US cautious over draft charter for new UN human rights body

US: John Bolton, the US ambassador to the United Nations, has called for the reopening of negotiations on a new human rights…

US: John Bolton, the US ambassador to the United Nations, has called for the reopening of negotiations on a new human rights council, a move that senior UN officials and some human rights advocates warned could jeopardise the creation of a new agency to sanction rights-violators.

Mr Bolton said that a draft charter made public on Thursday by president of the UN General Assembly Jan Eliasson did not include US amendments designed to exclude rights-abusers from the council, including a requirement that, to join the council, states must obtain support from two-thirds of the 191 assembly members.

"This draft certainly does not live up to the expectations set by the secretary general when he launched the process," Mr Bolton told reporters. "And I don't think anybody claims that and, in fact, the strongest argument in favour of this draft is that it's not as bad as it could be."

Mr Bolton did not rule out the possibility that US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice might still endorse the new council, saying the US will decide after "further review what position to take on this".

READ MORE

He said "one option at this moment is to open up real international negotiations".

His remarks placed him at odds with secretary general Kofi Annan and leaders of human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which urged states to support the proposal.

They expressed fears that reopening negotiations just weeks before the Human Rights Commission is scheduled to meet in Geneva would prompt countries to oppose the new council.

The draft would make next month's commission meting its last.

"Obviously the proposal isn't everything I asked for in my report, but I think it's a credible basis for moving ahead," said Mr Annan, who called in December 2004 for a new human rights group.

"I don't think anyone can claim this is old wine in a new bottle," he added. "Now is the time for the membership to support the president's compromise text and adopt a resolution in the coming days."

The new council would replace the 53-member human rights commission, which has granted membership to governments with abysmal rights records. Commission members have been selected by a system of regional rotation that makes no distinction between rights advocates and abusers.

Among the key issues of contention is how members would be chosen for the new council.

The US believes requiring a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly would prevent rights-abusers from being selected.

Thursday's draft resolution, however, calls for a new council, with 47 members elected on the basis of "geographical distribution" by simple majority vote of the assembly. Members could be suspended by a vote of two-thirds of the assembly, and would have to commit to "uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights".

Kenneth Roth, executive director of the New York-based Human Rights Watch, said the current draft was "significantly" better than the existing human rights council and worth supporting.

He and other activists said the new draft contains several improvements, including increasing the number of meetings and subjecting member nations' rights records to scrutiny.

"This draft is far from perfect," he said. "There is no reason to believe that more negotiations would yield a better text - and much reason to believe the opposite."