Race Issues in the Human Rights Council

Race Issues in the Human Rights Council in 2013

United States views on international law [1] in relation to Race Issues in the Human Rights Council: At the 22nd session of the HRC, the United States voted “no” on the resolution entitled “Intergovernmental Working Group on the Comprehensive Follow-Up to the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, and the Effective Implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.” For background on Durban, see this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2001) at 267-68, this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2007) at 315-17, this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2008) at 284-85, this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2009) at 174-75, this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2010) at 222-23, this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2011) at 159-62, and this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2012) at 148-50. The U.S. explanation of vote from the 22nd session of the HRC in March 2013 is excerpted below.

Some Aspects of Race Issues in the Human Rights Council

The United States is profoundly committed to combating racism and racial discrimination and we firmly believe the United Nations must continue to work with all people and nations to find concrete ways to combat racism and racial discrimination wherever they occur. We will continue to work in partnership with all countries of goodwill to uphold the human rights of all individuals and combat racism, racial discrimination, and related forms of intolerance in all forms and all places. Our concerns about the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA) and its follow up are well known, including its unfair and unacceptable singling out of Israel and its endorsement of overly broad restrictions on freedom of expression. Due to these concerns with the DDPA and given that the Intergovernmental Working Group is focused on implementation of the DDPA, we cannot support renewing the Working Group's mandate, as this resolution does. We must therefore vote no on this text.

Developments

Also at the 22nd session of the HRC, the United States abstained from a resolution on racism and education due to its emphasis on the DDPA. U.N. Doc. A/HRC/RES/22/34. The U.S. explanation of vote on the resolution follows.

Details

The United States strongly supports the goal of this resolution introduced by Brazil, Portugal, Mozambique, and other core group members: promoting education as a way to eliminate racism and racial discrimination. The United States is committed to working with our global partners, both bilaterally and multilaterally, in the fight against racism and racial discrimination, including through education. Early last year the United States and Brazil helped the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) launch a multilateral initiative, “Teaching Respect for All,” to combat racism and promote tolerance. The program will develop policy guidelines and materials that will be made available to interested educators and policymakers wishing to integrate the anti-discrimination theme into existing curricula. In April, the materials will be introduced on a pilot basis in ten countries, including Brazil. Domestically, the United States federal government, as part of its role in public education to support and partner with states, has made it a priority to develop or strengthen initiatives to continue to close achievement and opportunity gaps in education. The U.S. Department of Education's efforts to address racial discrimination have included issuing guidance to help school districts avoid racial isolation and achieve diversity in schools and to address the civil rights implications of student-on-student harassment or bullying based on race, color, and national origin. Against this backdrop, we were pleased when Council members began negotiating this resolution. We hoped that this Council would be able to address an important issue concerning racism while avoiding contentious debates over the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (DDPA). Regrettably, at the insistence of a small number of delegations, the resolution focuses heavily on the DDPA, unnecessarily and excessively preserving and reiterating its language. Our objections to the Durban process and resulting outcome documents are well known. It is unnecessary and inappropriate for this resolution to commemorate or entrench statements made in the DDPA adopted more than ten years ago. Instead, it should focus states on the real-world challenges with respect to combating racism and racial discrimination, including through education. For these reasons, the United States must call a vote and abstain on this resolution.

More

The United States again voted “no” on the annual resolution entitled “From rhetoric to reality: a global call for concrete action against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.” See this world legal encyclopedia (in relation to issues that took place in the year 2012) at 147 for the U.S. explanation of vote on the resolution at the 21st session of the HRC. The U.S. explanation of vote from the 24th session of the HRC in September 2013 is excerpted below.

More

The United States remains fully and firmly committed to combating racism, racial discrimination, and related forms of intolerance. We believe the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (“CERD”) provides comprehensive protections in this area and constitutes the relevant international framework to address all forms of racial discrimination. For the United States, our commitment to combat these problems is rooted in the saddest chapters of our history and reflected in the most cherished values of our union. It is an ongoing challenge. We will continue to work with civil society and all nations of goodwill to combat racism, racial discrimination, and related forms of intolerance in all forms and all places, including through enhancing our implementation of the CERD. We remain deeply concerned about speech that advocates national, racial, or religious hatred, particularly when it constitutes incitement to violence, discrimination, or hostility. However, based on our own experience, the United States remains convinced that the best antidote to offensive speech is not bans and punishments but a combination of three key elements: robust legal protections against discrimination and hate crimes, proactive government outreach to racial and religious groups, and the vigorous protection of freedom of expression, both on-line and off-line.

Race Issues in the Human Rights Council in 2013 (Continuation)

United States views on international law [1] in relation to Race Issues in the Human Rights Council: We regret that we cannot support this resolution for a number of reasons, including the ones described here. We believe it serves as a vehicle to prolong the divisions caused by the Durban conference and its follow-up rather than providing a concrete approach for the international community to combat racism and racial discrimination. Our concerns about the Durban Declaration and Program of Action and the outcome of the Durban review conference are well-known, including the DDPA's unfair and unacceptable singling out of Israel and the endorsement of overly broad restrictions on freedom of expression that run counter to the U.S. commitment to robust free speech. We are also concerned about the resolution's insistence that the UN General Assembly adopt in full the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent's proposed Programme of Action for a Decade for People of African Descent. The Programme of Action's proposal to create several new human rights instruments and programs, will—in our view—do little to advance the needs of those it attempts to serve. At the very least this initiative should be subject to a full and transparent intergovernmental debate. Finally, we underscore our concerns about the additional costs this resolution will impose on the UN's regular budget. In view of the significant constraints on the UN's regular budget, and the limited ability of member states to provide increasing amounts of resources to enable OHCHR to perform the substantial amount of work that this body has requested, we stress the need for this body to consider carefully the resource implications of such requests before making them. For these reasons we cannot support this resolution and have voted no.

Resources

Notes

1. Race Issues in the Human Rights Council in the Digest of United States Practice in International Law

Resources

Notes

1. Race Issues in the Human Rights Council in the Digest of United States Practice in International Law