HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL: GA PRESIDENT PRESENTS NEW

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000344 SIPDIS SIPDIS FROM AMBASSADOR BOLTON E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/23/2016 TAGS: PHUM KUNR UNGA PREL SUBJECT: HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL: GA PRESIDENT PRESENTS NEW TEXT REF: A. USUN 293 ¶B. USUN 108 ¶C. USUN 166 ¶D. USUN 257 ¶E. STATE 2397 ¶F. MEHRA-WOLFF/ZACK E-MAIL OF FEBRUARY 17 Classified By: Ambassador John R. Bolton, U.S. Representative to the Un ited Nations, for reasons 1.4(b) and (d). ¶1. (C) Summary and Comment: General Assembly (GA) President Eliasson presented February 23 to the GA his final text on the HRC (septel). As foreshadowed in earlier reporting (reftels),Eliasson settled on arrangements for the HRC that fall short of U.S. positions on all key points: -- size: Eliasson text: 47; U.S. position: initially 20, now up to 45; current Commission: 53; -- voting threshold: Eliasson text: individual absolute majority of 96 for each candidate; U.S. position: 2/3 majority for each candidate; current Commission: majority of present and voting (and de facto vote by acclamation); and, -- membership criteria: Eliasson text: hortatory standards and theoretical suspension mechanism; U.S. position: exclusions for countries under UNSC sanctions for human rights or terrorism reasons; current Commission: no criteria. In addition to these key elements, we have highlighted in paras 5-6 where Eliasson's new text disregards U.S. positions, where he has improved language over the previous text, and where he has introduced new elements. ¶2. (C) The negative elements of the current text are compounded by the major setback for western interests introduced in Eliasson's previous text (and retained in the current one) whereby the adoption of "equitable geographic distribution" reduces the number of WEOG seats (from ten to seven) on the proposed Council -- and with it the number of available seats for which the U.S. could vie. Under the new Council, Africa would get 13 seats, Asia 13, GRULAC 8, WEOG 7 and Eastern Europe 6, ensuring a permanent majority for Asia and Africa. ¶3. (C) UN Secretary General Annan has publicly endorsed the current text, and most like-minded delegations (including the EU, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand) have signaled that their capitals are likely to accept Eliasson's text, not so much because they are happy with it (the UK told us the text crossed some of their red lines),but because they fear a vacuum without it. From where we sit, we see modest improvements over the Commission in this text (e.g., direct elections of each member, establishment of the principle of suspension, stronger language on human rights principles) outweighed by those elements that do not improve -- or even diminish -- the Commission's effectiveness and credibility (e.g., fewer Western seats, term limits, no binding mechanism to improve quality of membership). Ultimately, this new Council will be judged by the composition of its membership and its ability to admonish human rights violators. Eliasson's text does not guarantee either. End Summary and Comment. ¶4. (C) Action Request: Eliasson intends to move for adoption of his draft resolution next week and foresees no further negotiations. We request instructions to reopen February 24 objectionable provisions in direct intergovernmental negotiations. End Action Request. ¶5. (C) Additional Points Regarding the New Text follow: -- PP1: maintains the February 1 text regarding "developing friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples..." (U.S. sought deletion or less prominent placement in the text.) -- PP 2: maintains language "reaffirming" the Vienna Declaration (U.S. sought "recalling" vice "reaffirming") -- PP 7: is a new paragraph "Affirming the need for all States to continue international efforts to enhance dialogue and broaden understanding among civilizations, cultures and religions and emphasizing that States, regional organizations, non-governmental organizations, religious bodies and the media have an important role to play in promoting tolerance, respect for and freedom of religion and belief." (Note: This is in response to Pakistan/OIC proposals to address the issue of respect for religions and cultures, but is not the original proposed language.) -- PP 12 and OP 4: maintain references to the right to development (U.S. sought deletion) -- OP 5(d): continues to read "promote...the follow-up of the goals and commitments related to the promotion and protection of human rights emanating from United Nations conferences and summits" (U.S. sought deletion of the paragraph, or to insert "relevant" before "UN conferences and summits.")(Note: The December 19 Co-Chairs text referred to "all" UN conferences and summits.) -- OP 5(e): maintains language on the universal periodic review. A new sentence has been added to say "The Council shall develop the modalities and necessary time allocation of the universal periodic review mechanism within one year after the holding of its first session." -- OP 5(f): Language is changed to read "the prevention of human rights violations and respond promptly to human rights emergencies" (vice February 1 text "respond promptly to deteriorating human rights situations). (The U.S. had proposed a reference to responding to "emergencies" in this paragraph for an earlier draft of the text.) -- OP 5(i): maintains language from the last text "make recommendations with regard to the promotion and protection of human rights" (This text neither specifies to which bodies recommendations might be made, as we might have hoped, nor does it call for recommendations to or through the General Assembly, as many delegations had requested, but which we opposed.) -- OP 6: Text still decides that the HRC will assume, review and where necessary improve and rationalize all mandates, mechanisms functions and responsibilities of the CHR "in order to maintain" a system of special procedures, expert advise and individual complaint procedure. Language remains unchanged from the February 1 text, except for the deletion of the word "individual" in reference to the CHR's complaint procedure and now calling for completion of the review "within" one year after the first HRC session. (U.S. sought to make the language, particularly "in order to maintain them," less strong.) -- OP 7: Size of the HRC in the new text is 47 (vice 45 in the February 1 text),and members are to be elected by the majority of members of the General Assembly (vice two-thirds or simple majority of the members present and voting). The allocation of seats to the regional groups "based on equitable geographic distribution" is therefore modified, with the African Group getting 13, the Asian Group 13, the Eastern European Group 6, GRULAC 8 and WEOG 7. (The new text maintains the language that HRC members shall be elected "directly and individually by secret ballots.") -- OP 8: OP 8 has been changed. The GA President's February 23 text includes a new sentence which reads: "The General Assembly, by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting, may suspend the rights of membership in the Council of a member of the Human Rights Council that commits gross and systematic violations of human rights." The new text deletes the third sentence of the February 1 text (which had called for Member States, when electing HRC members, to take into account whether there are any situations that constitute systematic and gross violations of human rights or any agreed measures currently in place at the United Nations against a candidate for human rights violations). The second sentence also has been modified slightly in the new text to read "When electing members of the Council, Member States shall take into account the candidates' contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights and their voluntary pledges and commitments made thereto." -- OP 9: Text was strengthened to read Members elected to the Council "shall uphold" the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights (vice February 1 text "shall be guided by" the highest standards). -- OP 10: The text calls for "not fewer than" three sessions (vice "meetings") per year, including a main session for a total duration of no less than 10 weeks. Special sessions can be held at the request of an HRC member with the support of one-third of the HRC membership. (There is no provision for the additional possibility of meetings to be called by the High Commissioner for Human Rights or the Secretary-General, as we preferred. U.S. also called for SIPDIS meetings to be agreed by a simple majority of the Council.) ¶6. Other small modifications to the text: -- PP 10: Small modification to refer to strengthening the capacity of Member States to comply with their human rights obligations for the benefit of all "human beings" (vice February 1 text referring to "all rights holders.") -- P 5(a): Modification for providing technical assistance and capacity building "in consultation with and with the consent of the Members States concerned" (vice February 1 text "in consultation and with the consent of Member States). -- OP 13: Small modification to the date for abolishment of the CHR on June 16 (vice June 15 in February 1 text) -- OP 15: Small modification to the date for the first meeting of the Council to be held on June 19 (vice June 16 in February 1 text). BOLTON