Tag: UNHRC

Categories
-Top News India News

Kashmiri terror victims address UNHRC event

Terrorism.

Cross-border terrorism remains a core concern for India, moreover, Pakistan facilitates the movement of its proxies across the border with the only motive of creating terror in the minds of people…reports Asian Lite News

Kashmiri victims of cross-border terrorism addressed United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) event for the first time which has been welcomed by India.

Activist Shuib Lone has highlighted the issue of cross-border terrorism in Kashmir, at a United Nations Human Rights Council event.

Representing family members of victims of terrorism in Kashmir, especially women, he said, “Silence is imposed on the victims, and families, especially regarding women. As an activist, I documented numerous such incidents where women are prevented from speaking out against these atrocities. It is well known how militants continue to use residents’ places during such operations against the wishes of locals.”

MEA spokesperson Arindam Bagchi hailed the move and said that “We talk about terrorism in this way very dispassionately, I think directly listening to the victims makes a difference and it is a good step that the council can hear them directly, the victims of terrorism”, adding, “I can’t express what impact it will have right now, but it is important that a human face is given to the victims of terrorism, and they are not just numbers or figures,” the WION reported.

Activist Shuib Lone at UNHRC

Cross-border terrorism remains a core concern for India, moreover, Pakistan facilitates the movement of its proxies across the border with the only motive of creating terror in the minds of people of neighbouring states.

Describing the horrors of women in Kashmir, Lone said, “There are numerous incidents of involuntary labour by women – cooking, cleaning, sheltering militants, sexual violence and assault on women over the last few years, we are working on the grass-root level to bring together the violence against the victim families and women on the common platform to amplify their voices as well as the community-led efforts for rehabilitation.”

During the last 15 years, thousands of civilians have lost their lives in terrorism, apart from thousands of defence, paramilitary and police personnel who have sacrificed their lives in the line of duty. Infiltration and smuggling of narcotics, arms and weapons across the borders have been matters of constant and relentless anxiety to all concerned agencies manning the borders.

“Today, the families of victims of cross-border terrorism continue to live under fear and threat. I have a strong faith in the international community’s role to address these challenges and increase coverage of such incidents with a special focus on women and reporting about perpetrators, who gradually created an environment that would keep such activities in check,” said Lone. Notably, India is the chair of the UN’s 1373 Counter-Terrorism Committee. The United Nations Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) has decided to hold a special meeting on the theme “New and Emerging Technologies” with the support of its Executive Directorate (CTED), in India on 29 October 2022.

Addressing the sideline event, Tasleema said, “I have witnessed many close family members being brutally murdered by terrorists” highlighting, “we remain unacknowledged…”

The members that will participate in the meeting are Albania, Brazil, Gabon, Ghana, India, Ireland, Kenya, Mexico, Norway and the UAE, along with five permanent members China, France, Russia, the UK and the US. There are several other countries and international organisations, and experts that are invited and will participate in the meeting. This will be the seventh time the Counter-Terrorism Committee meets outside New York.

The agenda/meeting will focus on three areas where emerging technologies are massively being used and abused by terrorists, for terrorism purposes and spreading disinformation and hate speech. The special meeting will discuss the use of technology for security and counter-terrorism purposes, namely (a) the Internet and social media, (b) terrorism financing, and (c) unmanned aerial systems (UAS). The meeting would be conducted in the six official languages of the United Nations and be open to the wider United Nations membership and other relevant stakeholders.

ALSO READ: Land Reforms Fuel Development in Kashmir

ALSO READ: Amit Shah’s first mega rally in Kashmir since Article 370 abrogation

Categories
-Top News Asia News China

Uyghurs call for global action, citing UN report on atrocities

The Uyghurs from 20 countries urged UNHRC to take up the issue in a Special Session or Urgent Debate with the aim of establishing a Commission of Inquiry (COI) to independently examine the treatment of Uyghurs …reports Asian Lite News

A group of 60 Uyghur organizations from 20 countries are calling for an immediate response to put an end to atrocities against Uyghurs, following the release of a report by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) today. Uyghurs are calling for seven concrete actions by governments, multilateral bodies, and corporations.

“This UN report is extremely important. It paves the way for meaningful and tangible action by member states, UN bodies, and the business community,” said World Uyghur Congress President Dolkun Isa. “Accountability starts now.”

“This is a game-changer for the international response to the Uyghur crisis,” said Uyghur Human Rights Project Executive Director Omer Kanat. “Despite the Chinese government’s strenuous denials, the UN has now officially recognized that horrific crimes are occurring.”

The report offers the most definitive assessment of the issues faced by Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples from the world’s leading human rights body. Most notably, it finds that “arbitrary and discriminatory detention” of Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples, within the context of other restrictions, “may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.”

The report also notes that the human rights abuses have included “far-reaching, arbitrary and discriminatory restrictions on human rights and fundamental freedoms, in violation of international norms and standards,” and that documentation of “patterns of torture or ill-treatment” is credible, including “incidents of sexual […] violence.”

On the crime of state-imposed forced labour, the report affirms the “deep concerns” of the International Labour Organisation (ILO), stating that the “OHCHR shares, from the human rights perspective, the concerns laid out by the ILO supervisory bodies.”

The report recommends for the Chinese government to take steps to release those arbitrarily detained; clarify the whereabouts of detained family members; cease intimidation and reprisals against Uyghurs in connection with their advocacy; to cooperate with the ILO Committee of Experts recommendations; and provide “adequate remedy and reparation to victims” of human rights abuses.

The report recommends that governments should “refrain from returning [Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples] to China” and “provide humanitarian assistance, including medical and psycho-social support, to victims in the States in which they are located.”

The report also makes recommendations to the business community to strengthen human rights risk assessments in the surveillance and security sector in particular, and for companies to respect human rights across activities and business relationships.

Uyghur

What are the demands?

  • The UN Human Rights Council to take up the issue in a Special Session or Urgent Debate with the aim of establishing a Commission of Inquiry (COI) to independently examine the treatment of Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples;
  •  The UN Special Procedures to consider evidence presented in the report and respond with recommendations for the UN and the international community;
  •  The UN Office on Genocide Prevention to immediately conduct an assessment of the risks of atrocities—including genocide and crimes against humanity—targeting Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples, and to alert relevant actors and advocate for a proportionate response;
  •  The ILO to take note of the report, include additional evidence of forced labour in its Committee of Experts annual report, and for delegates at the International Labour Conference to lodge a complaint against China for failure to uphold its obligations;
  •  UNESCO to urgently investigate cases of destruction or marginalisation of natural and cultural heritage, including UNESCO-listed heritage (Muqam, Karez well system, Manas, Meshrep, and the Tianshan mountain range);
  • The global business community to immediately cut all ties with entities assisting the government to carry out the atrocities, especially the programs of high-tech surveillance and state-imposed forced labour; and
  • Governments and international organizations to take urgent steps to protect Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples at imminent risk of refoulement, in line with a recent joint statement from 22 refugee and human rights groups and 50 Uyghur organizations.

“The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has waited far too long to deliver its report. The truth of China’s atrocities has once again been documented, and there can be no shying away from the obligation to act. Stopping genocide was a foundational purpose of the UN, and it must be upheld now,” said Campaign for Uyghurs Executive Director Rushan Abbas.

‘’Now that the leading UN office on human rights has spoken, there are no more excuses for failure to hold the Chinese government accountable,” said Elfidar Iltebir, Uyghur American Association President.

“Our people are enduring genocide that has been documented through research, exposed by the Uyghur Tribunal, and designated by parliaments,” said Hidayet Oghuzhan, President of the International Union of East Turkistan Organizations. “As the diaspora community, we call on international human rights organizations and governments to take immediate action to stop the ongoing genocide.”

In September 2021, OHCHR confirmed it was “finalizing its assessment” and in December a spokesperson announced that the report would be released in a matter of weeks. In an open letter in March 2022, over 200 human rights groups urged the High Commissioner to promptly release her Office’s report following the long delay.

The report comes after the visit of the High Commissioner, Michelle Bachelet, to East Turkistan in May 2022, amidst criticism from governments, international organisations, and Uyghur groups that the trip amounted to little more than a propaganda victory for the Chinese government.

Since China’s review by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) in August 2018, where members registered “alarm” at reports of mass detention, UN experts have indicated deep concerns over the deteriorating human rights situation in China—and the Uyghur region in particular.

UN experts have issued 83 communications and 27 press releases to China since 2018, but noted they “have yet to see any signs of political will to address the concerns raised.” The Chinese government has not replied to 19 pending visit requests and rejected all Universal Periodic Review recommendations to provide unhindered access to experts.

In June 2020, 50 UN experts called for “decisive measures” to protect fundamental freedoms in China, including the creation of a UN mechanism to “closely monitor, analyse and report annually on the human rights situation in China.” On June 10, 2022, this call was reiterated by 42 UN experts, noting a lack of political will to address the concerns raised.

A growing number of governments have also expressed alarm about the human rights situation in China—notably the atrocities perpetrated against Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples. The U.S. State Department determined in January 2021 that this treatment amounted to genocide and crimes against humanity, and parliaments in Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Lithuania, the Czech Republic and the European Parliament have all passed motions or resolutions condemning the atrocity crimes.

ALSO READ: How China accounts manipulate Uyghur discourse

ALSO READ: New UN rights report alleges China of ‘crimes against humanity’ in Xinjiang

Categories
-Top News Europe

Russia’s ouster from rights body has grave implications

Russian President Vladimir Putin holding a meeting with permanent members of the UN Security Council (Photo_Twitter@KremlinRussia_E)

The decision to remove Russia from the UNHRC is far-reaching and unprecedented. This would have compelled all countries to reflect deeply and carefully on how they would vote. Their decisions would have been dictated not only by their individual bilateral relations with the Russian Federation but also by the implications of such a decision on the global multilateral system, writes Ashok Sajjanhar

Russia was expelled from the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council (HRC) at a Special Session of the UN General Assembly on April 7, 2022.

Like on earlier ten occasions during discussions in the United Nations on the Russian aggression against Ukraine, India abstained in this vote also. In the Explanation of the Vote delivered after casting his vote, India’s Permanent Representative to the UN asserted that if it has “chosen” any side, it is the side of “peace and it is for an immediate end to violence. Since the inception of the Ukrainian conflict, India has stood for peace, dialogue and diplomacy. We believe that no solution can be arrived at by shedding blood and at the cost of innocent lives.’’ He said that India’s action was dictated by ‘’reasons of both substance and process.”

India has adopted a balanced approach in all discussions at the UN on this issue. This has been predicated by the necessity to uphold and promote its core security and developmental interests as well as to preserve the fundamental principles of the UN Charter to maintain the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all member States.

By abstaining in the UN, India is not abdicating its responsibility or becoming a fence-sitter. On the contrary, by advocating the path of dialogue and diplomacy, and adherence to the UN Charter and principles, India is advancing its interests and ensuring peace, security and stability of all countries concerned.

The Vote

93 countries voted in favour of the Resolution to evict Russia from this UN body while 24 voted against and 58 countries abstained. A few countries were either absent or did not vote.

As against this, 141 countries had voted for the Resolution in the UNGA on 2nd March, 2022 which reaffirmed Ukrainian sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity and demanded that Russia “immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders.”  4 countries had then voted with Russia and 38 countries abstained. In this case also, a few countries either absented themselves or did not exercise their option to vote.

Some commentators argue that the significant decline in numbers supporting the Resolution on 7th April, 2022 as compared to 2nd March, and increase in the support for Russia between these two dates, should be seen as a drop in the support for the position being articulated by the US, Europe and other protagonists of the Ukrainian cause.

(Photo_Twitter@RussiaUN)

Such a conclusion would be misplaced.

It needs to be recognized that the Resolution on 2nd March was a decision in favour of peace and a direction to the aggressor to immediately cease hostilities and withdraw its troops from the territories of Ukraine that it had occupied illegally in violation of the UN Charter and principles of respect of Ukrainian sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. It was a normative and principled decision.

The more recent Resolution on 7th April is however a considerably more substantive Resolution which results in specific action of expelling the Russian Federation from a major UN body. It is an extremely significant action to eject a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council and one of the five recognized nuclear weapon states out of a UN organ. This is only the second time that an action to oust a country from the UN HRC has been taken, the first time having been in 2011 when Libya was ejected from the UNHRC by consensus with the UNGA ‘’expressing its deep concern about the situation in that country in the wake of Muammar Al-Qadhafi’s violent crackdown on anti-Government protestors.’’

The fundamental purport and objective of the two Resolutions was vastly different. It is hence but natural that countries would view them differently, examine them separately and come to different conclusions and decisions.

The decision to remove Russia from the UNHRC is far-reaching and unprecedented. This would have compelled all countries to reflect deeply and carefully on how they would vote. Their decisions would have been dictated not only by their individual bilateral relations with the Russian Federation but also by the implications of such a decision on the global multilateral system.

Some countries who had earlier abstained in the voting that took place on 2nd March might also have been compelled to reconsider their positions after Russia made it clear that in this vote Moscow would view even “abstention or non-participation” as “an unfriendly gesture” to be “taken into account both in the development of bilateral relations and in the work on the issues important for it within the framework of the U.N.”

Some countries which had earlier either abstained or voted in favour of the Resolution to demand an end to violence and hostilities but in the latest Resolution came out in support of the Russian position include China; Iran; Vietnam; Cuba; Lao PDR; Ethiopia; and the four countries from Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – the fifth Central Asian nation, Turkmenistan, did not vote, ostensibly taking refuge behind its avowed status of being a ‘’neutral country’’). Reasons for China, Iran and Cuba to support Russia can be easily understood. All these countries have strained and tense relations with the USA and the West. It is hence natural for these countries to vote en bloc against the West, to bolster their own unity.

Rationale for the support by Central Asia to Russia is also easily comprehensible because they form a part of the ‘’near abroad’’ of Russia and depend on it significantly for ensuring and safeguarding their security, particularly in view of the takeover of power by the Taliban in Afghanistan. These countries would also like to maintain a balance by ensuring strong, substantive relations with Russia, keeping in view the growing foot print of China in Central Asia. Vietnam’s support for Russia can also be explained by considering its strong relations with Russia, particularly in the defence sector.

Singapore is one of the countries that moved from an affirmative response in the vote on 2nd March to an abstention on 7th April. This has come as a surprise as Singapore is the only ASEAN member state which has gone along with the West to impose sanctions against Russia because of the latter’s invasion of Ukraine. Singapore’s representative took the opportunity before the vote to condemn “the Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine and its continuing attacks on Ukrainian cities, civilians and civilian infrastructure in the strongest possible terms.” This does not square up with the subsequent action by Singapore on the vote.

Ukraine war.(credit httpswww.facebook.comzelenskiy.official)

Conclusion

One of the reasons for the move of a large number of abstentions from 2nd March to a vote in favour of Russia on 7th April could be due to the somewhat unseemly hurry with which this Resolution was tabled at the UNGA. Several countries, including India, had strongly suggested that an impartial, independent investigation be conducted into the Bucha massacre. India had ‘’unequivocally condemned’’ the deeply disturbing reports of civilian killings in Bucha and supported the call for an independent investigation, as, when innocent human lives are at stake, diplomacy must prevail as the only viable option.’’ Several countries felt that more consultations should have been held before bringing the Resolution to vote.

Some countries were also uncomfortable with the fact that there was no uniformity or consistency in bringing forth such Resolutions. Several instances of past egregious and heinous human rights violations by several countries in conflicts have been ignored and not brought in front of the UNGA. In addition, many cases like the persecution and oppression of the Uyghur Muslims and Tibetans by China do not attract the same attention and response by the international community.

To ensure and enhance the credibility and respect for the UN system, it is essential to eschew selectivity and promote fairness and equity while dealing with different countries, big or small, weak or powerful in the international system.

(Amb. Ashok Sajjanhar is a former Ambassador of India to Kazakhstan, Sweden and Latvia. He is an Executive Council Member at the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis and President, Institute of Global Studies. Views expressed are personal and exclusive to India Narrative)

ALSO READ: BRICS bats for Ukraine-Russia talks

Categories
-Top News India News

India defends its decision on UNHRC vote

Dr-S.-Jaishankar-

India and 13 other countries abstained from voting on a resolution at UNHRC on violence in Palestine…reports Asian Lite News

Noting that New Delhi has abstained from voting on the Israel-Palestine conflict at the United Nations on previous occasions as well, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) on Thursday maintained that India’s position at the May 27 UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) vote was not new.

India’a stand was explained by MEA Spokesperson Arindam Bagchi during the weekly media briefing.

He was replying to a question about a letter sent by Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki to Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar expressing concern over the position taken by India at a Special Session of UNHRC.


“I understand that Palestine has written similar letters to all the countries that abstained during the UN Human Rights Council vote. The position that we took is not a new position and we have abstained on previous occasions. I think that explains our position clearly and addresses the questions,” Bagchi said.

India and 13 others abstained from voting on the resolution to set up a commission of inquiry into alleged violations of human rights in occupied Palestine territory.

The resolution S-30, submitted by Pakistan on behalf of Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to the UNHCR, was adopted with 24 members voting in favour and 9 against it.

The 13 other countries that abstained from voting alongside India included Brazil, Denmark, France, Italy, Japan, Nepal, Republic of Korea, Netherlands, Fiji, Bahamas, Poland, Togo, Ukraine. (INN)

ALSO READ: Foreign Investors Closely Watching India’s Moves