General Assembly Session 63 meeting 38

The President

In connection with this item, I would like to recall that the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the General Committee, decided at its 34th plenary meeting, on 30 October 2008, to consider agenda item 58 in plenary meeting and in the Third Committee.

Taking into account that decision, the Assembly will consider in plenary meeting the annual report of the Human Rights Council on its activities for the year.

Upon the conclusion of the debate in plenary on this item, the General Assembly will revert to this agenda item in the context of its consideration of the report of the Third Committee.

The Assembly will now start its consideration of the annual report of the Human Rights Council on its activities for the year.

The report of the Human Rights Council that is being presented to this sixty-third session of the General Assembly is a relevant document, particularly now, when we are celebrating the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is the original source of the rights, freedoms and ethical and legal standards that compel us to recognize and respect the dignity, freedom and equality of all human beings, without discrimination of any nature, whether political, social, religious, ethnic or of any other type.

The Universal Declaration is today more relevant than ever. The active and motivating power of human rights compel us to fight together to eradicate the scourges afflicting today's society, such as the food, energy and financial crises, climate change, the degradation of Mother Earth, human trafficking, state terrorism and violence against women and children, among other global evils.

This report of the Council is entirely consonant with the Universal Declaration, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action and other international human rights instruments that affirm that human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and progressive, and that they must be addressed in a fair and equitable manner on an equal basis, giving each one of them the same weight.

This report appears today before the highest authority in the United Nations and provides us with much empirical data but also, above all, with the transformative and dialectical force of human rights in solving the main problems that oppress our world today. The contents of the report are relevant and timely, as they rightly denounce the violations of human rights taking place in various parts of the world against various groups that are excluded and rendered invisible and whose humanity is denied. The document also proactively shows us the path to follow to prevent, put an end to and compensate for those human rights violations.

Significant topics such as the eradication of hunger and extreme poverty, access to water, the protection of native peoples, the elimination of all forms of modern slavery, including human trafficking and economic exploitation, the eradication of all types of discrimination, respect for human rights in efforts to combat terrorism and violations of the human rights of the Palestinian people, are among the topics that this Assembly will have to deal with in the coming years.

We must remain committed to institutionalizing the Human Rights Council as a forum that nourishes and enhances all the activities of the United Nations.

I now give the floor to the representative of Nigeria and President of the Human Rights Council.

Mr. Uhomoibhi (Nigeria)

This past Friday, 31 October 2008, I had the distinct honour and privilege to present the report of the Human Rights Council to the Third Committee of the General Assembly. I come before the Assembly in plenary this morning to also apprise members on the activities of the Council, in accordance with resolution 60/251.

But permit me at the outset to say how very delighted I am, Sir, to see you in the presidency of the Assembly. I am pleased to reaffirm the support of the Human Rights Council to your leadership of the Assembly and to express our best wishes for your successful tenure.

Through you, Mr. President, I wish to thank the General Committee for the decision taken on the allocation of the agenda item to the Third Committee, as contained in document A/C.3/63/1/Add.1 of 30 October 2008, which resolved the modalities for the presentation of the annual report of the Council. It was indeed a reflection of the flexibility and cooperation of the membership that that step was achieved. I hope that the outcome will be built upon in the future.

My predecessors, His Excellency Mr. Luis Alfonso de Alba of Mexico and His Excellency Mr. Doru Romulus Costea of Romania, had presented the Human Rights Council's reports to the sixty-first and sixty-second sessions of the General Assembly respectively, covering the activities of the Council from June 2006 to June 2007. My current report covers the period of the second cycle of the Council, including the ninth session which took place from 8 to 24 September 2008.

It will be recalled that the decision of the General Assembly three years ago to establish the Council marked a significant development in United Nations efforts to place the promotion and protection of human rights on the front burner of global discourse. It reflected the commitment and resolve of Member States to revitalize the Organization's role in guaranteeing the enjoyment of human rights for all peoples. In a very particular sense, the decision to empower the Council to consider human rights situations in all countries through the mechanism of the Universal Periodic Review not only emphasized the principle of equality among all States, but also underscored the universality of all human rights.

Against that backdrop, during its second cycle, the Council continued the elaboration and conclusion of its institution-building process and addressed thematic and specific human rights situations around the world. The Council began to operationalize its new mechanisms and subsidiary bodies, such as the Universal Periodic Review, the Advisory Committee, the Social Forum, the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Forum on Minority Issues and the special procedures. The Council enhanced its engagement with various stakeholders, including from national institutions and representatives of civil society organizations.

Although the Human Rights Council is now in its third year of existence, it is still very much at an evolutionary stage. Consequently, the Council sometimes draws upon aspects of the strengths and achievements of its predecessor body, the Commission on Human Rights, while striving to avoid its shortcomings both at the levels of substance and methods of work.

Allow me now briefly to highlight some aspects of the activities of the Human Rights Council.

With regard to the review, rationalization and improvement of the mandates of special procedure, which is a key aspect of the institution-building text, during its sixth session in September and December 2007, the Council commenced the review, rationalization and improvement of special procedures mandates at both the thematic and country levels. In the review, rationalization and improvement process, some mandates were renewed, some were terminated and new ones were created. In carrying out that process, the President of the Council availed himself of the mechanism of the Consultative Group to ensure greater participation by Council members in the decision-making process.

At its seventh session, in March 2007, the Council held a high-level segment during which dignitaries representing States members of the Council in attendance welcomed the accomplishments of the Council since its inception. Many identified the challenges that could be faced by the Council but expressed their belief that the institution marked a departure that should bode well for the future of human rights. Significantly, during the session, the Council adopted resolutions and decisions covering civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including on the prevention of genocide, in commemoration of the sixtieth anniversary of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

At its eighth session, the Council adopted the optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. That was truly significant, as it represented an effort to make civil and political rights equal with economic, social and cultural rights, all of which are interrelated, interdependent, indivisible and universal. That important international human rights instrument is before the General Assembly for adoption at the current session.

On the Universal Periodic Review, during the second cycle the Council began to implement the mechanism comprehensively. So far, 32 countries have been reviewed in a transparent and equal manner. The outcomes of the two sessions of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, held in April and May 2008, were adopted during the eighth session in June 2008. At the recent session in September, some Member States that had already been reviewed voluntarily shared their experiences on the implementation of and follow-up to the recommendations contained in the outcomes of the review.

Also, at the ninth session, in September 2008, the Council received updates on the two regional preparatory meetings for the Durban Review Conference on Racism, Xenophobia and related Intolerance, scheduled to take place in Geneva in April 2009. The meetings were held in Brasilia and Abuja and produced framework documents as additional inputs for the review process.

In conformity with its mandate, the Council addressed serious human rights situations in various parts of the world. Accordingly, three special sessions were held during the reporting period -- regarding the human rights situation in Myanmar, the human rights violations emanating from Israeli military attacks and incursions in the occupied Palestinian territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, and the negative impact of the worsening of the food crisis on the realization of the right to food for all. By holding, for the first time, a special session on the thematic issue on the right to food, the Council was able substantively to link its work with what is happening in the real world, which has adverse effects on the lives of millions of people.

Given that we live in a globalizing world where an event in one part has the potential to affect life in other parts, the Council found it necessary to remain vigilant and to be seized of all situations, namely, of growing inequality, continuing armed conflicts and other menaces, such as climate change and the food crisis. In dealing with those important issues, it is clear that Member States must continue to muster the necessary political will and commitment to overcome the challenges that the world currently faces, mainly in the human rights arena, if the Council is to fulfil expectations.

In that connection, it was therefore important that, at its ninth session, the Council adopted a decision on the holding of a commemorative session on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That historic event is scheduled to take place in Geneva on 12 December 2008. Beyond providing a fitting opportunity for commemorating the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, that event is also expected to afford member States an opportunity to reaffirm their faith in the core human rights values and principles.

In conclusion, in adopting resolution 60/251, establishing the Human Rights Council, three years ago, the General Assembly sought to build an institution that would make a real difference in the governance of human rights at the universal level. It is gratifying today that the Human Rights Council, as distinct from its preceding body, the Commission on Human Rights, has already carved out a niche for itself with regard to its methods of work. What needs to be done is to ensure that the decisions and resolutions adopted by the Council on the variety of issues placed on its agenda are fully supported by the General Assembly in order to give concrete meaning and substance to the work of the Council. In that regard, the Council needs to be provided with adequate resources to carry out its work, as requested in the decision adopted by the Council at its ninth session entitled "Strengthening of the Human Rights Council", which is contained in the report.

All too often, most times without real justification, the Human Rights Council has been criticized on its methods and the outcome of its work. Let me appeal here for greater circumspection, objectivity and patience in assessing the work of the Council. Two years is hardly enough time to be overly critical of an institution that we strongly believe holds great promise as a universal human rights body.

I would like to reiterate my personal commitment to follow the path of my predecessors and to work closely with the Council's members to achieve the noble objectives enshrined in the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is our collective responsibility, working with objectivity, candour and commitment, to ensure that the Council lives up to its name and to the standards expected of it. That is our duty. That is our expectation. That indeed is our vocation as Member States of the United Nations General Assembly.

Mr. Ripert (France)

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union. The candidate countries Turkey, Croatia and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the potential candidates and countries of Stabilization and Association Process Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia, as well as Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Armenia, associate themselves with this statement. A full version of my statement has been distributed, and I should just like to emphasize a few points.

I should like, first, to thank Ambassador Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi for submitting the third annual report of the Human Rights Council (A/63/53) and to thank Ambassador Doru Costea, former President of the Council, who served for most of the period covered in this report.

Pursuant to the decision on United Nations reform taken by heads of State at Government during the 2005 World Summit, the General Assembly decided in 2006 to create the Human Rights Council to replace the former Commission on Human Rights. Our objective was to improve the United Nations human rights protection machinery in order to make it a mainstay of our Organization. We all know that peace, security, development and human rights complement one another, and are mutually reinforcing. It is through their joint promotion that we will strengthen collective well-being.

The Human Rights Council has been entrusted with a ambitious mandate: to ensure the promotion of human rights for all, to make recommendations on serious violations of these rights in order to put an end to them, and to guarantee that human rights are taken into account in all United Nations policies. The principles of universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity must guide the Council's work, which is based on cooperation and dialogue among States. We must stress those guiding principles in the Assembly as we review this report.

Since its establishment, the Human Rights Council has addressed many issues, on some occasions leading to major breakthroughs in human rights protection. That is how the draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the draft International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and, more recently, the draft optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were drawn up.

Three special sessions were held over the past year. One dealt with the right to food and another with the situation in Burma, which is still cause for great concern. If the issue of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, which was previously addressed at a special session, must be debated in the Human Rights Council, its members must make sure that they reach balanced solutions.

The Human Rights Council's mechanisms must be consolidated through our shared commitment. In this regard, the special procedures are one of the Council's key tools. The serious human rights violations in some countries justifies maintaining these procedures. It must be reaffirmed that the primary objective of these special procedures is to promote expertise and to make recommendations. We call upon the Council to remain vigilant for particularly serious situations that deserve our full attention.

The Universal Periodic Review is an innovative mechanism that should also help improve the human rights situation on the ground through dialogue and cooperation. Since its inception, 32 States were reviewed, seven of which are from the European Union. We commend the seriousness with which these 32 countries have granted this review.

Although some positive developments have been noted, many situations still deserve our full attention at the upcoming sessions. The European Union hopes that the 48 States that will submit themselves to the Universal Periodic Review will do so in good faith and with all the necessary rigour. The experience of the two previous sessions should allow us to improve the review. We must also ensure that the Council's recommendations and the pledges made by States under review are effectively implemented.

Due to the regularity of its meetings, the Human Rights Council has become a virtually permanent entity with an ambitious and challenging mandate. Its past action provides us a glimpse of its great future possibilities. However, in order to go from words to concrete action, we must ensure that the Human Rights Council and its institutions can run smoothly. We should all pledge to work towards that end.

The European Union calls for members of the United Nations to maintain close cooperation in the spirit of universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity. It is the heritage of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose sixtieth anniversary we will celebrate soon and which must remain our common landmark. Similarly, the encouraging outcomes that we have already had within the Council will lead to real progress in the effective enjoyment of human rights for all around the globe.

Mr. Wenaweser (Liechtenstein)

We thank Ambassador Uhomoibhi for his excellent presentation of the report of the Human Rights Council (A/63/53 and Add.1). Our thanks go also to Ambassador Doru Costea, who presided over the Council over much of the period covered in the report. We welcome this opportunity to discuss the report in this Assembly to which the Council is a subsidiary body -- as we welcome the interactive exchange in which the President of the Council engaged with the Third Committee last Friday.

It is a pragmatic arrangement that is fully in accordance with the letter and spirit of resolution 60/251, through which the Assembly created the Council. We hope that this debate will contribute to the awareness of the work of the Human Rights Council here in New York and that our colleagues in Geneva can benefit from it in tackling the challenges ahead. We would also wish that the schedule of the General Assembly plenary can in the future be arranged in such a manner that this debate does not coincide with Third Committee meetings. We believe that a more energetic relationship between the General Assembly and the Council is desirable and that it should not necessarily be limited to the consideration of the report during the fall season.

The third report of the Council to the Assembly illustrates the steady progress that has been made in the area of institution-building. After the adoption of the relevant package of measures last year, the Council has now gone through the first round of Universal Periodic Review (UPR), an instrument that we hope will make an important contribution to the dialogue on human rights issues and the implementation of human rights standards worldwide. In this context, we look forward to our own presentation under the UPR on 5 December. While it is of course too early to offer a final view on the value of the UPR, there are a number of observations that we can already offer at this point. We certainly welcome the emphasis on the implementation of human rights standards in the framework of the UPR. That emphasis is both essential for addressing the implementation gap that still exists 60 years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and it is also in keeping with the mandate of the Council given to it by the Assembly.

The first experiences gathered also show additional potential. In particular, the relationship between the UPR and the treaty body processes needs to be addressed. UPR and the presentation before treaty bodies are of course very different in nature, both as far as their legal foundation is concerned and their application in practice. Nevertheless, they are the two essential mechanisms through which States present their human rights record, and we must therefore explore synergies between the two. The treaty body mechanisms can and should be strengthened through the UPR. In particular, the outcome of the UPR and the voluntary commitments of States should be fed into the treaty body processes and become part of the dialogue between States and the treaty bodies, insofar as they are relevant for the treaty under discussion, of course. That would make the two mechanisms mutually beneficial while preserving their distinct characteristics. It would also be useful to get consolidated input from treaty bodies themselves on this question, such input resulting from the ongoing discussions in inter-Committee meetings.

The Council has almost concluded its complex and challenging review of the special procedures, as we have heard from the President of the Council. The results are generally satisfactory. While we support finalizing the tasks by reviewing one mandate that is still outstanding, we also believe that we must now shift our focus to the cooperation offered by States. State cooperation with the special procedures offers a lot of room for improvement and we expect those who serve as members of the Council to exercise leadership and set positive examples in that respect.

All States that are members of the Council have pledged to fully cooperate with it, and issuing a standing invitation to special procedures is one of the best ways of living up to that pledge in practice. We hope that the imminent conclusion of the review will lead a significant number of States -- especially those that put their names forward for membership on the Council -- to issue such invitations.

As a novel development during the reporting period, the Council has for the first time held a special session on a thematic issue. We strongly welcome that development and hope that the Council will continue to explore the potential of such ad hoc thematic meetings as the one held on the food crisis. We believe that such meetings could greatly contribute to the relevance of the work of the Council also outside of Geneva and put a renewed emphasis on its thematic work.

Mr. Maurer (Switzerland)

I thank the President of the Human Rights Council for having introduced the report on its activities (A/63/53). The Human Rights Council strengthens the universal system for the protection and promotion of human rights within the United Nations. That unique nature of the Council is reflected by the fact that its annual report is considered in plenary by the General Assembly.

I would like to share four main messages with the Assembly today. First, with the conclusion in June 2007 of the institutional consolidation of the Human Rights Council, the work of that organ gained in substance and the Council is now fully able to discharge its functions. The implementation of the universal periodic review as of April 2008 made it possible to consider human rights situations in 32 countries in a spirit of dialogue and cooperation. In most cases, it was thus possible to collectively identify ways and means of improving the human rights situations in our countries.

It is important to emphasize that the three reports that serve as the basis for the review are an excellent source of information about the country concerned. The commitment of State authorities at the highest level, as well as the participation of civil society, are indispensable components if we wish to realize the full potential of that new mechanism.

The determining factor for its success remains, however, the political will of the States under review to implement the recommendations arising from the review. Only after a complete review cycle will we be in a position to genuinely evaluate progress in the field, thanks to that new instrument. We also deem it important to take into consideration the contributions of that new mechanism to our work here in New York.

Secondly, over the past 18 months the Council has considered substantive matters and, thanks to its special sessions, responded rapidly to human rights situations throughout the world. In addition, for the first time the Council held a held a special session on a thematic issue: the right to food in the context of the current world food crisis. In its working methods, there is still a problem with the Council's ability to forecast its activities. That could perhaps be remedied by creating a programme of work for the coming year so as to distribute its workload over three annual sessions by grouping agenda items, so that each session does not have to consider every single item, as is done today.

Similarly, we must find a way to keep our Governments, the international and national media and other interested parties focused not only on the main session of the Council held in March, but also on the other sessions held throughout the year.

Thirdly, the support of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in its capacity as the secretariat of the Council, is indispensable to the smooth operation of its work, and we warmly thank the High Commissioner.

We are aware of the fact that, with an organ that is nearly permanently in session, the intensity of the work and the relationship between the High Commissioner for Human Rights and member States has increased considerably. Nevertheless, we wish to recall that the mandate of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was established in 1993 by the General Assembly and that its structure is part of the Secretariat. We strongly oppose any attempt to establish Council control over the activities, priorities and fieldwork of the High Commissioner. The Office of the High Commissioner must continue to enjoy the necessary autonomy to ensure the defence and promotion of all human rights throughout the world, as spelled out in its 1993 mandate.

Fourthly and finally, two and a half years after the creation of the Human Rights Council -- and thus halfway to its status review by the General Assembly in 2011 -- we note that we still have no clear notion of the attribution of competencies between the Council and the General Assembly's Third Committee. Switzerland is committed to the complementarity of the two organs through reinforcing cooperation and reducing overlapping.

The General Assembly, as a universal body, should serve essentially as a framework for general reference and play a programming role. The Human Rights Council has an operational part to play in the implementation of political commitments assumed by States in the light of their pertinent international legal obligations. The General Assembly could, for instance ask the Council to use its mechanisms to discuss a particular theme with respect to a human rights situation, and then to report on operational follow-up.

The Council could also propose to the General Assembly that it discuss a particular topic, and the Assembly could decide either to send it back to the Council to be discussed and followed up at the operational level, or to address the matter itself at the universal level, given its importance or its basic nature. Ultimately, by establishing a dynamic and positive interrelationship between the Council and the Third Committee, both will be strengthened in their respective roles and not through a rigid separation of competencies.

In conclusion, the Council has moved ahead by consolidating its institutional framework and strengthening human rights through dialogue. It is on the right path towards a credible and efficient international system of protection.

The Human Rights Council is still a young organ and it is normal that some adjustments may be necessary. That requires all of us, however, to give it our unswerving commitment in New York and in Geneva. Switzerland can be relied on to serve as one of the engines of the Council's progress.

Mr. Khazaee (Iran)

At the outset, I would like to extend my appreciation to the President of the Human Rights Council for his comprehensive report to the General Assembly today. We commend the completion by the Council of the process of institution-building and reviewing and establishing the mechanism and its subsidiary bodies that enable it to enter the implementation phase of its programmes and mandates, as stipulated in resolution 60/251. Creation of new mandates focusing on economic, social and cultural rights, and holding of panel discussions on a number of important subjects, are worthy achievements of the Council in its new era.

The establishment of the Human Rights Council, based on the valuable experiences and lessons learned from the strengths and shortcomings of the Commission on Human Rights, provided us with new hope and the necessary motivation to consider human rights issues that must be addressed if we are to find sound, decent solutions to the challenges that confront us. The Human Rights Council must be the focal point of reliance, hope and participation for all peoples and Governments in addressing global human rights challenges. As a forum for dialogue, understanding and cooperation in which to achieve the universal realization of human rights, it must be devoid of politicization.

We maintain that the reform of the United Nations in the field of human rights will not bear fruit unless partiality, selectivity and double standards are dealt with promptly and vigorously. Furthermore, there is a need to approach human rights issues in a comprehensive, cooperative and constructive manner. Manipulation and abuse of the United Nations human rights mechanisms and machineries have, unfortunately, become a prevalent tradition and exercise by certain countries and should no longer be tolerated, primarily because of their destructive impact on the credibility, efficiency and legitimacy of these mechanisms and machineries.

In that respect, the mechanism of the Universal Periodic Review constitutes a breakthrough in United Nations intergovernmental human rights activities. The merit of this mechanism is that it ensures universality, objectivity, non-selectivity and impartiality in the work of the United Nations human rights machinery. The actual performance of the mechanism in a logical context should allow the human rights machinery to act beyond political interests. We appreciate the degree of transparency and the constructive examination of situations under the Universal Periodic Review during the discussion of the challenges that lie ahead, given that, in any State, there is always room for improvement.

My delegation is of the opinion that, as the Third Committee's prerogative, it is necessary and timely to pay greater attention to its designated work and mandate and to those of the Human Rights Council. In principle, the Third Committee should focus primarily on policy-oriented deliberations and discussions in order to provide strategic policy recommendations to the General Assembly that will, in turn, guide the international community, in particular the Human Rights Council, in further enhancing the promotion and protection of all human rights. In that context, the consideration of country-specific situation proposals categorically falls within the purview of the Human Rights Council and its pertinent mechanism.

The Human Rights Council is the competent specialized United Nations organ responsible for considering human rights situations in all countries. In a logical context, the unhindered and smooth functioning of the mechanisms of the Human Rights Council, in particular the Universal Periodic Review, would enable the human rights machinery to function with impartiality, prudence and consistency. The overwhelming majority of the Member States believe that the ongoing selective presentation of country-specific human rights resolutions in the General Assembly runs counter to the mandate of Human Rights Council and undermines its competence and authority.

In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that, at this crucial juncture, in which we are facing real human rights challenges in many parts of the world, the Human Rights Council should rely on the principles of objectivity, cooperation, transparency and consensus, and should, in discharge of its historic mandate, undertake to rectify the past shortcomings of the United Nations human rights machinery. Accordingly, we are determined to continue our constructive cooperation with the Council in favour of the promotion and protection of human right all over the world.

Mr. Costea (Romania)

Allow me to convey my gratitude to Ambassador Martin Uhomoibhi for his work as President of the Human Rights Council. It falls to him to lead the Council during a period in which we will have to show that the institutionalization of the Council and its functioning in what we could call a normal mode will not mean a return to the routine of the past. That is one of the challenges I will address later in my statement. We wish him every possible success in his work and assure him of our full cooperation. Believe me, he will need it. I have been in his shoes and I know exactly what I am referring to.

Romania associates itself with the statement made by the Ambassador of France on behalf of the European Union. However, I should like to make a few additional comments on the results of the Council's work, the atmosphere surrounding that work during the most recent cycle and the challenges that the Council, and especially the Member States, will have to face in the coming months.

Mr. Costea (Romania)

Two and a half years ago, the establishment of the Council was decided in this very Hall. It is good to see the annual report of the Council addressed again in the plenary of the General Assembly, proving that we are indeed on the right track in giving human rights issues the priority they deserve alongside the peace, security and cooperation issues that form the three pillars of the work of the United Nations. We echo statements made at the thirty-second meeting of the Third Committee last Friday and encourage Member States to continue consideration of future annual reports of the Human Rights Council in the plenary of the General Assembly.

Mr. Costea (Romania)

The results of the work that was done during the second cycle of the Council are known and there is little need to recapitulate them. Some aspects are worth highlighting, however.

First, the institution-building process was completed and decisions were taken concerning important and highly-sensitive issues, such as the actual functioning of the Universal Periodic Review; the review, rationalization and improvement of the special procedures mandates; and the nomination of the mandate holders. Those three mechanisms are innovations in the landscape of the United Nations human rights machinery, and we all know only too well what it takes when change is needed and eagerly expected in multilateral organizations.

The Council expanded the use of tools that had been in place for some time now. For the first time, a special session was convened on a thematic issue. Likewise, panel discussions became part of the operative paragraphs of various resolutions. Some procedural issues were clarified, and others -- such as interactive dialogue with special procedures mandate-holders and the participation of non-governmental organizations in the work of the Council -- have now acquired the status of standard practices.

Secondly, the overall attitude of Council members and observers alike was focused largely on a pragmatic and solution-oriented approach to action, in particular when the completion of the institution-building process was at stake. Cross-regional dialogue and a certain readiness to try out-of-the-box options were keys in that respect. Much work is still needed with a view to increasing resistance to the temptation to politicize debate and expanding the cooperative approach to substantive issues.

Some encouraging developments may be found in relation to the Universal Periodic Review. The 32 countries that took part in the exercise also took it seriously. More than once, it was said that the Review's effects could be seen on the ground even before the Review itself had come to a conclusion. That was possible as a result of the preparations of various countries for the process. Likewise, most of the recommendations were accepted by the States under review. That is indeed an important step forward, since it implies a formal commitment to acting with a view to implementing those recommendations.

Thirdly, several challenges are facing the Council. One of them is ensuring the Council's credibility. Human rights are not mere abstractions, and Eleanor Roosevelt's often-quoted wise words remind us of that elementary fact. It follows that gross and systematic violations of human rights must not be ignored by the Council and that no attempt to bring them before the Council be seen as a sign of selectivity.

Another challenge is ensuring the effectiveness of Council action. That requires, among other things, focused debates and decisions, resolutions that include concrete and measurable steps, and follow-up to resolutions and commitments. Assessing the implementation of the Council's own decisions must become a regular practice; at the same time, new mechanisms need to be insulated from attempts to change them immediately after their adoption.

Last but not least, I should like to discuss what, at the beginning of this statement, I called the routine of the past. The Human Rights Council replaced the Commission on Human Rights, and what we need to do now, more than ever, is replace the Commission's mindset with a new approach. As it develops its routine, the Council, as well as its observers, must avoid slipping back into the old routine. The memory of the Commission's faults is still very present, and so too is the shadow of the caterpillar that refused the lipstick yet still wanted to become a butterfly.