Bottom Line: The Election Of New Members Of The United Nations Human Rights Commission
The recent election of new members of the United Nations Human Rights Council deepened and signifies the importance of human rights and demonstrate the emerging shift from the myopic perception of human rights infringement by Western democratic nations against smaller and often perceived non-democratic countries. The election of North Korea, Cuba, India, China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia to the Council demonstrates this shift and calls for congratulation on the entire nations involved in the voting and election of new members for their honesty, transparency and impartiality. The Bahamas must be commended for its strong stance in voting in support of Cuba and other successful nations.
The election to many minds may appear to be insignificant but when we look at the legion of allegation of human rights abuse against many nations and in fact against some of these nation just elected to the UN Human Rights Council, one would wonder why the contradictions. Actually, there is no contradiction, because the allegations of human rights abuse against some of these countries are in fact false. The fact that a country such India got as much as 171 votes of the total of 191 votes, "…is a vindication of India’s long history and tradition of democracy and plurality, for the kind of international causes we have straddled," according to a delighted Nirupam Sen, India’s Permanent Representative to the UN.
Historically, nations with alleged negative records on human right abuse are barred from been elected to the UN Human Rights Council. In practical terms, it is easier for a nation or person to change if the spotlight is focused on them rather than when accusation is been alleged from a distance. In addition, some of these newly elected Human Rights Council members have been wrongly alleged to have committed increasing numbers of human rights abuse against its citizen without the world having appreciable understanding of the complexity of the society in which these nations exist and operate.
Just like the concept of democracy which has a simple principle of "one man one vote" but has no general application to all nations due to culture and demographics differences. Hence nations around the world have adopted various strategies to accommodate the uniqueness of the nation existence to determine the nature and operationality of its democratic system, so long as the masses have the final authority to elect the government either directly or indirectly.
In the same vein, human rights consideration must be discussed in the context of national sovereignty, political and legal structures as well as cultural values; hence, the world cannot unilaterally and blankly condemn nations all over the world on the basis of the percieved human rights principles enunciated by the United Kingdom, the United States of America or any other nation. It must be considered on the basis of country geopolitical, economic, social and cultural and legal complexities. Consequently, the United States US envoy to the UN, John Bolton’s criticism of the UN Human Rights Council as seriously flawed is unwelcome and undeserving, and shows the United States unwillingness to give these nations the chance to demonstrate their intentions of improving their human rights conditions if at all they are deficient in human rights management.
The election of Russia, Cuba, India, China, Pakistan, among other members of the United Nations Human Rights Commission is a good sign that the world is emerging from its hegemonic influence to accepting broad diplomatic approach to dealing with global issues particularly the controversial human rights issues. It is certain that if any of these elected countries are guilty of human rights abuse; this will be an opportunity for them to clean their act and prove to the world that they have the deepest respect for human rights.
resa k�penhamn
