Human rights issues get `sanitized' in Geneva

Human rights issues get `sanitized' in Geneva

Endy M. Bayuni, The Jakarta Post, Geneva

In Salle XVII, eight languages are simultaneously spoken, or
rather translated. Yet here in the main conference room in the
Palais des Nations, where the Commission on Human Rights meets
every year, the situation is hushed and orderly. Even the voice
of the speaker can barely be heard. Most people tune in to one of
the channels of the eight simultaneous translations through the
earphone provided.

Each year, the round hall with wooden panel walls takes center
stage on human rights issues. At the podium sits the chairs of
the 61st session, which this year is headed by Makarim Wibisono,
Indonesia's permanent ambassador to the United Nations offices in
Geneva. He normally opens and closes the meeting each day, but in
between, the meetings may be chaired by one of his deputies.

On the floor, the desks are arranged in half circles, and
delegates sit in areas designated by countries organized
alphabetically. On one side, there is a gallery for NGO
representatives. It's free seating here, and some NGO activists
have been forced to stand. A smaller section adjacent is the
press gallery. Although only few or none of the 16 seats reserved
for journalists are occupied at most times, the light-blue
uniformed security officer politely turns away any NGO activists
who try to sit in the press section.

Delegates and NGO observers may troop in and out of the
conference room even as the meeting is under way, others may
speak in hushed tones, and still others take advantage of the
wireless Internet connection inside the hall to browse, check e-
mails, or send instructions to their staff outside.

The atmosphere inside the hall is orderly, and the
discussions, mostly conducted with the help of interpreters, are
cordial and proper.

"I thank the distinguished representative from Georgia. I now
invite the distinguished representative from Hungary," is a
typical remark Makarim would make during the day while chairing a
meeting.

"I thank Mr. President/Chairman..," is the opening line almost
every speaker uses. In the first days, they would congratulate
Mr. Makarim for his appointment, and also congratulate Indonesia
for the democratic elections it held last year.

All this week, virtually all speakers used their precious
limited allotted time to express condolences and pay tribute to
Pope John Paul II before moving on to make a statement.

Such cordiality and diplomatic niceties are observed, though
perhaps not as strictly, by NGO activists, many of whom during a
normal working day are known to be vocal and often loud in order
to be heard, and certainly informal.

The situation here is very diplomatique.

The atmosphere in Salle XVII and the adjacent halls where
delegates meet and talk is a far cry from the very brutal and
barbaric nature of the issues they discuss: killings, mutilation,
suppression, discrimination, torture; you name it, they are all
here.

To say that the 61st Session discusses 1,001 issues is an
understatement: There are literally thousands of issues to be
brought up in the six weeks between March 14 and April 22 that
the session is being held. The commission annually receives
17,000 reports of human rights violations from all parts of the
world.

The explosion of issues can be explained in part by the
growing presence of NGOs. While states are represented by their
respective governments, the commission has accommodated the NGOs
by allocating them time to speak of their issues and concerns.
Perhaps more important to them, the session affords them rare
space and time to lobby and network, not only with fellow NGO
activists, but also with delegates from other countries.

It is, however, the official delegates rather than the NGOs
that control the agenda of the session. The 53 members of the
Commission on Human Rights are also the ones who have the power
to initiate, draft, debate and vote on resolutions.

At the end of the day, every one knows that this is still a
diplomatic affair, where protocol and ethics must be observed,
and cordiality must always be extended. For the unfamiliar, the
Geneva Convention takes on a completely different meaning here.

"It's the only time in the year that I wear a suit," confesses
Choirul Anam, a member of the Human Rights Working Group that is
coordinating the non-governmental organizations in Indonesia at
this session.

"We have to play by the rules," Rafendy Jamin, Choirul's
colleague, concedes. "Or else, we will be barred from taking part
in the future."

Making his 14th consecutive appearance in Geneva this year,
Rafendy says his organization and affiliates are using their
combined 12 entitlements to take the floor in plenary meetings to
speak for three minutes at a time. Rafendy and his colleagues
also actively distribute written statements, and have organized
many side meetings during the six weeks to try to get their
message across.

The cordiality does not necessarily shield the brutal reality
of the issues they discuss in Geneva. And the resolutions do have
an impact sometimes on the observation of human rights throughout
the world, albeit indirectly.

The final two weeks of the session beginning on Monday will be
used to discuss, debate and pass various resolutions. While these
resolutions are non-binding on the states concerned, they still
put tremendous pressure on states to comply or at least
cooperate.

Most important of these resolutions is the appointment of
special rapporteurs and representatives to look into particular
issues in one or more countries, or what many delegate fear most,
to look specifically into their country's records.

This year, 21 countries are under the commission's spotlight:
Colombia, Sudan including Darfur, Iraq, occupied Palestine,
occupied Syrian Golan, Cuba, North Korea, Belarus, Myanmar,
Cyprus, Cambodia, Somalia, Burundi, Liberia, the Democratic
Republic of Congo, Chad, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, Haiti, Nepal
and East Timor.

Indonesia had been a target country for much of the 1990s.
Today, Indonesia is no longer one, but that does not mean
Indonesia is spared from the wrath of the commission. Indonesia
is still mentioned in some thematic reports such as on freedom of
expression and on human rights defenders.

Rafendy says the whole Geneva exercise may have sanitized the
issues because of protocol necessity, but a lot of good does come
out of this process. At least as far as the NGOs are concerned,
this is the place to build support and solidarity to add external
pressure on states, in his case the Indonesian government, to
comply with international norms and to meet their human rights
obligations.

He recalled the establishment of the National Commission on
Human Rights by then president Soeharto in 1993 as an example of
the result of pressure that came out Geneva. There have been
other measures taken since then, partly though not wholly, in
response to international pressure, like the appointment of
special rapporteurs in Geneva.

"Sometimes it takes outside pressure to force the government
to change," Rafendy says.