The Sub-Commission began its debate under item 4 of its agenda today. Papers were presented on the right to drinking water, the effects of debt on human rights, extreme poverty, non-discrimination, and corruption.
This was the final report from Mr. Guisse (Senegal) on his multi-year study on the right to drinking water. Several members congratulated the author on his report during the interactive dialogue that followed the formal presentation of the study. Several remarked that the topic had grown on them as the study proceeded, in light of the potential for conflict and violations where the right to drinking water is at risk. Mr. Kartashkin called as a next step for the consideration of a draft declaration on this topic.
Mr. Salama from Egypt took up a theme he repeated in each of the next several reports under this agenda item -- that the Sub-Commission should be sure when taking up these topics which have cross-disciplinary dimensions and are also being dealt with in other bodies of the UN, that the Sub-Commission's contribution is relevant and useful. He said the Sub-Commission should ask itself in each case, first, what does human rights have to do with this topic, and second, what value can be gained from a human rights perspective on this topic. In each case Mr. Salama said he saw value in the Sub-Commission studying the question at hand, but the scope of the study and its emphasis should always be guided by the above two questions.
Mr. Guisse also presented a new working paper this year on the topic of the crushing human rights impact that foreign debt has on the economies and human rights of developing countries. The topic is not new, and is also being addressed in a number of mechanisms at the Commission on Human Rights, but Mr. Guisse's presentation sparked an interesting exchange of ideas. Several members believe very strongly that this is a serious problem which should be addressed. Mr. Guisse will probably be asked to continue his research into this topic, by providing an expandedworking paper next year.
Mrs. Florizelle O'Connor, expert from Jamaica, spoke briefly on this topic in a statement that seemed to strike a chord with many in the room. We've included a copy of her statement here.Mr. Decaux (expert from France) presented his working paper on interpretation of the so-called "non-discrimination" provision in article 2, paragraph 2 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This is a fairly obscure way of describing a very important topic -- how the international human rights treaties should be interpreted to cover new, emerging types of discrimination, and how to reconcile the slightly different "lists" of factors that can not be discriminated against. The treaty body known as the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had requested the Sub-Commission to study this particular issue to help them formulate a general comment on this particular article 2, paragraph 2, in their treaty, explaining in more detail how it should be interpreted.
This issue is important because if you shouldn't discriminate against persons with different traits, the question becomes, what does discrimination mean in the context of jobs, professions, or other situations where certain distinctions based on age, height, manual dexterity or other physical characteristics might in fact be a permissible factor from which to treat people differently. Mr. Decaux cued up the issue in this working paper and will probably be asked to continue this research with a further working paper next year.
One clear area of controversy regarding this particular issue is whether to include sexual orientation as a grounds for non-discrimination. Mr. Decaux noted several interpretative comments and court cases which now include gender and sexual orientation as a protected characteristic. Mrs. Warzazi (expert from Morocco) and Mrs. Wadibia-Anyanwu (expert from Nigeria) both expressed serious reservations about broadening the scope of this principle to include sexual orientation. Mrs. Warzazi in particular said that certain cultures and religions do not accept such activities or behaviors and it is not appropriate to include them in a protected class in human rights law. Mr. Pinheiro (expert from Brazil) disagreed, pointing out that no one should be discriminated against based on any factor such as this one, especially when the discrimination takes the form of violence or hate crimes. H pointed out that young men and women are suffering real discrimination and physical harm out in the field because of this problem and the Sub-Commission should not ignore it in its work.
Another important ongoing project in the Sub-Commission is the work of the ad hoc working group which is drafting guidelines dealing with the human rights impact of the battle against extreme poverty. This is another project in which a human rights "twist" can add real value to the ongoing debate on how best to eradicate poverty, in particular extreme poverty. One of the most important principles in this regard, is the principle of participation of affected groups in the programmatic decision-making on poverty eradication proposals.
This project is also pathbreaking in another sense -- it involves an ad hoc group of experts, regionally representing all of the world, who are working together "by email" and in occasional face to face meetings, to discuss, deliberate and draft these standards. As such it may form a precedent for other similar projects. The group is scheduled to produce a final working paper next year.
Mrs. Christi Mbonu (expert alternate from Nigeria) was tasked last year to begin a three year study of corruption and its impact on human rights. This year she presented the first report in her study. Many complements were received for her work, with several experts encouraging her to address certain underlooked areas so far. The point made by Mr. Salama earlier, to make sure that projects like this one have a clear human rights focus, was also generally shared by several of the experts. Nonetheless it was felt that this project does have direct impact on the enjoyment of human rights in many countries of the world, and a human rights perspective on its elimination would be well received.
Tomorrow the Sub-Commission will continue its debate under item 4, and hear presentations on reports by Mr. Pinheiro (return of refugee property), Mr. Bengoa (report on the Social Forum), and Mr. Guisse (report on the Working Group on transnational corporations).