Geneva, March 23 (KMS): The International Council for Human Rights (ICHR), in association with the International Human Rights Association of American Minorities (IHRAAM) hosted an Interactive Dialogue and Roundtable Conference in Geneva. The event entitled Peace and Security, Development and Human Rights as Pillars of the United Nations System ran in parallel to the 10th session of the Human Rights Council and discussed the state of the three pillars since the inception of the UN and their relevance to the modern world.
The comprehensive and distinguished list of speakers included Barrister Abdul Majeed Tramboo, the Chairman of ICHR, Professor Alfred de Zayas, Public and International Law Professor at the Geneva School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Professor Krishna Ahoojapatel, UN Representative Women’s Int. League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), Professor Joseph Wronka, Professor of Social Work, Spring College Massachusetts, Ms Victoria Schofield, South Asia analyst and distinguished author, Shah Ghulam Qadir, the Chairman of Kashmir Institute of International Relations, Princess Michelene Makou Djouma, the International Co-ordinator and UN representative for Organisation Camerounaise de Promotion de la Coopération Economique Internationale (OCAPROCE) and Ronald Barnes, Chairman of Indigenous Peoples and Nations Coalition (IPNC).
The text of speeches made by the speakers is as follows.
Barrister Abdul Majeed Tramboo opened the interactive dialogue and roundtable by outlining the changing nature of the three pillars of the UN. He noted that the definition of peace and security has changed since the inception of the UN and, as such, new ways of tackling old problems had been sought. The concept of Human Rights had taken root and had now entered the daily lexicon used by governments, NGOs and international organisations around the world. The significance of which is embodied by the three sessions of the Human Rights Council that take place each year and the universal periodic review in which the human rights record of nations are reviewed and then discussed by all of the members of the HRC. However, despite the significance of global human rights and the increasing amount of importance that the UN places on these rights there is still a long way to go before they are afforded to many of the people in the world.
Barrister Tramboo expressed serious concern over the continuous gross human rights violations by India in occupied Kashmir. Very recently the issue of land mines has come to surface, which had been laid down by the Indian military and paramilitary forces at the various parts of Kashmir. There is issue of nameless and mass graves which has been also reported by the United Nations working group on enforced and involuntary disappearances as well as an urgency resolution passed by the European Parliament, unfortunately no independent and impartial investigation has been conducted by the government of India on this issue. Arrests and detentions take place as a matter of routine in the occupied territory. Hundreds of political and human rights activists are being detained without any charge or trial including Shabbir Ahmad Shah, Masarat Alam Butt Muhammad Saleem Nunnaji and Farooq Ahmed Dar.
Professor Alfred de Zayas began by stating that the concept of human rights is not the flavour of the month. It is the most noble commitment of men and women of good will, who believe in peace and development and who want to make this a reality not just for elites but for all human beings in all regions of the world. The problem with the United Nations, as with every human institution, is that member States work for their perceived interests, not for human rights or human dignity. Thus it is the task of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to persuade States that it is in their own interest to play by the rules. The principle of equality and non-selectivity is crucial for the credibility and good functioning of the system. There are many States who apply human rights. Today they invoke human rights with regard to a particular country or region, they point fingers, they engage in naming and shaming. Tomorrow they keep quiet when the violations occur in their own territory or in the territory of an allied or friendly State. Here again it is the task of the Office of the High Commissioner and of moral authorities throughout the world to insist in the necessity of honesty and consistency in the application of human rights norms. This requires patience and continuing education. Most importantly, the human right to peace must be vindicated. Peace is the condition for the enjoyment of all civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. And peace is not just the absence of war. It is the presence of all those elements that make peace possible, disarmament, mutual respect, equality and social justice. The Spanish Association for the Advancement of International Human Rights Law (AEDIDH) has adopted an important document, The Luarca Declaration on the Human Right to Peace. This declaration was formally submitted to the Human Rights Council on 15 March 2007 and has been discussed worldwide in international seminars and congresses. It is to be hoped that it shall be adopted by the Human Rights Council in 2010. As of today 164 non-governmental organization endorse this initiative. If you want peace, cultivate justice. Indeed, there can be no peace in the world when social injustice prevails in so many countries, when millions of persons suffer hunger and extreme poverty. We must change our priorities and ensure the implementation of the millennium development goals.
Professor Krishna Ahoojapatel began by expressing her agreement with the comments that Barrister Tramboo had made about the human rights situation in Kashmir and then discussed development and industrialisation. The distinguished professor noted that all development processes had been intervened in by western nations and that this had resulted in many problems for the least developed nations of the world. Since 1994 the USA, the worlds only superpower, has been shying away from multilateralism and towards unilateral trade agreements. The entire UN system of the World Bank, the World Trade Organisation and the International Monetary Fund was allowing capital flight from the poorest nations of the world to the richest and this is part of the reason for the current global economic crises. She noted that if we are to achieve peace in the world then there needs to be less hypocrisy within the largest International Organisations of the World.
Professor Joseph Wronka began by stating that to achieve global peace we first need to eradicate global poverty. The global disparity of incomes is a leading factor in global turmoil. He implored civil society to demand that the governments of the world tackle poverty and extreme poverty by meeting their legal commitments under the Convention to Eradicate Extreme Poverty as well as several other international agreements to that end. Professor Wronka noted that the human rights mechanisms and treaties are pillars of a globally just world and noted that the right to peace should be paramount on the agenda of the Human Rights Council.
Ms Victoria Schofield started by outlining some of the new security threats that the World is facing. These are the rich/poor divide, international crime, terrorism, environmental concerns and migrations. Examining them in the context of Jammu and Kashmir she noted that the people of Jammu and Kashmir had been unable to attain their human right to peace. Ms Schofield believes that the valley of Jammu and Kashmir is a victim of four of the points mentioned above, excluding the threat of international crime. The people of Jammu and Kashmir have been suffering from economic deprivation and this has led to frustration. She discussed the first ever economic survey of Kashmir that was carried out by the Indian sponsored government if Indian Held Jammu and Kashmir in 2007. The findings of the report were glaring illustrations of the growing rich/poor divide.
Firstly, Jammu and Kashmir lags behind in development aspects including per capita income, healthcare, communications and literacy. On communications the story is little different. On average there is one post office to serve an area of 60sq km. On the social infrastructure side the outlook is even bleaker. In 2006 there was on average one medical institution servicing 3000 people, 71% of homes do not receive drinking water, the literacy rate is 55% as opposed 64% in India. Such disparities have the potential to threaten political security and without peace then security is always under threat and this is made worse by social depravation.
The second threat is terrorism. This can be state terror and unlawful killings of civilians the greatest example of this being the mass graves that have been discovered in the Indian held Kashmir. Unlawful killings of civilians and the use of illegal force has not brought peace and security but has exacerbated it.
Thirdly, environmental concerns. Kashmir is one of the most beautiful places on the world and if the environment is destroyed then peoples’ incomes will suffer. The damage that occurred in Kargil in 1999 caused lots of damage to the weavers of the region and disrupted an entire way of life. Also, on the Sichuan glacier the high levels of military activity is leading to a great deal of environmental pollution which could have a serious affect on the water supplies for many of the people of Kashmir.
Finally there is the issue of migration. The compulsion of so many of the Kashmiris of the valley to migrate due to political repression has effectively led to them having the right to live in their homeland taken away from them.
These are ways in which the four modern threats to world peace can be related to Jammu and Kashmir and a speedy resolution of the conflict would go a long way to neutralizing them.
Mr Shah Ghulam Qadir began by discussing the universal declaration of human rights. The problem, he said, lay not in the document itself but in the implementation of that document. If we look at the Peace and Security problems all over the world we have to ask why there is such a disparity between Peace and Security in the developed world and the developing world. He pointed out that in chastising developing countries the countries of the developed world made little attempt to discuss the human rights record of countries with which they shared political and economic interests and this has a direct effect on the discussion of human rights abuses in Kashmir.
Princess Michelene Makou Djouma highlighted the need for a socio-economic approach to improving human rights of marginalised communities, particularly women and children, emphasising the role of education and the need for skills based training. She argued that this approach was crucial for breaking the cycle of extreme poverty in Africa and easing its dependence on aid.
Ronald Barnes discussed how in the name of peace and security the previous US administration fostered a doctrine of pre-emptive defence and this has had a negative effect on Peace and Security across the globe. He went on to outline the difference between terrorists and freedom fighters and pointed out that even on his 90th birthday Nelson Mandela was still on the US terror list. He then discussed how the realisation of the right to self-determination of people all-over the world is critical to the peace and security of the world. Barnes stated his belief that if the HRC could achieve the goals set out in its mandate then we would be closer to solving many of the problems of peace and security, development and human rights across the globe.
Barrister Tramboo then opened the floor for the interactive dialogue where questions were put to the panel before the interactive dialogue and roundtable was adjourned. »