The remarks from Jan Eliasson of Sweden represented a rejection of Washington's push to postpone creation of a new Human Rights Council because it does not go far enough in guaranteeing that member countries have solid records of respect for human rights.
Eliasson acknowledged US opposition to the draft resolution designed to create the new council. But he said the majority of the 191 countries in the world organization want closure on the issue.
Eliasson also rejected repeated demands by US Ambassador John Bolton to reopen negotiations and improve the draft, warning of 'grave difficulties' if he were to do so.
He said the new Human Rights Council should become reality before the UN Commission on Human Rights, with 53 members, is to open its three-week annual session March 13 in Geneva.
If the council is formed before then, it would be the last meeting for the commission, which was created in the 1950s. The commission has failed to defend human rights and its membership has included countries like Sudan and Cuba accused of human rights violations.
While he called for closure, Eliasson told reporters he was still holding talks with UN members, including with Bolton, to sort out their differences.
'Human rights is the soul of the UN and we have to preserve that,' Eliasson told reporters following a meeting with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
Annan also supports action on the draft resolution, even though he voiced deep disappointment that the text failed his own requests for stronger measures and criteria to uphold human rights.
'I think we have moved from the desirable to the workable with the maintenance of the human rights work,' Eliasson said. He said he will continue to consult with UN members before proceeding for the adoption of the draft, not by a hand vote but by consensus.
Adoption of programmes by consensus in the General Assembly has to be agreed upon by the membership before it takes place. In such a case, opponents are allowed to explain on the record their position, but they cannot stop the action to adopt the programmes.
When the draft was submitted to the 191-nation assembly last Friday, Eliasson and Annan had hoped for action by the assembly this week. But it was delayed for administrative as well as political reasons, including US opposition.
The new human rights body would be called to promote, protect and uphold human rights to the highest standards. It would have 47 members whose tasks would include holding regular reviews of human rights in all countries in the world, including their own. The 47 members' performance would be subjected to peer review.
The 47 members would be individually elected by an absolute majority of 96 votes of the assembly's 191 members. If members fail to uphold high human rights standards, they can be ejected by a two-thirds majority vote, counted according to the number of assembly members present at the meeting.
While Eliasson urged action on the draft, UN diplomats said that groups like the European Union and the Organization of Islamic Council were not ready.
An EU diplomat said the group was working hard, but had not been able yet to reach an 'absolute common position' on the draft resolution, which was not seen as the best text. The diplomat said he cannot be more explicit because talks were underway.
Islamic and Arab countries had been trying to amend the draft with demands to ban a phrase referring to 'intolerance, discrimination and incitement of hatred arising from insult against religions, Prophets and beliefs.'
Their demands, which were rejected, arose from a desire to avoid censure for situations like the riots and dozens of deaths across the Islamic world to protest Danish cartoons satirizing Islam's prophet Mohammed.
The dispute between the US and Eliasson heated up this week. <!--page-->
Bolton on Tuesday insisted that the draft be renegotiated because of what he called 'deficiencies', or that the vote be pushed off for 'several months' so UN members can work out a stronger concept.
Bolton had threatened to vote against the draft if it were to be voted on by the assembly under its present form.
'We are not in a rush (to set up the council),' Bolton told reporters, calling Eliasson's draft a 'failed resolution.'
Eliasson hammered out the draft resolution through five months of intense negotiations with UN members, including the US. He called the draft the 'best attempt' at representing the views and positions of all UN members.
