Voting on Item 9: The agony and the ecstasy

AS expected, last week the Commission had fierce debate on country resolutions. For the first time, it adopted resolutions on Belarus, North Korea and Turkmenistan. It also terminated the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Sudan, decided not to act on Zimbabwe and rejected a draft on Chechnya.            

At the end of the fifth week of this 59th session, the Commission almost concluded its votes on Items 5 (self-determination), 8 (Arab occupied territories) and 9 (human rights violations). Two resolutions were adopted concerning the right to self-determination: on Western Sahara (by consensus) and on the Occupied Palestinian Territories (by 51 votes against one - the USA - with one abstention, Guatemala).            

Under Items 8 and 9, the Commission adopted resolutions and decisions on Israeli settlements in the occupied Arab territories (50 votes in favour, 1 against and two abstentions), the occupied Syrian Golan (31-1-21), the occupied Arab territories (33-5-15), the Lebanese detainees in Israel (32-1-20), Cyprus, Chechnya (draft rejected by 15-21-17), North Korea (28-10-14), Turkmenistan (23-16-14), Burma (consensus), Sudan (draft rejected by 24-26-3), Cuba (24-20-9), Belarus (23-14-16), Congo-DRC (consensus), and Burundi (consensus).            

For the second consecutive year, the African Group (South Africa) introduced a no-action motion on a draft resolution that would have expressed deep concern at the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe. The no-action motion was adopted, with 28 votes in favour (all Asian and African delegations, except Japan and South Korea, together with Russia, Cuba and Venezuela), 24 votes against, and one abstention (Brazil).            

Another blow for the protection of human rights came with the decisions on Chechnya and Burma. Though observers would hope that the Commission takes its decisions on the basis of specific human rights situations and not because of political motivations, this negative outcome was not unexpected. The African group, which is the largest group in the Commission (15 members out of 53) had clearly reiterated its will to get rid of all the country resolutions concerning the continent. It failed last year and continued its efforts this year. Concerning Chechnya, having systematically opposed all the country resolutions, the Russian delegation was expecting the trade-off from other countries.            

All three new situations on the list of the Commission (Belarus, North Korea and Turkmenistan) concern countries under the yoke of old-type dictatorships, whose behaviours disturb even hardliner states in the U.N. It should be noted that none of these resolutions create the mechanism of a country Rapporteur. The three regimes are  simply requested to receive the visits of several thematic Rapporteurs of the Commission.            

There is a group of hardliner states in the Commission who oppose any resolution on country situations. They claim that this debate shows double standards, but do not hesitate to make an exception for all the votes concerning the shameful and unacceptable policy of Israel in the Arab occupied territories. They denounce the human rights abuses in the Western countries, but don't submit drafts for examination and decisions. This group is traditionally composed of Algeria, China, Cuba, India, Libya, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Viet Nam and Zimbabwe. In view of their negative voting patterns  this year on almost all the country resolutions, it seems that Gabon, Russia, Ukraine, Armenia, South Africa, Swaziland and Venezuela now also belong to the group.            

In the debate on country situations, much still depends on the initiatives by the European countries. Their drafts resolutions may sometimes appear weak, but they are the only ones to take the lead and constitute a minority in the Commission. Hence the importance of the Latin American votes. From this first voting week, Mexico has by far the best voting record. Paraguay also proved to be committed to human (but why this abstention on Chechnya?). Argentina's voting pattern was mostly positive, except for its unsurprising abstentions on Cuba, Chechnya and Belarus. Despite their doubtful position on the Occupied Territories, Peru and Costa Rica took a clear stand on most drafts. As last year, Brazil’s position was disappointing.            

During the coming week, again under Item 9, the Commission will take action on the drafts resolutions concerning Afghanistan, Iraq and south-eastern Europe (parts of former Yugoslavia).Chairperson's Statements will be made on East Timor and Colombia. Furthermore, as part of the advisory services, the Commission has to take decisions on Cambodia, Haiti, Somalia and, hopefully, Equatorial Guinea and Sierra Leone.