The 57th Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights was held in Geneva for six weeks, from March 19 to April 27. Although I did not participate in the whole process, I attended the meetings for two weeks as a representative of the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues.
The commission is the UN's main organization concerned with human rights. With its 53 member states, it reflects the reality of "group politics" inside the UN and is considered highly political. Of the 53 members, many respect human rights while others (such as China, Cuba and Libya) are contemptuous of them.
The commission's discussions cover a variety of issues, from general human rights promotion to specific human rights violations. This year, the US motion to condemn China's violation of human rights was the focus of the confrontation between the pro- and anti-human rights camps.
The US moved the motion to condemn Beijing's crackdown on the Falun Gong sect, its tight control over Tibet and its heavy punishments of Chinese democracy activists. In response to the condemnation, the Chinese government's strategy, as usual, was to initiate a "no-action motion" to prevent the commission from voting on a resolution concerning its human rights record. Large Chinese delegations, both governmental and non-governmental, had tried their best to confront the US-European alliance, as if they were facing a formidable enemy. On April 18, the "no-action motion" was finally passed -- with 23 in favor, 17 against, 12 abstentions and 1 absence. Thus, 23 of the member states supported China while 30 others opposed it.
Although China appeared to be the "winner" on the surface, hundreds of Falun Gong practitioners protested in the square in front of the UN's Geneva office the night before the vote. Meanwhile, a large crowd of Chinese and international human rights activists also protested near the office on the day of the vote, demanding that the Chinese government "stop massacres and respect human rights."
A "no-action motion" is a procedural mechanism, not a solution. The solution is for the Chinese government to genuinely improve its domestic human rights situation by upholding the rights enshrined in the International Bill of Rights -- including freedom of speech, assembly and association, and religious belief -- to benefit its people.
Members of the commission are elected every three years through intense rounds of voting. The worse a country's human rights record, the more that country wants to secure membership. Their motivation is not to promote human rights but to increase the number of "human rights gangsters" on the commission so that they can shield one another. China's initiation of a "no-action motion" against the US' condemnation is an example of precisely that kind of behavior.
In fact, all governmental and non-governmental representatives who participated in the session expressed great concern over the above problem and actively discussed possible solutions. A suggestion from Kenneth Roth -- executive director of Human Rights Watch -- won particular attention. According to Roth, "A state's willingness to cooperate with the commission's monitoring mechanisms should be a condition of eligibility for commission membership."
This is a brilliant suggestion since many countries which abuse human rights have frequently refused visits by human rights experts and delegates, using a variety of excuses.
As Taiwan brings its human rights record up to international standards, it is to be hoped that more local activists will have a chance to attend such sessions.
Chen Lung-chu is chairman of the Lung-chu Chen New Century Foundation.
Translated by Eddy Chang
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
RSS