting from the Chechen Republic in Russian and international media, can only prolong the conflict.

Thematical recommendations

We are most concerned about the decreasing respect for human rights in the ongoing counter-terrorism activities. Last year’s General Assembly reaffirmed that states must ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism comply with their obligations under international law, in particular human rights, refugee and humanitarian law.  It welcomed the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ “Digest of Jurisprudence of the United Nations and Regional Organizations on the Protection of Human Rights while Countering Terorrism”.

 

However, rather than, for example, asking for its distribution among and use by national authorities involved in combating terrorism, the resolution merely asks the High Commissioner  “to update and publish it periodically”. We hope that the Norwegian government will contribute to ensure that this year´s resolution is strengthened. 

 

At the upcoming session of the General Assembly, we expect that the main focus of the debate on protection of human rights and terrorism will be on the High Commissioner´s study (regrettably we do not know the contents of this study yet).

 

In order to strengthen the resolution this year, we call on the Norwegian government to:

·       In the debate on this resolution, to make a strong statement underlining the crucial importance of strictly upholding human rights in the fight against terrorism and highlighting the use the  “Digest of Jurisprudence” as one of the tools to that end;

·       Urge that a serious debate takes place on the High Commissioner´s study and its recommendations;

·       Strengthen the resolution by including the following elements in its operative paragraphs

o     a)  request states to take full account of the Human Rights Committee´s General Comment 29 on states of emergency  when taking measures to combat terrorism,

o     b) request states to distribute the “Digest of Jurisprudence” to national authorities and judicial institutions dealing with measures to counter terrorism, urging them to take its provisions fully into account, and

o     c) request all countries to provide, in their reports to the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the United Nations Security Council, information on concrete steps they have taken to ensure that the counter-terrorism measures also meet states´ obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law, as Security Council resolution 1456 (2003) requires.

Many countries have legislation that can be used to restrict the free exchange of religious, scientific or cultural expressions, by defining these expressions as “blasphemous.” False accusations are also easily presented, with grave consequences for the accused, especially in the countries with severe penalties, including capital punishment, if found guilty.

 

Freedom of religion, as defined Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is a non-derogable human right that may be subject only to such limitations as are proscribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals and rights and freedoms of others (cfr article 18.3). The broad scope of many national laws and their application regarding ”blasphemy” has no justification.

 

The right to criticise religious ideas and to change one’s religion or not to have a religion must also be protected. Forced conversions are contrary to international standards and laws.

 

A further concern is the tendency of a number of governments to recognise only the religious communities that are set up under the auspices of the Government. This leads to the discrimination of both some traditional communities as well as new religions.

 

Tolerance and understanding must be learned in public schools. Students should gain a deeper understanding of other religions and worldviews, in an impartial and non-discriminatory manner.

We call on the Norwegian government to: 

·       Express concern for the broad scope of many ”blasphemy laws”, its potential for grave abuse, and therefore to call for a general abolishment of such laws;

·       Work for the release of persons imprisoned on charges of blasphemy;

·       Call for a UN Conference, with national dialogue with all relevant stakeholders in the preparations, to address the issue of national definition of certain faith communities as recognised and others as non-recognised;

·       Encourage legislation that allows:

o    every citizen’s religious or belief affiliation to be a private (undisclosed) matter;

o    citizens to manifest their belief alone or in community;

o    for the possibility to change one’s belief or to have no belief at all;

o    for the possibility to be taught in school according to one’s belief, or in the case of minors, according to the wishes of the child’s parents or legal guardians;

·       Encourage the promotion of diverse ceremonies, both religious and civil, relating to matters that change the legal status of the persons, e.g. marriage, burial, etc;

·       Encourage member states to study the outcome of the Madrid Conference in detail, and apply its recommendations in their own curricula.

The lines between military and humanitarian actors are becoming more blurred. Humanitarian workers run a risk of being regarded as a part of an occupying power or otherwise a party to the conflict. Serious security threats to the UN, to NGOs and not least to the civil population ensue. We are gravely concerned about the undermining of the basis of all humanitarian assistance: The principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence.

 

One of the main concerns in Liberia, is the integration of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Afraires into the peace-keeping operation (UNMIL). Humanitarian organisations fear that an “integrated mission” will further blur the lines between humanitarian actions and the military and political agenda. Making humanitarian organisations report directly to UNMIL, will jeopardise the neutral coordination of humanitarian affairs. An “integrated mission” will most probably also render a poorer quality of humanitarian assistance. In practical terms, the location of humanitarian facilities within military guarded UNMIL compounds will severely restrict the access to humanitarian assistance, both in a general sense and due to the composition of military troops. In the areas controlled by Pakistani peace-keepers, for example, female staff are not allowed to enter UNMIL military premises, as this is against Pakistani regulations.

 

In Afghanistan, the military forces have performed humanitarian tasks from the beginning of the intervention. Both the soldiers belonging to ISAF and the US coalition forces appear in civilian clothing and drive non-camouflage white cars that are normally being used solely by humanitarian organisations. The neutral, humanitarian space has practically disappeared in Afghanistan. The US coalition forces have distributed leaflets saying that people will not receive humanitarian assistance unless they cooperate and give information regarding terrorist threats.

 

We call on the Norwegian government to:

·       Demand that the UN and member states make no compromise regarding the principles underpinning humanitarian action.

·       Demand that member states, under no circumstances, link conditions to humanitarian assistance or use withdrawal of humanitarian assistance as a threat. Humanitarian assistance shall always be distributed without regard to race, religion, nationality or political conviction.

·       Demand that member states will do their utmost to ensure sufficient neutral, humanitarian space for humanitarian actors in areas where they themselves have military presence or otherwise exert effective control.

·       Demand that member states ensure that soldiers always identify themselves clearly as representing military forces.

·       Demand that the Office of Civilian and Humanitarian Affairs always operates as an independent entity, and never as part of a military structure.

Currently, some 25 million people are displaced within their own countries by conflicts and human rights violations. In 2003 alone, some three million people were forced out of their homes; a similarly high number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) were able to return, albeit often into situations of poverty and continuing human rights violations.

 

Although the number of IDPs is more than twice as high as that of refugees, IDPs hardly ever get the same international attention, let alone concrete assistance and protection. As the current crisis in Sudan’s Darfur region shows, IDPs often are the most vulnerable victims of conflict: Caught up in battle zones or remote and inaccessible areas, cut-off from humanitarian aid and exposed to attacks and human rights abuses by warring parties. Generally speaking, about 80 percent of an IDP population consists of women and children. IDP women are highly exposed to gender-based violence, such as rape, and therefore need special protection.

 

In the post-conflict phase, IDPs often face great difficulties returning and reintegrating in their places of origin as local economies and infrastructures are destroyed and basic services disrupted. Millions of IDPs are forced to live in prolonged displacement, faced in many cases with discrimination and very limited subsistence opportunities.  

 

Responsibility for the protection of IDPs rests first and foremost with national governments. The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, issued by the UN Secretary-General’s Special Representative on IDPs in 1998, spell out the duties and responsibilities of national authorities towards displaced populations, based on international human rights and humanitarian law. The General Assembly has repeatedly called upon governments to “provide protection and assistance to IDPs, including reintegration and development assistance”. 

 

Yet the displaced are only rarely afforded adequate protection and assistance by their governments. In 2003, IDPs could not count on their government for protection in 13 of the 52 countries affected by internal displacement. This meant that more than ten million people were confronted with hostile or, at best, indifferent authorities that made no effort to protect them. In several cases, governments themselves – through national armies or government-backed militias – were responsible for displacements, including in Burma, Côte d’Ivoire, Sudan and Zimbabwe. Nearly 18 million IDPs received no humanitarian assistance from their government, or only on an occasional basis. Displaced people continue to suffer from high rates of death and illness due to war. In DR Congo, 3.3 million people have died as a result of the war since 1998 – a fact that has passed largely unnoticed by the international community. In Uganda, the number of IDPs has more than doubled over the last year – to 1.6 million people – and the general conditions in the camps for the displaced are appalling.

            

The international community does not do enough to fill the gap left by governments unable or unwilling to help their displaced populations. Funding for humanitarian assistance is insufficient, and the UN has yet to put in place a system to more effectively protect and assist IDPs. Nearly a third of the world’s internally displaced – some seven million people – do not benefit from any systematic UN assistance at all. There are serious concerns that the humanitarian space may be further shrinking as a result of an increasing number of “integrated” UN missions, which run the risk of subordinating the humanitarian sector under the missions’ broader political agenda.

We call on the Norwegian government to:

·       Urge governments to respect their obligations under international law vis-à-vis their displaced citizens.

·       Urge governments to use the Guiding Principles as a framework for addressing the needs of IDPs.

·       Urge the UN to actively assist governments in responding to the protection and assistance needs of IDPs, in particular in country where the UN so far has remained inactive.

·       Urge on the UN to ensure that the set-up of its missions does not curtail the humanitarian community’s ability to effectively respond to the protection and assistance needs of the IDPs.

We are concerned that the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment under international law that has prevailed in modern times is being dangerously undermined and is now under threat. Media reports suggest that some UN member states assert that torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment may be condoned and could be legally justified under certain circumstances, such as in measures undertaken against terror.

 

Interrogation methods and other treatment that amount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, have been portrayed as legitimate, in spite of the overwhelming relevant jurisprudence of international and regional human rights bodies and national courts that make it clear they are not. The prohibition of the use of evidence elicited as a result of torture in proceedings has been questioned.

 

Some states have breached their obligation to ensure that no one is expelled, extradited or returned to a country where they may be in danger of being tortured or ill-treated.

 

The General Assembly deliberations about the resolution on Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment provides an occasion for the international community to reaffirm that torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated.  It is an opportunity to renew the commitment to denounce such acts and seek justice for torture victims. 

We call on the Norwegian government to:

·        Ensure that statements by the Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs or other senior government officials in the General Debate (high level segment, agenda item 9) clearly state that torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment are condemned and prohibited in all circumstances. Instruct its delegation to make a similar affirmation in the Third Committee during the discussion around the torture resolution (agenda item 107: Human rights questions).

·       Fully support the Danish government in its efforts to draft a high-quality General Assembly resolution on torture and ill-treatment that will lend itself to be used, as a tool, in campaigning to resist efforts to weaken the absolute prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; and instruct its delegation in New York to use its good offices to encourage as many states as possible to co-sponsor the resolution.

·       Contribute to the increased ratification of the Convention against Torture, by encouraging major recipients of Norwegian development assistance, such as Angola, Tanzania and Eritrea to participate in the 21-24 September – Treaty Event 2004 and to sign the Convention against Torture.