The Human Rights Council this afternoon held an interactive dialogue on the report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, and an enhanced interactive dialogue on the report of the Secretary-General on the involvement of the United Nations in Myanmar. It also concluded its interactive dialogue with the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan.

Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, Chair of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, said the Syrian civilian population had now endured more than 11 years of crisis and conflict. They were currently suffering new levels of hardship, through a dangerous combination of escalating violence, plunging economy, and a humanitarian disaster. Parts of the country were still witnessing frontline fighting and bombardment, while violence against civilians was increasing across the country. The international community must show the courage and determination to move beyond rhetorical commitments to peace and to do all that was necessary to reach a negotiated political solution that respected Syria’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence, as only this could establish the foundation for the restoration of the basic human rights that had been so long denied the Syrian people.

Syria, speaking as the country concerned, renewed its rejection of the mandate of the Commission and its reports. It was a platform for shaming and circulating unacceptable and unfounded allegations, while seeking to extend its mandate. This report was promoted by the United Kingdom, on behalf of an interventionist group of countries. Syria renewed its call to the Council to end this politicised mandate that was not accepted by the country concerned and that lacked credibility and objectivity. Eleven years after the military and economic aggression against Syria, supported by the United States and its allies, the Council was telling stories that stood no ground in reality. The report was misleading and ignored the major challenges faced by the Syrian State. In order to cooperate with the mechanisms of the Council through constructive dialogue, Syria had recently completed its third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review.

In the discussion, some speakers said that the report established the massive human rights violations committed, first and foremost by the Syrian “regime” and its allies. The violations were condemned, and all parties should allow humanitarian aid, respect international humanitarian law, and refrain from attacking civilian infrastructure and civilians. Some speakers said the report of the Commission was characterised by a provocative approach, lacking professionalism, impartiality and independence, in a politically motivated context, and was another attempt to manipulate the Human Rights Council. The international community should create a conducive environment for further promotion and protection of human rights, and should not show bias, selectivity, politicisation and double standards.

Khaled Khiari, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for the Middle East, Asia and the Pacific, presenting the report of the Secretary-General on the involvement of the United Nations in Myanmar, said while Gert Rosenthal’s 2019 inquiry sought to shed light on how the system failed to protect the Rohingya people in Myanmar, his recommendations were meant to serve the entire system, across the globe. In Myanmar, Mr. Rosenthal’s review concluded that there were “systemic and structural failures” which impeded the United Nations’ response to a deteriorating situation in Myanmar. In 2020, the United Nations had undertaken a number of initiatives to ensure that United Nations activities effectively supported the promotion and protection of human rights.

In the enhanced interactive dialogue, speakers said it was imperative to ensure a system-wide approach so that all parts of the United Nations system could intervene in situations where human rights were threatened. All States should implement their human rights obligations. There was concern for the continuing deterioration of the situation in Myanmar as a consequence of the military coup. Some speakers said there should be restraint, and the international community needed to contribute to normalising the situation in Myanmar and not put sanctions or pressures on it. The attempts by certain countries to use multilateral arenas for politicising the Myanmar issue could not be accepted, and efforts should be made to avoid this selectivity, and ensure cooperative dialogue. At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its interactive dialogue with the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan.

Barney Afako, Member of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, in concluding remarks, said that each chapter of the Revitalised Peace Agreement was like a key pillar of the structure of a bridge. All of these were important pillars and provided for the meaning of a new constitution for South Sudan. Without implementing all of these elements, the prospects for prosperity for South Sudan would be weakened.

Andrew Clapham, Member of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, also in concluding remarks, said the Commission would keep following with great interest the development of the Commission for Truth, Reconciliation and Healing and offered his technical assistance. He was looking for more progress regarding the reparation and compensation institutions.

Yasmin Sooka, Chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, concluding, said that the survivors of sexual violence in South Sudan had written to the Members of the Council, asking not to be abandoned. She urged the Council to read the shocking account of testimonies of sexual survivors in South Sudan.

In the discussion, speakers said that the report highlighted serious issues which should alarm the Council. The cooperation of the Government of South Sudan in the process was appreciated. The Revitalised Peace Agreement was key to solving the situation and addressing the human rights violations. Setting up key institutions towards the completion of the transition process was a vital step in achieving peace, including creating an effective remedy institution for the victims of human rights defenders. The key aspect was to ensure the stability and territorial integrity of the country, whilst coordinating with the international community. Some speakers said that it was up to each country to choose which mechanism it considered the best to help it achieve its goals, as included in article 10 of the Charter of the Council.

Speaking in the discussion on South Sudan were Malawi, Saudi Arabia, Cameroon, Egypt, Netherlands and Sudan.

Also speaking were East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project, Human Rights Watch, CIVICUS – World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Amnesty International, Article 19 – the International Centre against Censorship, Meezaan Centre for Human Rights, and International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Speaking in the discussion on Syria were European Union, Iceland (on behalf of a group of countries), Liechtenstein, Qatar, Israel, Germany, Italy, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Ecuador, Cuba, France, Venezuela, Luxembourg, Brazil, China, Japan, Spain, Netherlands, Switzerland, Sri Lanka, Russian Federation, Australia, Kuwait, Chile, Ireland, Belarus, United States, Belgium, Romania, Turkey, Greece, Albania, Nicaragua, Croatia, Cyprus, Georgia, Malta, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Zimbabwe, Jordan, United Kingdom and Iran.

Also speaking were International Council Supporting Fair Trial and Human Rights, Centre-Europe -Tiers Monde, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, International Commission of Jurists, and Centre Zagros pour les Droits de l’Homme.

Speaking in the discussion on Myanmar were the European Union, Estonia (on behalf of a group of countries), Pakistan (on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation), Malaysia, France, Russian Federation, Indonesia, Australia, Bangladesh, United States, United Kingdom, Thailand, Philippines and Gambia.

Also speaking were Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, International Commission of Jurists, and United Nations Watch.

Speaking in right of reply were Turkey and Greece.

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 at 10 a.m. on Monday, 21 March, when it will begin an interactive dialogue on the report of the High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in Myanmar followed by an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Interactive Dialogue with the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan

The interactive dialogue with the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan started in the morning meeting and a summary can be found here.

Discussion

Some speakers said that the report highlighted serious issues which should alarm the Council. The cooperation of the Government of South Sudan in the process was appreciated. The Revitalised Peace Agreement was key to solving the situation and addressing the human rights violations. Setting up key institutions towards the completion of the transition process was a vital step in achieving peace, including creating an effective remedy institution for the victims of human rights violations. The efforts of the Government to promote human rights, notwithstanding the difficulties faced, were appreciated, and it was encouraged to continue the work to promote peace and human rights. The key aspect was to ensure the stability and territorial integrity of South Sudan, whilst coordinating with the international community. The international community should pursue its technical assistance to meet the humanitarian needs of the country, and respect its choices. Good governance was fundamental both for human rights and the good functioning of the State. South Sudan should strengthen its cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner and all other mechanisms, as well as accelerate the pace of the peace process.

The efforts of South Sudan to reduce the levels of violence and to meet the revised deadlines, despite the economic and social challenges faced by the country, were appreciated; all allegations of human rights violations should be investigated in order to restore peace and stability. The international community should continue to provide technical and humanitarian assistance, as well as to build up institutions in the country to allow it to live up to its own obligations. Some speakers underlined that it was up to each country to choose which mechanisms it considered the best to help it achieve its goals, as included in article 10 of the Charter of the Council. Other speakers said that the number of gross human rights violations recorded over the last year was of concern, and the protection of human rights was essential in all relationships between Governments and the people. This did not appear to be the case, with regard to the use of intimidation, violence and arbitrary detention in the case of human rights defenders and media workers, and there should be swift and in-depth investigations of these occurrences. The total impunity in South Sudan continued to fuel war crimes, and the Council should renew the mandate of the Commission to allow its members to continue their work to preserve evidence in this context.

Concluding Remarks

BARNEY AFAKO, Member of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, said that each chapter of the Revitalised Peace Agreement was like a key pillar of the structure of a bridge. Without one of those elements, one would not have a transition that would be credible. All of these were important pillars and provided for the meaning of a new constitution for South Sudan. Without implementing all of these elements, the prospects for prosperity for South Sudan would be weakened. The plans for the elections in South Sudan should be based on the basis of improved security by implementing the Revitalised Agreement and the new constitutional dispensation that represented the will of the people.

ANDREW CLAPHAM, Member of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, said that the Commission would keep following with great interest the development of the Commission for Truth, Reconciliation and Healing and offered his technical assistance. He was looking for more progress regarding the reparation and compensation institutions. The African Union hybrid court for South Sudan would have jurisdiction over war crimes, torture and sexual violence that had been documented by the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan. He further explained that the Commission had offered its assistance to both the South Sudanese Government and the African Union to see if the gridlock could be broken. They also looked at the Memorandum of Understanding to see if it could be signed and they did not see why it could not. The hybrid court would work in a complementary way with the justice system of South Sudan.

YASMIN SOOKA, Member of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, said that the survivors of sexual violence in South Sudan had written to the Members of the Council, asking not to be abandoned. She urged the Council to read the shocking account of testimonies of sexual survivors in South Sudan.

Interactive Dialogue with the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Human Rights Situation in the Syrian Arab Republic

Documentation

The Council has before it the report by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic (A/HRC/49/77).

Presentation of Report

PAULO SERGIO PINHEIRO, Chair of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, presenting the report, said the Syrian civilian population had now endured more than 11 years of crisis and conflict. They were currently suffering new levels of hardship, through a dangerous combination of escalating violence, a plunging economy, and a humanitarian disaster. More than half of the pre-war population had been displaced, hundreds of thousands had been killed, over 100,000 were still missing or forcibly disappeared, and Syria’s cities and infrastructure had been destroyed. Over 90 per cent of the remaining population was now living in poverty. Twelve million people were food insecure and an unprecedented 14.6 million were in need of humanitarian assistance. As living conditions continued to deteriorate, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry had called for a review of the impact of unilateral sanctions imposed on Syria to mitigate consequences on the daily lives of civilians that may be causing shortages and impeding aid. Parts of the country were still witnessing frontline fighting and bombardment, while violence against civilians was increasing across the country.

People across the country, regardless of who was in control, lived in fear of being arrested for expressing their opinion, belonging to a dissenting political party, reporting for the media, or defending human rights. Practices of torture and ill-treatment in detention continued, in some cases leading to deaths. Tens of thousands of Syrians were still held incommunicado or forcibly disappeared. Gender-based discrimination and violence continued, with women and girls being disproportionately impacted, subjected to a range of violations depending on the armed group in charge of the area. Women also suffered sexual and gender-based violence in detention, and in their daily life as they navigated restrictions imposed by armed groups.

On the accountability front, all parties should conduct credible, independent and impartial investigations into incidents entailing civilian casualties in which their forces were involved. It was essential to ensure that those responsible for violations were held accountable. The international community must show the courage and determination to move beyond rhetorical commitments to peace and to do all that was necessary to reach a negotiated political solution that respected Syria’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence, as only this could establish the foundation for the restoration of the basic human rights that had been so long denied the Syrian people.

Statement by Country Concerned

Syria, speaking as the country concerned, renewed its rejection of the mandate of the Commission and its reports. It was a platform for shaming and circulating unacceptable and unfounded allegations, while seeking to extend its mandate. This report was promoted by the United Kingdom, on behalf of an interventionist group of countries. Syria renewed its call to the Council to end this politicised mandate that was not accepted by the country concerned and that lacked credibility and objectivity. Eleven years after the military and economic aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic, supported by the United States and its allies, the Council was telling stories that stood no ground in reality. The report was misleading and ignored the major challenges faced by the Syrian State.

In order to cooperate with the mechanisms of the Council through constructive dialogue, Syria had recently completed its third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review. That process had shed light on the efforts of the Syrian State, within its available capacities, and included responses and clarifications that refuted the allegations and accusations made against Syria by the Commission, which continued to put political agendas ahead of humanitarian and legal considerations. It was not surprising that this information was not reflected in the reports of the Commission. The limited time given to Syria to speak as the targeted country in this debate was not sufficient to respond to the accusations, fallacies and misleading information in the report. Syria rejected the report, which contributed to providing a cover for abuses by the State sponsors of the Commission’s mandate and their violations of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.

Discussion

In the ensuing dialogue, speakers said that the report established the massive human rights violations committed, first and foremost by the Syrian “regime” and its allies. The violations were condemned, and all parties should allow humanitarian aid, respect international humanitarian law, and refrain from attacking civilian infrastructure and civilians. The situation should be referred to the International Criminal Court. The Government should cease arbitrary detentions. Gender-based violations and violations of children’s rights were of concern. Conditions for safe and voluntary return of refugees and internally displaced persons had not yet been met. The situation continued to deteriorate, with increased suffering. Accountability was key; impunity was of great concern, and independent monitors must be given access to all areas. The “regime” must allow humanitarian access in line with United Nations Security Council resolutions. The crucial work of the United Nations Special Envoy for Syria, the Commission of Inquiry and others was supported. Limited access to essential services and goods left about 90 per cent of the population below the poverty line, with children being the most affected, with war becoming a normality for them, leaving a lost generation behind. One in 13 killed in the conflict were children. The Government forces continued to commit war crimes, continued to rape and murder, and the international community must hold the Syrian Government to account.

Some speakers said the report of the Commission was characterised by a provocative approach, lacking professionalism, impartiality and independence, in a politically motivated context, and was another attempt to manipulate the Human Rights Council. The issue could better be dealt with by supporting the territorial and sovereign integrity of Syria in dealing with its terrorist elements. The international community should create a conducive environment for further promotion and protection of human rights, and should not show bias, selectivity, politicisation and double standards. Only a political solution could put an end to the crisis; the terrorist groups in the country imperilled that solution. It was essential to avoid any foreign interference in Syria and to increase regional cooperation. Syria was congratulated for its commitment and participation in the Universal Periodic Review. Unilateral coercive measures and attempts at regime change were rejected. Country-specific mandates without the support of the country concerned were rejected. Any foreign intervention, direct or indirect, without the country’s involvement was rejected, as were attempts to destabilise Syria and other countries of the area as part of the Western powers’ geo-agenda. Human rights were enhanced through cooperation, and never through bias, selectivity, politicisation and double standards.

Interim Remarks

PAULO SERGIO PINHEIRO, Chair of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, said that there was no military solution for the Syrian crisis. The only solution was political, which required an actual cease fire, and must take into account the real interests of the Syrian people.

HANNY MEGALLY, Member of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, explained that, when it had become clear that the Syrian case could not go to the International Criminal Court through the regular route – which was via the Security Council, a lot of countries had started using international jurisdiction, like the Netherlands did last year. This was really good progress. The Commission itself had responded to 300 enquiries from different jurisdictions. That was not enough but this was the start of showing accountability. Jurisdictions around the world needed to better cooperate with each other and within countries. Where it was possible to go forward with international jurisdiction, they needed to accelerate the work. In terms of the need for a new identity or more coordination, he was pleased that the General Assembly had passed the resolution for the Secretary-General to produce a study. There was not enough coordination going on and there was a need for stronger cooperation as it had been needed for the past 10 years, but there also ought to be a new entity. On the question of coordination on criminal justice issues, they should look at the example of the coordination of work between the Commission of Inquiry and the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism.

LYNN WELCHMAN, Member of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, said that gender-based violence and child right violations were interlinked to the dreadful economic situation. There was a growing number of women-headed households who could not find out what had happened to the male members of their household, they could not get a death certificate, it was a dreadful situation. About child rights, she reminded the Council of the situation in the camps in the northeast of Syria, where there were 40,000 children being held, either orphans or with their mothers. Some of these children, who were foreign nationals, had been repatriated, while others had not been repatriated and were deprived of all child rights. This needed to be resolved or those children would grow up without a childhood.

Discussion

In the continuing debate, some speakers said that Syrian human rights defenders continued to bravely advocate for democracy and human rights. The violence committed by the “regime” affected every family. Over 150,000 Syrians were arbitrarily detained or forcibly disappeared. The continuing war crimes were a barrier to the return of refugees and internally displaced persons. There should be an independent mechanism established to investigate the plight of the disappeared in the country. Children in Syria continued to come under attack and all efforts should be made to increase the protection provided to them. All efforts should be made to achieve a sustainable political solution.

Some speakers noted that resolution 46/22 on Syria, establishing the Commission, had not been supported by 20 Council members. The mandate of the Commission on Syria was not supported, nor were other similar mandates, as they were political, and thus the report was unacceptable and biased. The inclusion of the impact of unilateral coercive measures in the report was noted, although they did not take enough attention thereof. Unilateral coercive measures were inherently deliberate on the part of Western countries, as they aimed to change the internal political situation in the affected countries, and they should be entirely abolished.

Concluding Remarks

LYNN WELCHMAN, Member of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, said that violations of housing, land and property rights were committed by all parties in Syria. In order to prevent those from happening, pillage needed to be recognised as a crime and Member States needed to use their influence to stop Syrian lands from being looted. The desperate economic situation had also increased the risk of child marriage, while violations such as extortion and hostage taking were being noted. Member States needed to do what they could to mitigate the impact of the sanctions on the daily lives of Syrians as recommended in the report.

HANNY MEGALLY, Member of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, said that the report had some concrete and specific recommendations on the release of those in detention, such as for Syria to publish the names of those in detention and give access to families and lawyers. The ways this could be done had been explained in the report; it could be done starting with the sick, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. All that was left was for people to listen to the recommendations of the Commission. On the issue of enforced disappearance, he believed it needed a new entity to take this forward. On strengthening accountability, he called on all parties in Syria to stop committing crimes in Syria.

Interactive Dialogue on the Report of the Secretary-General on the Involvement of the United Nations in Myanmar

Documentation

The Council has before it (A/HRC/49/73) report of the Secretary-General on progress made in the implementation of follow-up action to the recommendations of the “A Brief and Independent Inquiry into the Involvement of the United Nations in Myanmar from 2010 to 2018” to strengthen the prevention capacity of the United Nations system.

Presentation of the Report

KHALED KHIARI, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for the Middle East, Asia and the Pacific, presenting the report of the Secretary-General on the involvement of the United Nations in Myanmar, said while Gert Rosenthal’s 2019 inquiry sought to shed light on how the system failed to protect the Rohingya people in Myanmar, his recommendations were meant to serve the entire system, across the globe. He had found that the issues at play were systemic, encompassing interactions with the host government, dynamics within the United Nations system, and interactions with the international community.

Since Mr. Rosenthal’s review, the Secretary-General had launched his Call to Action for Human Rights, stressing that human rights were the responsibility of each and every United Nations actor and must be integrated into everything the United Nations did – in the field, at the regional level, and at Headquarters. The Call to Action provided the entire United Nations system with the necessary frameworks and momentum to ensure that human rights were placed at the centre of efforts across the three pillars. It outlined a vision in which the system worked in tandem on human rights, and spoke coherently on violations of human rights, and had led to an improvement in the way Governments perceived the Resident Coordinators as genuine access points to the United Nations system. Despite the progress made, there was room to further improve what the United Nations could offer on the ground, under the leadership of the Resident Coordinator, and in support of the 2030 Agenda.

In Myanmar, Mr. Rosenthal’s review had concluded that there were “systemic and structural failures” which had impeded the United Nations’ response to a deteriorating situation in Myanmar. In 2020, the United Nations had undertaken a number of initiatives to ensure that United Nations activities effectively supported the promotion and protection of human rights. Following the 1 February 2021 military takeover and within the parameters of a challenging context, the United Nations remained committed to “stay and deliver” with a focus on humanitarian assistance and priority development needed at the local level, and strived to leverage all available channels and put systems in place to ensure human rights remained a key priority in all its programmes and activities. The United Nations remained committed to use its mandate, resources and authority to encourage and support those responsible for protection to live up to that responsibility.

Discussion

In the ensuing discussion, speakers said it was imperative to ensure a system-wide approach so that all parts of the United Nations system could intervene in situations where human rights were threatened. All States should implement their human rights obligations. The attention of the Security Council should be drawn to the situation in Myanmar. There was concern for the continuing deterioration of the situation in Myanmar as a consequence of the military coup. All those detained should be freed, and the military Government should ensure the full promotion and protection of all human rights, as well as their full respect. Humanitarian access must be ensured. The “regime” bore responsibility for the crisis, which had gravely undermined peace and security, and those responsible needed to be held accountable for their actions. Ensuring full access of all United Nations bodies and mandates to the country was essential. Justice, accountability and a durable solution must remain the focus, within a context of full respect for human rights. There should be full redress for the Rohingya, and a restoration of all their human rights.

Some speakers urged Myanmar to fully cooperate with the United Nations and its mechanisms, including the Secretary-General and the Independent Envoy for Myanmar. The human rights situation continued to deteriorate, and the population was living in an untenable position, where their rights were flouted. Other speakers said there should be restraint, and the international community needed to contribute to normalising the situation in Myanmar and not put sanctions or pressures on it. The attempts by certain countries to use multilateral arenas for politicising the Myanmar issue could not be accepted, and efforts should be made to avoid this selectivity, and ensure cooperative dialogue. Country resolutions were not acceptable, and it was not acceptable to interfere in the internal situation in Myanmar.

Concluding Remarks

KHALED KHIARI, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for the Middle East, Asia and the Pacific, said that the situation described by several persons was very concerning. He shared their concerns on further deterioration, with all its consequences on human rights and humanitarian needs. One of the biggest problems was access to the vulnerable population. On accountability, he mentioned that the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Myanmar had presented reports that included a range of strong recommendations in this regard. Member States should also continue to support the work stream that contributed to accountability in Myanmar such as the Office of the High Commissioner’s work on monitoring and reporting, even if remotely, as well as the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism on Myanmar, which was mandated to collect evidence on the most serious international crimes and violations of international law. There was always the proceedings of the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice.

Mr. Khiari encouraged Member States to collaborate with those courts and he also supported the Members States who exercised their universal jurisdiction through their courts. He pointed out that the responsibility for prevention rested with Member States. The human rights system was the best prevention tool; there was no better guarantee for human rights prevention than for Member States to abide by their human rights responsibilities and the United Nations system provided the framework to ensure that human rights were at the centre of all efforts. On ensuring access to all United Nations bodies and international mechanisms, he noted that the de facto authority in Myanmar, as well as their predecessors, had maintained consistently negative positions towards allowing entry to specialised human rights bodies. This time, Mr. Khiari added, it was apparently driven by concerns that such bodies would gather evidence to be utilised in accountability efforts.

For access to all parts of the country for entities functioning in Myanmar, it was particularly of concern as the de facto authorities maintained rigid travel systems, and limited access to affected populations. The coherence of the human right system was at the core of the reforms engaged by the Secretary-General. The Human Rights Council had for many years demonstrated the importance of how it could work on the prevention of human rights violations, through regular sessions, the work of investigative and accountability bodies, Special Procedures and the Universal Periodic Review etc. Next week the Secretary-General would present a report on the financing of technical assistance which made recommendations on how to attract more support.

Source: UN Human Rights Council

By pr web

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.