belgium.indymedia.org
Genral Assembly UN rebukes Human Rights situation in Iran. Resolution voted 22 Dec.
by Brian Vatteroth Wednesday December 24, 2003 at 03:14 AM
bvattero@wanadoo.be
after 18 years of UN-resolutions condemning Iran for it violations of human rights, there was no resolution in 2002. After a year of high hopes the UN concludes that in spite of good intentions nothing has changed on the ground.
On 22 December the General Assembly of the United Nations approved a resolution rebuking the Human rights situation In Iran. The draft resolution was adopted earlier, on 21 November 2003, by the Third Committee (Social and Humanitarian), where it had been tabled by Canada. Last year, 2002, was the first time since 18 years that no resolution on the violations of human rights in Iran was approved in the General Assembly. The last resolution had been tabled by Belgium in 2001. The E.U. withdrew its proposal in 2002. Still concerned about the situation in Iran the E.U. hoped for more results through a “human rights dialogue” with Iran. Iran, in its turn, invited and UN-rapporteurs after years of refusal. Hopes were high that the reformist government would be willing and able to turn the tide. This makes this new resolution more dramatic: in spite of good signs, the situation has worsened.
During the past year international NGO’s like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and The International Federation for Human Rights have urged repeatedly for a new UN-resolution. In spite of positive steps on paper by the government, the human rights situation got worse. This is a result of the repressive reaction of the conservative clergy, which has the real state power, and rules both judiciary and security forces.
On October 13th the E.U Council on General Affairs and External Relations concludes the third round of the human rights dialogue with an expression of its concerns with continuing human rights violations in Iran. The council warns Iran that the dialogue will not prevent Europe from tabling or sponsoring a new UN resolution if necessary.
From 3 to 10 November Mr. Ambeyi Ligabo, Special UN Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, visits Iran. He says on his return that the government was co-operative, but he expressed his concern about the prisoners of conscience and urged Iran to release them all. He said those he met with complained of a variety of injustices, including torture and solitary confinement. He called the situation in Iran complex: Iranian Constitution and many laws provide for protection of the right to freedom of opinion but that they are open to wide interpretation when they are implemented. (Radio Free Europe, 11 November 2003 http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/11/11112003164329.asp)
On 21 November the Third Committee (Social and Humanitarian) approves a draft proposal, tabled by Canada, which (a.o.) would “have the General Assembly express its grave concern about continuing human rights violations in that country. Also, the Assembly would call on that Government to abide by its obligations under the International Covenants on Human Rights to expedite judicial reform, guarantee the dignity of the individual, ensure the full application of due process of law, by an independent and impartial judiciary, and eliminate discrimination against religious minorities”. This approval added the draft-resolution to the agenda of the General Assembly, where it has now been approved, on 22 December 2004. 68 in faour, 54 against en 51 abstantions. Belgium voted in favour, as it did earlier, in the Third Comittee.
Genral Assembly UN rebukes Human Rights situation in Iran. Resolution voted 22 Dec.
by Brian Vatteroth Wednesday December 24, 2003 at 03:14 AM
bvattero@wanadoo.be
after 18 years of UN-resolutions condemning Iran for it violations of human rights, there was no resolution in 2002. After a year of high hopes the UN concludes that in spite of good intentions nothing has changed on the ground.
On 22 December the General Assembly of the United Nations approved a resolution rebuking the Human rights situation In Iran. The draft resolution was adopted earlier, on 21 November 2003, by the Third Committee (Social and Humanitarian), where it had been tabled by Canada. Last year, 2002, was the first time since 18 years that no resolution on the violations of human rights in Iran was approved in the General Assembly. The last resolution had been tabled by Belgium in 2001. The E.U. withdrew its proposal in 2002. Still concerned about the situation in Iran the E.U. hoped for more results through a “human rights dialogue” with Iran. Iran, in its turn, invited and UN-rapporteurs after years of refusal. Hopes were high that the reformist government would be willing and able to turn the tide. This makes this new resolution more dramatic: in spite of good signs, the situation has worsened.
During the past year international NGO’s like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and The International Federation for Human Rights have urged repeatedly for a new UN-resolution. In spite of positive steps on paper by the government, the human rights situation got worse. This is a result of the repressive reaction of the conservative clergy, which has the real state power, and rules both judiciary and security forces.
On October 13th the E.U Council on General Affairs and External Relations concludes the third round of the human rights dialogue with an expression of its concerns with continuing human rights violations in Iran. The council warns Iran that the dialogue will not prevent Europe from tabling or sponsoring a new UN resolution if necessary.
From 3 to 10 November Mr. Ambeyi Ligabo, Special UN Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, visits Iran. He says on his return that the government was co-operative, but he expressed his concern about the prisoners of conscience and urged Iran to release them all. He said those he met with complained of a variety of injustices, including torture and solitary confinement. He called the situation in Iran complex: Iranian Constitution and many laws provide for protection of the right to freedom of opinion but that they are open to wide interpretation when they are implemented. (Radio Free Europe, 11 November 2003 http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/11/11112003164329.asp)
On 21 November the Third Committee (Social and Humanitarian) approves a draft proposal, tabled by Canada, which (a.o.) would “have the General Assembly express its grave concern about continuing human rights violations in that country. Also, the Assembly would call on that Government to abide by its obligations under the International Covenants on Human Rights to expedite judicial reform, guarantee the dignity of the individual, ensure the full application of due process of law, by an independent and impartial judiciary, and eliminate discrimination against religious minorities”. This approval added the draft-resolution to the agenda of the General Assembly, where it has now been approved, on 22 December 2004. 68 in faour, 54 against en 51 abstantions. Belgium voted in favour, as it did earlier, in the Third Comittee.
posted by Anonymous at 5:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home