The Human Rights Council this afternoon held separate interactive dialogues on the situations of human rights in Eritrea and in Sri Lanka.
Mohamed Abdelsalam Babiker, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea, presenting his oral update, said recent developments continued to evidence a lack of progress in the human rights situation in Eritrea. Eritrea’s systematic crackdown on dissenting voices continued unabated. Civic and democratic space remained hermetically shut as the Government continued to severely curtail freedom of opinion, expression, assembly, association and religion. In place since 1998, the indefinite national service programme effectively constituted forced labour and remained one of the key sources of human rights violations in the country.
Speaking as the country concerned, Eritrea denounced the distorted assumptions of the reality on the ground contained in the report and said it would not answer to what had been said. Eritrea continued to provide justice and human rights building through strategies and programmes. The report had failed to mention the work that Eritrea had done to remain a zone of stability despite the external destabilisation attempts. The irresponsible defamations were negating the efforts that the country had made to address its human rights challenges that were being continuously addressed.
In the ensuing debate, speakers said the persistent human rights abuses and violations in Eritrea, including arbitrary detention, restrictions on rights of freedom of expression, association, religion and belief, and forced labour were all of great concern, as were reports of sexual violence and child labour. The Government should undertake investigations that met international standards and hold those responsible to account. The Government should fully comply with all its international obligations and improve its cooperation with human rights bodies, allowing them full and unhindered access to the country. Other speakers said that the efforts of the Government of Eritrea to promote and protect human rights should be applauded and encouraged. The Human Rights Council should avoid bias and selectivity; it should promote dialogue in the understanding of different realities. The Universal Periodic Review mechanism was the ideal way to consider the situation in Eritrea. The Council should rethink the role of country mandates and abandon them in favour of cooperation with the countries involved.
Michelle Bachelet, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, introducing the report on Sri Lanka, said the Government should take further steps to address the fundamental problems with the Prevention of Terrorism Act and undertake deeper legal, institutional and security sector reforms that were critically needed to put an end to impunity and prevent any reoccurrence of past violations. Victims and their families continued to be denied truth and justice. There was deep concern about the concentration of civilian positions in the hands of military officials, some of them implicated in serious allegations of human rights violations. The Council should pursue alternative strategies to advance accountability at the international level.
Sri Lanka, speaking as the country concerned, said the resolution was directly contrary to the Council’s founding principles of impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity. There were serious anomalies and problems with the report. It had an intolerably intrusive character and there was a clear element of discrimination within it. This in itself struck at the root of the foundations of the United Nations system. It was deeply regretted that numerous unsubstantiated allegations had found their way into the report. The international community should join Sri Lanka on a footing of mutual respect to face the challenges ahead.
In the ensuing debate, speakers said Sri Lanka should ensure a safe democratic space, and strong independent judicial institutions. The erosion of democratic institutions and the lack of accountability for past human rights violations undermined progress. The Government had taken the first steps to undertake reforms but there was a long road ahead. More comprehensive reforms were needed to allow civil society to operate freely and safely and to bring terrorism legislation in line with international norms and standards. Ensuring accountability and justice for survivors was essential for maintaining peace and ensuring reconciliation. Some speakers said that reports should be based on reliable, objective and neutral observation. The development of reports should be done with constructive cooperation with the concerned country. When dealing with human rights situations, the Council should retain a non-biased, non-selective and non-hypocritical point of view.
Speaking this afternoon on the situation in Eritrea were the European Union, Iceland on behalf of the Nordic-Baltic countries, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Philippines, France, Djibouti, Luxembourg, Venezuela, China, Cuba, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Russian Federation, Benin, Australia, Sudan, Ireland, Belarus, United States, Belgium, United Kingdom, Canada, Somalia, Syria, Iran and South Sudan. Also speaking were the following non-governmental organizations: Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Eastern Horn of Africa: Human Rights Defenders Project, Civicus World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Amnesty International, Advocates for Human Rights, and UN Watch.
Speaking on Sri Lanka were the European Union, Netherlands on behalf of the Benelux countries, Norway on behalf of the Nordic-Baltic countries, United Kingdom on behalf of the Sri Lanka Core Group, Saudi Arabia on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Germany, Egypt, Montenegro, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Canada, Philippines, Nepal, Kenya, India and France.
The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s forty-ninth regular session can be found here.
The Council will reconvene on Monday, 7 March at 9 a.m. when it will continue and conclude its interactive dialogue on the High Commissioner’s report on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka. It will then hold a meeting on technical cooperation in protecting the human rights of vulnerable persons in and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Eritrea
Presentation of Oral Update
MOHAMED ABDELSALAM BABIKER, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea, presenting his oral update, said that since the last update to the Council in June 2021, he had continued to monitor the human rights situation in Eritrea. Regrettably, recent developments continued to evidence a lack of progress in the human rights situation in the country. Eritrea’s systematic crackdown on dissenting voices continued unabated. Political opponents, activists, journalists, religious leaders, people of faith and draft evaders were subjected to prolonged arbitrary detention in inhuman and degrading conditions, in some instances amounting to torture. Thousands of Eritreans had been arbitrarily detained since 1991 without any regard to basic due process rights, many had been held in Eritrea’s prisons for decades. The Council should exert the maximum possible pressure on the Eritrean authorities to release all prisoners of conscience.
A comprehensive reform of the justice sector was also urgently needed to re-establish the foundations of the rule of law. Civic and democratic space remained hermetically shut, as the Government continued to severely curtail freedom of opinion, expression, assembly, association and religion. There were no independent media outlets in the country, and the right to seek and receive information was highly restricted. Internet penetration was one of the lowest in the world, making access to communication and to information from abroad very difficult.
The Special Rapporteur was also deeply concerned about the impact of the on-going conflict in Ethiopia on the internal human rights situation in Eritrea. In place since 1998, the indefinite national service programme effectively constituted forced labour and remained one of the key sources of human rights violations in the country. These conditions continued to push thousands of young Eritreans to flee their country every year. Over the past few months, the Special Rapporteur had heard harrowing accounts by brave Eritrean refugees of the violations they endured in the horn and north of Africa, including arbitrary detention, kidnapping for ransom, torture, sexual and gender-based violence, and dangerous collective expulsions and pushbacks at sea. Deeply troubling information continued to emerge from the Tigray and Afar regions of Ethiopia, where an estimated 80,000 Eritrean refugees remained caught in the crossfires of this gruesome conflict. The humanitarian situation in Mai Aini and Adi Harush camps in Tigray was critical.
Statement by Country Concerned
Eritrea, speaking as a country concerned, denounced the distorted assumptions of the reality on the ground contained in the report and said it would not answer to what had been said. Eritrea continued to provide justice and human rights building through strategies and programmes. The report failed to mention the work that Eritrea had done to remain a zone of stability despite the external destabilisation attempts. The mandate failed to give any consideration of Eritrea’s engagement in strengthening its relationships in international fora, including at the African level. The irresponsible defamations were negating the efforts that Eritrea had made to address its human rights challenges that were continuously addressed by the Government. There was no systemic discrimination. Those were irresponsible defamations. Some countries had an anti-Eritrea position, using the human right agenda to advance their interests.
Discussion
In the interactive debate, speakers said the persistent human rights abuses and violations, including arbitrary detention, restrictions on rights of freedom of expression, association, religion and belief, and forced labour were all of great concern, as were reports of sexual violence and child labour. The Government should undertake investigations that met international standards and hold those responsible to account. The Government should fully comply with all its international obligations and improve its cooperation with human rights bodies, allowing them full and unhindered access to the country. The situation was not improving in any way, despite Eritrea being elected for a second time to the Human Rights Council. There was a climate of generalised impunity in the country: clear commitments and tangible measures should be taken by the Government to improve human rights and to punish those guilty of violations. Eritrea should implement a constitutional and legal framework for the implementation of all rights.
Speakers said there were serious human rights violations and violations of international humanitarian law by all sides to the conflict in Tigray, and it was important for all sides to respect these human rights and laws. The situation had to continue to be monitored by international bodies. The situation of prisoners was a matter of particular concern, as many were held incommunicado and were unaccounted for. The continuation of national service without any end date was also a matter of concern. Particular attention should be paid to those affected by the conflict, and humanitarian access should be granted to the victims thereof in order to ensure that they could receive the aid required. All of those imprisoned for expressing their right to belief, religion or association should be immediately freed.
Some speakers said that any debate was not conducive but counter-productive to the promotion and protection of human rights, and should be abandoned in the context of country-based mechanisms. The efforts of the Government of Eritrea to promote and protect human rights should be applauded and encouraged. The Human Rights Council should avoid bias and selectivity; it should promote dialogue in the understanding of different realities. The Special Rapporteur had failed to identify concrete measures for technical assistance, and he should reorient his work in this regard, so it could guide international development partners on technical assistance areas and human rights. Eritrea was making considerable efforts to continue to promote and protect the human rights of the Eritrean people and promote economic and social development, whilst safeguarding its national sovereignty and dignity.
The international community should play a constructive role to encourage dialogue, which was the best way to promote human rights, speakers said. The Universal Periodic Review mechanism was the ideal way to consider the situation in Eritrea, and the Human Rights Council should focus on cooperative engagement in order to ensure progress on the ground, as reports did not always show the true situation, and often politicised the situation with biased reporting. Mandates that were not supported by the countries concerned could not improve a situation. All of those who were working through the mechanisms of the Human Rights Council should work in a spirit of agreement and cooperation. The Council should rethink the role of country mandates and abandon them in favour of cooperation with the countries involved.
Concluding Remarks
MOHAMED ABDESALAM BABIKER, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea, highlighted the central role of the Universal Periodic Review, which was complementary to his mandate; they were not in conflict with each other. The recommendations of the Universal Periodic Review were accepted by Eritrea and it had agreed to take the necessary measures to implement the provisions of the Convention against Torture, and to fully cooperate with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and other human rights mechanisms. These recommendations, fully accepted by Eritrea, were at the heart of his mandate and were consistent with the recommendations in his last report. Unfortunately, Eritrea had not accepted the Special Rapporteur’s report and had attacked it.
The international community was urged to support the Special Rapporteur’s mandate by calling for an active engagement from the Eritrean Government. The Special Rapporteur had requested the release of prisoners of conscience, saying that their disappearance was unacceptable. Eritrea could not keep individuals in prison for more than two decades; it was in violation of all legal and moral norms. The criminal penal system needed to be reformed, the constitution needed to be implemented, and the democratic space needed to be expanded. There was a serious issue related to the reform of the national service that was indefinite, and there was an urgent need to support Eritrean civil society organizations. He further mentioned the importance of the issue of cooperation with human rights mechanisms as the level of progress of Eritrea in human rights was not in accordance with the behaviour to be expected from a member of the Council.
Mr. Babiker took note of the concerns detailed by the Eritrean representative, saying that the establishment of a dialogue would allow him to meet and engage with the relevant officials as well as address all of the concerns expressed in the representative’s statement. Mr. Babiker reiterated his willingness to engage in an open and constructive dialogue with the Eritrean authorities and concluded by highlighting that significant progress could be achieved if there was political will.
Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner for Human Rights on Promoting Reconciliation, Accountability and Human Rights in Sri Lanka
Documentation
The Council has before it (A/HRC/49/9), the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka.
Presentation of Report
MICHELLE BACHELET, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the report mostly focused on developments since the last report. There had been recent signs of increased engagement and certain steps to initiate reforms. The Government should take further steps to address the fundamental problems with the Prevention of Terrorism Act and undertake deeper legal, institutional and security sector reforms that were critically needed to put an end to impunity and prevent any reoccurrence of past violations. However, victims and their families continued to be denied truth and justice. There were a number of underlying trends that threatened human rights, and these continued to advance. There was deep concern about the concentration of civilian positions in the hands of military officials, some of them implicated in serious allegations of human rights violations. Minority communities continued to be marginalised and lived in fear. There were land disputes which were exacerbating the grievances of minority communities and creating new tensions.
Two years after committing to pursue an accountability process before the Council, the Government had not yet produced a credible road map on transitional justice towards accountability and reconciliation. The families of the disappeared called for truth and justice and to know the fates of their loved ones. Perpetrators should be called to justice in this regard. There were continued reports of harassment and intimidation of civil society organizations, human rights defenders and journalists. Continued reports of deaths in custody were alarming, as were reports of ill-treatment and violence by the police and the military. Successive Governments had failed to prosecute international crimes and serious human rights violations and to pursue an effective transitional justice process. The current Government not only demonstrated its unwillingness to pursue accountability, it had incorporated military officials implicated in alleged war crimes at the highest levels of government, reinforcing a narrative of impunity. The Council should pursue alternative strategies to advance accountability at the international level.
There was a considerable amount of work required from the Office to investigate and prosecute those guilty of international crimes committed by all parties in Sri Lanka. The mandate under the resolution gave an important opportunity to pursue accountability for serious international crimes in Sri Lanka. As long as immunity prevailed, Sri Lanka would not achieve genuine reconciliation and sustainable peace.
Statement by Country Concerned
Sri Lanka, speaking as a country concerned, said the resolution on the mandate had been adopted by a divided Council. This was a deeply flawed procedure. The resolution was directly contrary to the Council’s founding principles of impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity. It went well beyond the mandate of the Council. Sri Lanka had submitted its comments on the report, noting with regret that the Secretariat had failed to publish the comments simultaneously with the report. Sri Lanka would continue to engage with the United Nations, including the Council. It would also continue with its voluntarily agreed human rights obligations. Sri Lanka had regularly shared its challenges and progress with the relevant organizations of the United Nations system.
There were serious anomalies and problems with the report. It had an intolerably intrusive character and there was a clear element of discrimination within it. This in itself struck at the root of the foundations of the United Nations system. Uniformity and conformity of standards, applied to Member States by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, were cynically transgressed in several portions of the report, and this was particularly disturbing, as the strength and prestige of the United Nations derived from the regard of the international community for the moral and ethical underpinnings of the work of the Council. It was vital to retain this confidence undiminished. It was deeply regretted that numerous unsubstantiated allegations had found their way into the report. The High Commissioner’s unwarranted onslaught on seminal institutions of the country was of great concern. The international community should join Sri Lanka on a footing of mutual respect to face the challenges ahead.
Discussion
Speakers said Sri Lanka should ensure a safe democratic space and strong independent judicial institutions. The erosion of democratic institutions and the lack of accountability for past human rights violations was undermining progress. The building of a prosperous State for all Sri Lankans was required, including all minorities. The Government had taken the first steps to undertake reforms, but there was a long road ahead. There was also concern for political prisoners still in custody, and concern that the proposed changes were not sufficient to address human rights concerns. There should be freedom of speech for journalists and those in minority communities, as well as non-governmental organizations. The Government should ensure the independence and effectiveness of human rights institutions, and encourage proper investigation of reports of deaths in police custody. There should be full implementation of Council resolution 46/1.
More comprehensive reforms were needed to allow civil society to operate freely and safely, and to bring terrorism legislation in line with international norms and standards. The rights of religious minorities should be protected. More inclusive governance was needed in Sri Lanka: a safe and open space should be maintained, even for dissent. Ensuring accountability and justice for survivors was essential for maintaining peace and ensuring reconciliation. A more comprehensive and deeper reform agenda was required to ensure that future violations could not occur. The Government should fully consider the numerous and consecutive recommendations made by various United Nations mechanisms and organizations. The lack of domestic progress in accountability and the reconciliation process required further commitment by the Government. The human rights situation could degrade further if steps were not taken to address the issues of the past.
Some speakers said that reports should be based on reliable, objective and neutral observation. The development of reports should be done with constructive cooperation with the concerned country. When dealing with human rights situations, the Council should retain a non-biased, non-selective and non-hypocritical point of view. The community of nations should support in good faith any steps taken towards reconciliation in the country, and encourage genuine dialogue in an impartial manner, standing against selectivity, politicisation and double standards. The Human Rights Council should support Sri Lanka in order to achieve its priorities for its domestic development in the context of its own needs.
