キハラハント愛の世界漂流徒然日記

国連平和維持活動、国際人権法、治安部門改革の分野で活動する キハラハント愛のブログです。

ACUNS

7月17日 国連高等弁務官事務所 討論

7月17日にACUNS(国連システム学術評議会)東京事務所と国連ヨーロッパ本部の主催で
東アジアの学者・研究者の方々と共に
国連高等弁務官事務所(OHCHR)を訪れた際の
討論の記録について、OHCHRのクリアランスが出ましたので
ACUNSのウェブサイトと共に、こちらでも公開します。
Deputy High Commissionerが人権にかける熱意の伝わる
大変素晴らしい討論の機会でした。

関係者の皆様、貴重な機会をいただき、ありがとうございました。

―――
Human Rights is NOT in Retreat insisted the Deputy UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Kate Gilmore, while Importance of Universal Periodic Review emphasized by UPR Chief Mr. Gianni MAGAZZENI

 

Deputy High Commissioner Gilmore saw real benefit in the academic collaboration with East Asian scholars and first opened the floor for the commentators.

 

Prof. Ai Kihara-Hunt of the University of Tokyo, Japan, inquired with the Deputy High Commissioner how the UN-OHCHR was dealing the global trend of retreat of human rights, and what its strategy is in tackling the issue of globally shrinking space to speak up for human rights. In particular, the speaker asked if there was a way of collaborating with the group, who share two common features: they are East Asians, and they are academics.

 

In presenting the trend of retreat, Prof. Kihara-Hunt mentioned that examples of the rise of populism needed no mention among the informed participants. In more States, vindictive and xenophobic rhetoric of populism were more apparently and bluntly in the face of the general population. It was at multiple levels, from the government policies to the public’s attitude toward outsiders, and worryingly, this trend was even in the laws and regulations, through which more discrimination appears to be legitimized.

 

In the case of Japan, too, the government’s survey on the public awareness of human rights, suggested that the vast majority of the Japanese population are aware of human rights, noting that the topics that they inquired about were mostly concerning categories of persons who may face discrimination but did not other substantive topics, such as death penalty, freedom of opinion and expression, sexual violence, ill-treatment against foreign workers, immigration. Rights and freedoms are necessary to create democratic space for everyone’s human rights.

 

She encouraged East Asian scholars to contribute to the endeavor of maintaining and regaining space for human rights.

 

Prof. Sheng of China asked if there is a gap between the Office and the people in the field, referring to the human rights situation of women and children in Central African Republic. He also asked how much impact the US’s withdrawal from the Human Rights Council has.

 

Professor Changrok Soh of Korea University thought there should be an East Asian dialogue about human rights, even if this does not happen at the State-level. He recommended that Universal Periodic Review (UPR) be used as a topic of discussion among the East Asian scholars.

 

Mr. Inuzuka, former member of the Japanese Diet, wondered what the Responsibility to Protect concept would be in relation to peacekeeping in the era of President Trump.

 

Deputy High Commissioner questioned whether human rights are really in retreat, and if so, by what measure would we assess this to be the case? After all, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed 70 years ago, has since been included in almost every new national constitution established subsequently; the majority of UN member states being constituted post-WW2. There are now laws in countries all over the world that reference the contents and/or values and/or purposes of the Declaration enabling the cascade of human rights from the universal and the global to the national and the local.

 

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is concrete evidence of this universal engagement in human rights, having now passed through two cycles with which all States cooperated while, for example, the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court with jurisdiction over international crimes, is further evidence that never before has the world been so aware of human rights; of those who are lost to human rights violations and of States’ potential for abuse of power and their obligations to relative powerlessness.  Never before have we known so much about the nature and causes of preventable human suffering; never before has so much evidence been collected about the violations/abuses of human rights; never before has there been so many forums in which evidence of these matters can be put before member states. These are not the circumstances of defeat or of retreat. That being said, there is no question that political discourse has deteriorated: political narrative about universal rights has worsened as has the moral character of that political discourse.

 

She further emphasized that claims for rights to be upheld were not in retreat. Human rights defenders continued to demand for human rights. The number of people documenting human rights evidence has increased.  There is a broader based clash between people’s demand for rights and the State’s efforts to “supply rights”. She expressed her opinion that it was important to challenge current negative political narratives, by building coalitions to amplify the demand for rights. She noted specifically that what is under assault are not only values, but also the place of fact and of evidence. The norm that public policy should be based on evidence and on impartial standards was under assault.

 

How this retreat from the disciplines of standards, norms and evidence-based policy making has an impact is clear in peacekeeping. The UN is overdependent on certain donors; it has its political economy that affects its policy making including in respect of fulfilling its mandate in times of conflict.

 

Times are changing.  There are more people than ever on the move. Climate change is a local problem with only global solutions. Inequality is the gravest threat to enduring peace. There are alive today more young people than ever before in human history. All of these – and many more – directly concern people and where ever people are concerned there are inevitably human rights concerns.  We all must do more to elevate the demand for rights, including in East Asia. Geneva itself – alone - is not the answer. The answer will always involve a key role for local social movements. She concludes that we all have rights – without exception - but that not everyone has the same degree of responsibility for rights. The more power one has, the more responsibility we have to defend, protect and uphold rights.

 

Concerning the Universal Periodic Review, Mr. Gianni MAGAZZENI, Chief of the UPR Branch, Council and Treaty Mechanisms Division (CTMD), explained that while the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) takes place in Geneva its main objective is to improve the human rights situation at country level. It is a peer review of every member state, which benefits from the contribution of other stakeholders as well, including independent national human rights institutions and human rights associations active in country as well as regional organizations, if they  submit  information within given deadlines. For the UPR, hundreds of pages are considered and then summarized in a report of maximum 10 pages. In addition, OHCHR prepares also a compilation of UN documentation, received from UN Treaty Bodies, Special Procedures Mandate Holders, which complement state reports. The UPR has entered its third cycle in May 2017. On average, each delegation is led by one or more ministers with an average number of 20 state officials, and about 100 states making an average of 2.4 recommendations (i.e. more than 200) for each review. The review takes place in Geneva but the UPR focuses on the implementation and follow up of recommendations – especially those that are accepted - in each Member State. By strengthening national coordination and follow up mechanisms and enhancing the links between human rights requirements and the SDGs States will be able to better address root causes and prevent emergency situations. The UPR has 100% participation record so far: i.e. it is a mechanism accepted by all member states, which come to Geneva for the review. The main challenge in this third cycle is implementation which - if systematically ensured - will greatly enhance prevention and the success and sustainability of the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The entire UN system, in addition to OHCHR needs to work more with Governments and other national stakeholders in order to support at least accepted UPR recommendations leading to the strengthening of the national protection system and relevant changes in laws and practices. Thus, if human rights are at the core of efforts at the SDGs, all the three pillars of the UN Charter (peace and security, development, and human rights) will be significantly strengthened.

 
[Report written by Mr. Simon Panchaud and Ai Kihara-Hunt, edited by the Deputy High Commissioner's Office at the UN-OHCHR].


日本国際平和構築協会・国連システム学術評議会の平和構築に関するシンポジウム

AKASHIOKAMURAHASEGAWA12月2日(土曜日)、
私が事務局長を務める日本国際平和構築協会(Global Peacebuilding Association of Japan:GPAJ)と
国連システム学術評議会(ACUNS)との共催で
「アフリカでの国連平和活動の新たな挑戦」と名打ったシンポジウムが開催されました。

明石康元国連事務総長特別代表の
カンボジア・旧ユーゴスラビアでのご経験に基づくお話しと、
岡村善文大使の、
国連平和活動のフィールドでのご経験やコートジボアールなどでの
大使としてのご経験に基づくお話しがあり、
大変参考になりました。
特に、私が国連警察について常に問題提起している、
意思決定を行う国連安保理、国連のフィールドと要員を派遣する国との
意識のずれ、意思疎通の不十分さ、装備の不備など、を
軍事要員について鋭くご指摘された大使のお話しは
大変興味深く拝聴しました。
文民の保護というマンデートに
国連加盟国から軍事要員を派遣しても、
その要員を犠牲にしても
現地の文民を守るという決定を
派遣国は現場でできるのだろうか、
どのくらいの割合の派遣国が
そのような判断をできるのだろうか、と、
深く考えさせられました。

事務局長として、企画・運営・連絡・会計すべての責任者ということで、
大変心配でしたが、
おかげさまで外部からも50余名の参加者がいらっしゃる
大きなイベントとなりました。

このシンポジウムのプログラムはこちらです。
発表された内容については、
これからGPAJ/ACUNSのウェブサイトにて
ご紹介していきます。

同日午後には平和構築に関する
GPAJ初めての研究大会を開催しました。
そちらは別途記事にします。

AM sessionUEKISATO


国連システム学術評議会(ACUNS)ニュースレターに

国連システム学術評議会(ACUNS)は、
国連の実務者と国連について研究する研究者たちが集まる会議で、
東京に連絡事務所を持っています。
東京の連絡事務所の副代表として、
6月に行いました「国連を活性化する」と題した会議の報告書を
本部に提出していましたが、
今回のニュースレターに掲載されました。

リンクはこちらです。

会議には高須国連事務次長に基調講演をしていただき、
多数の国連関係者、研究者のご参加をいただきました。
ACUNS本部からは、ジュネーブ連絡事務所代表の
Stephen Browne氏と、
インドからSublash Birla氏に来ていただきました。

21世紀に入り、世界の紛争は一層国境の中で起こり、
一般市民を多く巻き込んでいます。
多くの移民・難民を生み出し、
テロリズムも台頭する中、
各加盟国の国益と世界・人類の共通利益とを
国連はどうバランスを取っていけるのでしょうか。

ACUNS(国連システム学術評議会)年次会プレナリー発表

ACUNS(国連システム学術評議会)は
国連について研究する研究者と
国連で働いている、または働いていた実務者とが一堂に会する
最大のフォーラムです。

私も毎年年次会に参加していますが、
今年は6月15日から17日、
韓国のソウルで開かれました。
今年はプレナリー(全大会)で発表させてもらえました。

ACUNS Seoul presentation

国連の人権についてのパネルにて、
国連警察の刑事的アカウンタビリティについての発表です。
国連警察が実際に重大な犯罪を犯しているのか、
1990年以降の犯罪について、
ひとつひとつデータを検証し、
それぞれ訴追されているのか調査し、
結果訴追されていないという実情に基づいて、
何が訴追の障害となっているのか、検証しました。
法的には、よく言われるのが国連警察の派遣国が
刑事的管轄権がないのではないか、という点と
国連で働く人員の持つ特権免除についてですが、
85パーセントほどの派遣国について
ひとつひとつ刑法と刑事訴訟法を調べ、
管轄権は訴追を阻む主な理由とはならないことを証明しました。
また、国連警察の持つ特権免除については、
業務と関係ない行為には特権免除がありません。
集めた犯罪行為については
ほぼ業務と関係ないものでした。
特権免除も訴追を阻む主な理由とはなり得ないことが判明したわけです。
ただし、国連が特権免除を使う場合、
その使い方は統制が取れておらず、
また、受入国において特権免除を認める理由として
受入国の人権状況に問題があるということを主張する場合があります。
これは特権免除とは別の問題であり、
別の議論(人権)を持って受入国での訴追を退けるべきであると主張しました。
国際人権法における、捜査と訴追の義務というロジックを持ってすると、
受入国、派遣国、並びに国連に、
それぞれ異なる義務の内容が認められます。

下記のリンクから、日本国際平和構築協会のページには英語でアップしました。
http://www.gpaj.org/2017/06/16/15314
プロフィール

hyoryumin_jane

カテゴリ別アーカイブ
QRコード
QRコード
  • ライブドアブログ