Rights groups lash out at UN Human Rights Council

Mar 28, 2008, 19:32 GMT

Geneva - The United Nations Human Rights Council 'needs to be more focused on saving lives and less focused on allowing governments to save face,' was the damning assessment of one human rights group as the Council ended its seventh regular session in Geneva on Friday.

The efficacy of the council came under the microscope again, this time for its failure to address the human rights drama at the very moment it was unfolding in Tibet.

Peggy Hicks of the non-governmental organization (NGO) Human Rights Watch said the Council used 'the ruse of cooperation' as a tool to avoid discussions of country situations and its 'timidity' allowed countries with poor human rights records to take full advantage.

The omission of Tibet on the Council agenda was 'shocking' and its text on Darfur was 'shameful' for failing to hold the Sudanese Government truly to account, she said.

The Council was set up two years ago to try to replace the Human Rights Commission which was criticized for its powerlessness in the face of political divisions and country bias that many believed rendered it unworkable.

But many thought its reputation and strength was already winged by the refusal of the United States to take on anything more than an observer's role.

According to Human Rights Council President Romanian Ambassador Doru Costea the latest meeting was the first where the Council had been able to get on with the job of tackling human rights abuses after months of institution building.

But a number of NGOs had the Costea himself in their sights. He had, in their view, caved in to pressure from China and its supporters abruptly ending the one session where the question of Tibet was raised.

It was 'a very weird situation' he conceded to reporters on Friday. Costea said he wondered whether the Council president needed more power to direct rather than simply moderate, as he saw his role.

On Wednesday, hundreds of pro-independence activists had gathered a few hundred metres from the door of the venue where the Council was meeting, chanting slogans and demanding action as the debate inside was being silenced on a point of order. China claimed that country- specific issues could not be discussed.

Costea said no member state had sought to raise the issue by placing it formally on the agenda or requesting a special session and without that he could do very little. His role was not 'political.'

The Council has been rebuked before for what some see as the unwieldy influence of the Muslim group, aligning African and Arab states under the Organization of the Islamic Conference and promoting Arab interests.

UN Watch, a Geneva-based NGO, claimed Friday that Israel had been censured no less than 19 times by the Council since its creation while other states with questionable human rights records had received no mention. The situation in Myanmar had only been 'deplored' but not condemned, UN Watch said.

The Council faces its next big test when its new mechanism, the Universal Periodic Review gets underway in April, which will scrutinize every country's human rights record in turn.

Meanwhile Human Rights Watch may be disappointed but remains pragmatic. They dismissed journalists' suggestions that they boycott the Council in future, suggesting it had achieved some successes such as in tackling the situation in Somalia and Myanmar.

Hicks said: 'There is no alternative to this body. This is the body we have, we have to make it work.'