Today the debate concluded under item 2 (country violations). Item 5 (discrimination) was opened and the first paper, on discrimination based on work and descent, was presented. The NGO Forum was held in the afternoon co-sponsored by Minnesota Advocates and Geneva for Human Rights, to discuss ways to improve the Sub-Commission's discussions under item 2. Attendance and feedback from the Forum was very good. And the Working Group on activities and methods of transnational corporations held its first meeting of the year in the afternoon.
Today's item 2 debate concluded with virtually all members of the Sub-Commission participating. By the end of the discussion 23 of 25 possible members had spoken. This was a much better participation than in prior years, and perhaps a new record for participation (for example, only 10 members spoke under item 2 last year). Nearly every speaker emphasized the value of item 2 and the need to find ways to improve its usefulness to NGOs and members. Most also favored the preparation of a joint working paper by next year to further explore these ideas. Several speakers thanked Minnesota Advocates for sparking the debate and the search for new ideas.
It would also appear from the comments of several members that several draft resolutions will be proposed under this agenda item this year. If true, then this too would be another sign that the discussion under this item has been much revitalized. In the previous three years either one resolution only or no resolutions were tabled under this agenda item.
Mr. Pinheiro (expert from Brazil) gave a concluding presentation, summarizing the debate, and commenting on the distribution of country situations. He also said, "I like to think of item 2 as sort of the 'laboratory' for our think tank. It is where new ideas can emerge by examining the country violations that are occurring and by identifying new patterns, gaps where new mechanisms or new implementation activities could take place, and preventive mechanisms that could better head off these problems."
The decision had been delayed for several days on who would be the Rapporteur of the session. The rapporteur is the 5th member of the Bureau which decides on procedural and scheduling matters during the session, as well as the person who is responsible for producing the final report and summary records of the session.
By customary rotation, it was the turn this year for the Latin American regional group to nominate a rapporteur. It was hoped that Ms. Florizelle O'Connor, expert from Jamaica, would arrive and be asked to serve in this post. Apparently it is not clear whether Ms. O'Connor is coming to this year's session. Thus Mr. Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, expert from Brazil, was nominated and elected to serve as rapporteur.
The TNC working group met for its first time this afternoon. The five members of the working group this year are Mr. Guisse (Senegal), Mr. Alfonso Martinez (Cuba), Mrs. Chung (South Korea), Mr. Alfredsson (Iceland), and Mr. Biro (Hungary). But the meeting was also attended by 11 other members, Bossuyt (Belgium), Chen (China), Charif (Tunisia), Decaux (France), Hampson (UK), Wadibia-Anyanwu (and her alternate Mbonu) (Nigeria), Rivkin (US), Salama (Egypt), Sorabjee (India), Warzazi and Yokota (and his alternate, Hayashi, Japan).
Remarkably, the working group meeting was also attended by 26 government organizations, Cameroon, Canada, the Council of Europe, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mauritius, Mexico, Palestine, Saint Sege, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Syria, and the United Kingdom.
The main item of discussion was what the working group should be focussing on now. Last year the draft norms on responsibilities of TNCs and business enterprises were adopted unanimously by the Working Group and Sub-Commission. This spring the parent body, the Commission on Human Rights, had severely criticized the Sub-Commission for submitting these draft norms, stating that they were not legally binding, had not been requested, would be taken up at the Commission level, and that the Sub-Commission was not to do any type of monitoring work on the standards. Many of the governments who participated in this decision at the Commission were in the room at the working group meeting.
In particular, after about an hour of deliberations the Government of Egypt asked to speak and questioned why almost 90% of the discussion so far had been about the draft norms. Didn't the working group understand that their work on the draft norms was now finished? This was now being taken up by the Commission.
Two of the three new members of the working group (Biro and Alfredsson) expressed reservations about the norms themselves. Mr. Alfredsson said he doubted he would have joined the consensus if he had been on the working group last year. Several members, both experts on the working group and other members of the Sub-Commission attending, questioned the need to continue the Working Group's existence at all. The three-year mandate of the working group is set to expire this year, and would require a new resolution renewing it for an additional mandate. At this point it seems doubtful that this mandate will be renewed.
It appeared approximately 100 people attended the meeting organized by Minnesota Advocates and Geneva for Human Rights in the afternoon. Questionaires were handed out, soliciting NGO input on ways and means to improve the deliberations under item 2. A few experts of the Sub-Commission attended portions of the meeting. While the NGOs present were surprisingly quiet, with very few volunteering to speak, the feedback later was that the program was very helpful to understanding the issues underlying the current controversy, and expressing solidarity for the improvements that Minnesota Advocates and Geneva for Human Rights were trying to accomplish. A report will be prepared to summarize the findings of the questionaire, and the comments and suggestions made during the program.
We're staying at the John Knox Center while we're here in Geneva. It's located in a beautiful setting in the community of Grand Sacconex, about a 25 minute walk from the UN. We've included a few photos of the view from our room.
Tomorrow, Friday, the Sub-Commission will continue its discussion under agenda item 5, discrimination.