Universal Periodic Review: Milestone in the Shared History of the UN and the US
The following Universal Periodic Review was submitted to the United Nations Association-USA on 30 March 2010 on behalf of the United Nations Association-USA East Bay Chapter, and the Northern California Division, by Advocacy Vice-President Rita Maran.
I. Prologue
For the first time in the history of this country and in the history of the United Nations, the US Department of State is preparing a report for the UN Human Rights Council on human rights as promised by the government and as actually lived by the people in the United States.
A part of that “First” pertains to Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who are contributing their own organizations’ reports which the US government will present before the UN Human Rights Council, as formally requested by the State Department. Naturally, there will in the end be thousands of reports, each of them chronicling in 5 to 10 pages a report of each organization’s work on human rights. The State Department will submit a relatively short report of approximately 20 pages in all to the Human Rights Council in November 2010.
II. Introduction
A. The UNA-USA East Bay Chapter (the Chapter) of northern California, one of approximately 120 UNA chapters across the United States, hereby submits a report to be considered in connection with the U.S. Department of State report for the Universal Periodic Review to be conducted by the United Nations Human Rights Council in November 2010.
Further, this report has been approved and is signed also in the name also of the UNA-USA Northern California Division (NCD). [footnote 1]
B. The commitment of the United States to its legal obligations arising from international treaties has come under question in recent years. US repudiation of the Kyoto Protocol; the “unsigning” of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; the refusal to ratify a number of treaties enjoying near-universal support, and the willingness to disregard existing international legal obligations such as those arising from the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and from the Four Geneva Conventions, have led the Chapter to redouble efforts to bring about the desired improvements in that arena.
C. International human rights law and international humanitarian law have been fundamental components of US foreign policy since the United States helped to create the United Nations in 1945, in order to maintain “respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law,” as cited among other founding principles. In today’s interdependent world, the need for a widely-accepted, rules-based international system is more pronounced than ever before—particularly for the United States, which has economic and security interests spanning the globe. The United States, as one of the world’s leading economic and military powers, must no longer limit itself to only selectively recognizing international legal commitments that the majority of member states of the United Nations uphold.
D. The 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) need to be more completely adhered to in terms of promised budgetary appropriations as well as integration into domestic and foreign policy decision-making.
III. Recommendations:
~ Encourage the US Government to adhere fully to international treaties it has ratified, and to the eight Millennium Development Goals.
~ Call on the Senate and the Administration to ratify widely-supported international treaties that would advance U.S. national interests and the well-being of its citizens.
~ Support the important role of the UN in promoting human rights.
Best Practices: In May 2009, the United States ran for and was elected to a three-year term on the Human Rights Council. In November 2009, President Obama nominated Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe to serve as the first U.S. Ambassador to the Human Rights Council. Donahoe was confirmed by the Senate in March 2010.
Best Practices: In 2009, Congress and the President provided funding to pay all UN arrears accumulated since the 1999 Helms-Biden bill, and to begin the process of returning to an on-time payment schedule for U.S. dues to international organizations.
IV. Ratification of twelve international treaties
_ Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
◆ Convention on the Rights of the Child
_ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
◆ Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of
Their Families
◆ Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
-- *Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [ratified by US 1970; current goal is to reaffirm and to strengthen implementation]
◆ Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
◆ Convention on the Law of the Sea
◆ Kyoto Protocols [as updated]
◆ Statute of the International Criminal Court
◆ Convention on Cluster Munitions
◆ Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of
Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction
Best Practices: As agreed with each Congress Member’s legislative aide, the Chapter routinely gathers signatures on a petition in support of ratification* of 12 treaties named above. Each spring, on the occasion of the Chapter’s annual Advocacy visits in local district offices and in Washington, D.C., offices, the Chapter presents copies of all signatures on petitions to both US Senators and to Representatives in the 8th and 9th Congressional Districts.
A. Human Rights Treaties Ratified by the US
It is noted with appreciation that the US, as a ratifying state of three of the nine core human rights treaties that follow, duly continues to fulfill the obligation to report to the committee established under each respective treaty.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; in force 1976, and ratified by the US in 1992;
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, in force 1987, and ratified by the US in 1994;
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, in force 1969, and ratified by the US in 1994.
B. Remaining Human Rights Treaties
The East Bay Chapter actively educates about and advocates for ratification by the US government of the remaining six unratified human rights treaties; namely,
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in force 1976, and signed by President Carter in 1978;
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, in force 1981;
Convention on the Rights of the Child, in force 1990; signed by President Clinton in 1995;
Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, in force 2003;
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in force 2008;
International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, adopted by General Assembly on 20 December 2006. The treaty will enter into force following the 20th instrument of ratification.
Recommendation: On-time reporting needs to be improved.
Best Practices: The Council of the City of Berkeley unanimously approved adoption of the operative Articles of CEDAW, as requested by the Peace & Justice Commission and the UNA-USA East Bay Chapter. The Articles are in the process of being incorporated into Berkeley Municipal Code.
Best Practices: The Chapter is submitting this report to join those currently being assembled in the Bay area for transmittal to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, in connection with the first Universal Periodic Review of the US by the Human Rights Council in December 2010.
Best Practices: The Chapter is also submitting this report to join those currently being assembled by the UNA-USA in connection with the first Universal Periodic Review of the US by the Human Rights Council in December 2010.
APPENDIX
Treaties – Random Selections
1. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by UN General Assembly on December 18, 1979, CEDAW has been coined the international bill of rights for women. Thus far, 186 states have ratified or acceded to the treaty. The seven UN member states that have not become parties to the treaty include Iran, Nauru, Palau, Somalia, Sudan, Tonga, and the Holy See (the Vatican). Although the United States signed the convention under the Carter administration on July 17, 1980, it remains the only state that has signed but not ratified CEDAW. However, CEDAW is currently on a priority list of 17 UN treaties that the Obama administration sent to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on May 11, 2009 urging ratification.
Part I of the convention lays out the duties of the state, guarantees of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms, and calls for the elimination of sex role stereotyping and prejudice. Article 1 defines discrimination against women as any “distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of marital status, on the basis of equality between men and women, of human rights or fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil, or any other field.”
Part II protects the political and civil rights of women while Part III seeks to ensure equal social and economic opportunities especially in the realms of education and employment. Part IV, in addition to according “women equality with men before the law,” secures marital and family rights for women. Oversight is laid out in Part V, which introduces the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and the role of specialized agencies in protecting the aforementioned rights. CEDAW concludes with Part VI, which defines its effect on other treaties, commitment of party states, and the administration of the convention.
The Optional Protocol to CEDAW:
In addition, it is strongly recommended that the US government ratify the Optional Protocol to CEDAW, by which each ratifying state recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women to consider complaints from an individual.
2. Convention on the Rights of the Child
The United Nations human rights treaty, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), is considered a pro-family human rights treaty. From 1979 to 1989, religious leaders, social workers, educators, attorneys, doctors, legislators and family advocates from all over the world worked together to develop basic standards and language for the protection of children and families sensitive, to the cultural, religious and child-rearing practices of United Nations member states. The U.S. was heavily involved in drafting the treaty, under both the Reagan and Bush administrations. In 1989, when the United Nations adopted the treaty and made it available for ratification, it was ratified by more nations in a shorter period of time than any other treaty in United Nations history. The United States and Somalia stand alone as the only eligible nations in the world that have not ratified this treaty, which is widely acclaimed for the comprehensive standards it establishes to improve the laws and policies of nations on children’s issues.
The Convention sets out the rights of the child in 54 articles and subsequently in two separate Optional Protocols (*see below). While the U.S. has not ratified the Convention, it has ratified both Optional Protocols to the Convention. The Convention spells out the basic human rights of children everywhere: the right to survival; to develop to the fullest; to protection from harmful influences, abuse and exploitation; and to participate fully in family, cultural and social life. The four core principles of the Convention are non-discrimination; devotion to the best interests of the child; the right to life, survival and development; and respect for the views of the child. Every right spelled out in the Convention is inherent to the human dignity and harmonious development of every child. The Convention protects children's rights by setting standards in health care; education; and legal, civil and social services.
By agreeing to undertake the obligations of the Convention which is done by ratifying or acceding to it, national governments have committed themselves to protecting and ensuring children's rights, and they have agreed to hold themselves accountable for this commitment before the international community. States parties to the Convention are obliged to develop and undertake all actions and policies in the light of the best interests of the child.
Two Optional Protocols to The Convention on the Rights of the Child
*Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflicts. Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution
A/RES/54/263 of 25 May 2000; entered into force on 12 February 2002
*Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography. Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution A/RES/54/263 of 25 May 2000; entered into force on 18 January 2002
********************************************************
3. Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) entered into force on 5 March 1970. The treaty, among other assurances, prevents party states from transferring nuclear weapons or weapon technology, should they already be in possession of them, and places safeguards on the production and use of fissionable material in non-nuclear states. At present, 189 states are party to the treaty, with 4 recognized sovereign states (North Korea, Israel, India, and Pakistan) yet to sign. The inherent security threat presented by non-compliance is evident. The treaty undergoes systematic reviews, the next of which will take place in 2010, with a number of Preparatory Committees before the 2010 review. The last Preparatory Committee was held from 4 – 15 May 2009 in New York. It is imperative that the strongest possible message be sent from US representatives going into the next review, with respect to strengthening safeguards and pressing for inclusion of non-signatories. The US ratified the treaty in 1970.
**********************************************************
4. The Convention on the Law of the Sea (CLOS)
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (CLOS) establishes a legal regime governing commercial, navigational, and environmental aspects of the world’s oceans. As a leading maritime power with one of the world's longest coastlines and some of the earth’s richest waters, the United States stands to benefit perhaps more than any other country from the protections provided by the treaty.
Indeed, the US has long sought the establishment of such a comprehensive, widely accepted legal framework that regulates all uses of the world’s oceans. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, with 158 states parties, including every permanent member of the Security Council except the United States, and all other major industrialized nations, provides just such a framework. United States accession to the treaty would provide vital security, economic, and environmental benefits, and would greatly enhance our influence in the development and interpretation of maritime law.
The treaty was adopted by the United Nations in 1982 and entered into force in 1994. Although the United States played a lead role in drafting the treaty, the Reagan Administration did not sign it owing to concerns relating to certain deep seabed mining provisions. However, since negotiations began in 1973, every US administration has supported the treaty in its entirety except for the deep seabed mining provisions, and the United States has accepted and complied with all other provisions of the treaty.
There is widespread support for the treaty within the United States. The treaty has been endorsed by President Obama; the Departments of State, Defense, and Homeland Security; the US Navy; the US Coast Guard; congressional leaders from both parties; and a large and diverse collection of civil society and business groups, including environmental organizations and associations representing the shipping, fishing, telecommunications, oil and gas, and other oceans industries.
On July 28, 1994, a legally-binding agreement amending the treaty, and addressing all US concerns regarding deep seabed mining, was unanimously adopted by the General Assembly. The US signed the agreement the next day and later that year President Clinton submitted the agreement and the treaty as a package to the Senate for its advice and consent. However, despite being reported out of committee twice since 2004, the treaty has never received a vote on the Senate floor. Both the chairman and ranking minority member of the Foreign Relations Committee support ratification of the treaty, as does the Obama administration.
Becoming a party to the treaty would strengthen US influence over the development and interpretation of ocean law and policy. As a state party, the United States will be able to enjoy full membership in institutions created by the treaty that make crucial decisions on oceans issues, such as the International Seabed Authority, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
The legal protections provided by the treaty are vital to attracting the investments necessary for resource development in this area. For those regions that do not come under any country’s jurisdiction, the treaty establishes regulations for accessing non-living resources and created the International Seabed Authority (ISA) to govern their development. Finally, the treaty protects freedoms of navigation for commercial vessels and the right to deploy and maintain submarine cables and pipelines.
Joining the CLOS would advance US national security by strengthening the global mobility of our armed forces, a key requirement in the war on terrorism. The treaty guarantees extensive navigation and overflight rights to important sea and air lanes that are crucial to our military. It also protects the right of vessels to use normal modes of travel through key international straits, enabling, for instance, submarines to remain submerged and air-capable ships to operate their aircraft. This would allow US forces to hold defensive postures and assume a sufficient level of readiness while traversing some of the world’s most strategic and congested waters, such as the Strait of Hormuz. Furthermore, the treaty requires states parties to cooperate in the suppression of illegal narcotics trafficking, and strengthens our government’s ability to interdict suspicious foreign vessels.
*******************************************************
5. The International Criminal Court
The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established by UN member states in 2002 as a permanent independent court. It holds individuals accountable for atrocity crimes that inevitably include the gravest violations of human rights. The United States has not joined the ICC despite its role as a longtime proponent of the international rule of law and international courts. The ICC is the world’s only permanent international court with jurisdiction to try individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and serious war crimes when national courts are unwilling or unable to act.
The United States participated in the drafting of the Rome Statute of the ICC, and President Clinton signed the treaty at the end of 2000, but did not support ratification owing to concerns about possible politically-motivated prosecutions of U.S. personnel. The Bush administration initially ended all U.S. involvement with the Court, including an unprecedented removal of previous President Clinton's signature by President Bush on the Rome Statute. However, in 2005, the Bush administration allowed the Security Council to refer the situation in Darfur, Sudan, to the Court.
The ICC is moving forward with its work without the participation of the United States. More than 100 countries have joined the ICC, which became operational in 2002, and the Court is currently investigating cases in the Democratic Republic of the Congo; Uganda; the Central African Republic; and Darfur. The Court’s performance to date does not bear out critics’ concerns about politically-motivated or impartial prosecutions.
An "Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues" has been appointed by President Obama. Stephen J. Rapp, appointed and confirmed by the Senate, took office on 8 Sepember, 2009 and attended the ICC Assembly of States' Parties meeting in Kampala, Uganda, in June, 2010.
Recommendation: The US should reinstate the US signature on the Rome Statute, and proceed to ratification of the Rome Statute.
6. UN Climate Change Framework
The threat of climate change is exactly the type of issue that the UN is best suited to address—a truly global challenge that no region can ignore and no nation can resolve acting alone. It is quite natural, therefore, that the United Nations—over the past two decades—has taken the lead in the global fight against climate change by providing a universally-accepted framework for negotiating concerted international action on climate change.
The UN’s leading role on climate change provides a tailor-made example of the organization’s value as a forum for organizing collective global action to address shared problems that no nation can resolve on its own. The issue of climate change also underscores the degree to which today’s most pressing international challenges are most effectively confronted through global engagement and multilateral cooperation.
As the world’s largest economy and a leading emitter of greenhouse gases, the United States has a responsibility to actively and constructively participate in these UN-led negotiations.
Climate change is one of the world’s most pressing and far-reaching challenges. Any effective solution will require intensive diplomatic, economic, scientific, and technological cooperation among all members of the international community.
The United Nations is uniquely positioned to provide the most effective platform for jointly addressing this threat. Under a UN framework, the international community has begun the process of drafting a new global climate agreement. The goal of these negotiations is the establishment of a widely-accepted comprehensive international agreement for preventing catastrophic climate change.
The UN will also play a central role in helping the developing world adapt to climatic changes by promoting measures such as the adoption of clean energy technologies that will enable economic progress with minimal emissions of greenhouse gases. The US and other developed countries should work with and through the UN to help provide developing countries with the financing and technology needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
Recommendations:
~ Promote understanding and awareness of the UN’s role in international climate change negotiations.
~ Encourage US participation and leadership in the UN-led effort to negotiate a successor to the Kyoto Protocol.
Best Practices
The Chapter held two large-scale public meetings in 2008, following the Nobel Peace Prize awarded jointly to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice-President Al Gore,. Members of the UN IPCC were invited to give major addresses on the U. California Berkeley campus on the International Day of Peace, and on UN Day.
[1]The NCD consists of 12 chapters geographically located in Northern California: Mid-peninsula Chapter, Santa Cruz, Monterey Bay, East Bay, Grass Valley, San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma County, Davis, Sacramento, Golden Empire, Sierra Nevada