Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07STATE60672
2007-05-04 18:36:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Secretary of State
Cable title:
DEMARCHE: HOLDING THE LINE ON UN COUNTRY-SPECIFIC
how-toVZCZCXYZ0000 PP RUEHWEB DE RUEHC #0672 1241842 ZNR UUUUU ZZH P 041836Z MAY 07 FM SECSTATE WASHDC TO RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 0000 RUEHOT/AMEMBASSY OTTAWA PRIORITY 0000 RUEHPG/AMEMBASSY PRAGUE PRIORITY 0000 RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL PRIORITY 0000 RUEHTC/AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE PRIORITY 0000 RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO PRIORITY 0000 RUEHWR/AMEMBASSY WARSAW PRIORITY 0000 INFO RUEHSK/AMEMBASSY MINSK PRIORITY 0000 RUEHGO/AMEMBASSY RANGOON PRIORITY 0000 RUEHUB/USINT HAVANA PRIORITY 0000 RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE PRIORITY 0000 RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 0000 RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA PRIORITY 0000
UNCLAS STATE 060672
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: HUMAN PHUM PREL EUN
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE: HOLDING THE LINE ON UN COUNTRY-SPECIFIC
SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS
REF: GENEVA 975
UNCLAS STATE 060672
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: HUMAN PHUM PREL EUN
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE: HOLDING THE LINE ON UN COUNTRY-SPECIFIC
SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS
REF: GENEVA 975
1. (U) This is an action request. Please see paragraph 3.
SUMMARY
--------------
2. (SBU) The sixth regular session of the UN Human Rights
Council (HRC) in June will chiefly address the final
outstanding institution-building and transitional issues left
over from the now-defunct UN Commission on Human Rights
(CHR). The most contentious of these issues is what to do
about the existing Special Rapporteur mandates, specifically
those country mandates created under CHR agenda Item 9.
Persistent rumors of a package deal whereby the Cuba and
Belarus mandates would be eliminated to preserve Burma and
North Korea mandates continue to circulate, but has not been
formally proposed. Though the U.S. is not a member of the
HRC, the U.S. strongly believes that no Item 9
country-specific mandate inherited by the HRC should be
eliminated. (Note: The risk of loss of the Cuba and Belarus
mandates are particularly high, as Cuba is a current member
of the HRC. Belarus is running for a seat on the Council,
and at present is likely to win on May 17. Both have already
lobbied extensively to end the manda
tes for the country-specific Special Rapporteurs on Belarus
and Cuba. End Note.) As no single HRC member is likely to
successfully resist such a package, the U.S. will call upon a
core group of HRC members to provide a center from which to
fight the loss of any country-specific mandates. This effort
will require heavy lifting from both the Department and
Posts. End Summary.
OBJECTIVES
--------------
3. (SBU) Posts are instructed to pursue the following
objectives:
-- Urge host governments to resist strongly the loss of any
Item 9 country-specific mandates inherited by the HRC from
the CHR.
-- Convey to governments deep concern that the acceptance of
the rumored package deal to eliminate the mandates on Cuba
and Belarus to save all other mandates rewards the repressive
Castro and Lukashenko regimes, and would also send the
message that continued human rights violations are of little
concern to the world community.
-- Remind host-governments that an institution-building phase
that results in the loss of the Cuba and Belarus mandates
would critically undermine the HRC "institutional gains" and
would constitute a pyrrhic victory.
-- Urge host governments to work with other like-minded HRC
members to resist the erosion of one of the most significant
protective mechanisms in the HRC's arsenal.
-- Press host governments to lobby other HRC members to
reject any package deal on country-specific or thematic
mandates that compromises the ability of the HRC to monitor
the human rights situation the world over.
REPORTING DEADLINE
--------------
4. (U) Posts should report results of efforts by cable to
DRL/MLGA - Laura Jordan and IO/RHS - Deepa Ghosh before May
10.
BACKGROUND
--------------
5. (SBU) The Governments of Cuba and Belarus have demanded
that both of their country mandates be eliminated, and they
seem to have garnered the support in the Like-Minded Group,
portions of the NAM, OIC, and African Groups. We continue to
hear in public statements that Western Group members remain
united in asserting that all country mandates (vote (Item 9)
and consensus (Item 19)) be retained. Mission Geneva has
heard, however, from Canada, Czech Republic, and a handful of
others that they fear we may be fighting a losing battle.
Japan has been very active in calling for the retention of
all for the retention of all country mandates. The latest
version of the facilitator's paper contains the following
formulation: "66. Rationalized mandates could newly operate
within unified cycle (e.g. two years for thematic and country
mandates). Mandates could be extended in four different
groups, according to their original date of expiration. The
mandate-holders approaching or exceeding the maximum length
of fu
nction (i.e. 6 years) should be replaced, while reflecting on
the administrative burden to establish new selection
procedure. Rationalized mandates could be reviewed again
when up for renewal, in order to enable the stable
surrounding of a system." This leaves the Item 9 country
mandates immediately vulnerable, since former practice under
the Commission was to renew the mandates annually.
POINT OF CONTACT
--------------
6. (U) Please contact DRL/MLGA - Laura Jordan at
202-647-0293 or via email for further information or
argumentation to meet our objectives. Department appreciates
Embassy assistance on this important issue.
RICE
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: HUMAN PHUM PREL EUN
SUBJECT: DEMARCHE: HOLDING THE LINE ON UN COUNTRY-SPECIFIC
SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS
REF: GENEVA 975
1. (U) This is an action request. Please see paragraph 3.
SUMMARY
--------------
2. (SBU) The sixth regular session of the UN Human Rights
Council (HRC) in June will chiefly address the final
outstanding institution-building and transitional issues left
over from the now-defunct UN Commission on Human Rights
(CHR). The most contentious of these issues is what to do
about the existing Special Rapporteur mandates, specifically
those country mandates created under CHR agenda Item 9.
Persistent rumors of a package deal whereby the Cuba and
Belarus mandates would be eliminated to preserve Burma and
North Korea mandates continue to circulate, but has not been
formally proposed. Though the U.S. is not a member of the
HRC, the U.S. strongly believes that no Item 9
country-specific mandate inherited by the HRC should be
eliminated. (Note: The risk of loss of the Cuba and Belarus
mandates are particularly high, as Cuba is a current member
of the HRC. Belarus is running for a seat on the Council,
and at present is likely to win on May 17. Both have already
lobbied extensively to end the manda
tes for the country-specific Special Rapporteurs on Belarus
and Cuba. End Note.) As no single HRC member is likely to
successfully resist such a package, the U.S. will call upon a
core group of HRC members to provide a center from which to
fight the loss of any country-specific mandates. This effort
will require heavy lifting from both the Department and
Posts. End Summary.
OBJECTIVES
--------------
3. (SBU) Posts are instructed to pursue the following
objectives:
-- Urge host governments to resist strongly the loss of any
Item 9 country-specific mandates inherited by the HRC from
the CHR.
-- Convey to governments deep concern that the acceptance of
the rumored package deal to eliminate the mandates on Cuba
and Belarus to save all other mandates rewards the repressive
Castro and Lukashenko regimes, and would also send the
message that continued human rights violations are of little
concern to the world community.
-- Remind host-governments that an institution-building phase
that results in the loss of the Cuba and Belarus mandates
would critically undermine the HRC "institutional gains" and
would constitute a pyrrhic victory.
-- Urge host governments to work with other like-minded HRC
members to resist the erosion of one of the most significant
protective mechanisms in the HRC's arsenal.
-- Press host governments to lobby other HRC members to
reject any package deal on country-specific or thematic
mandates that compromises the ability of the HRC to monitor
the human rights situation the world over.
REPORTING DEADLINE
--------------
4. (U) Posts should report results of efforts by cable to
DRL/MLGA - Laura Jordan and IO/RHS - Deepa Ghosh before May
10.
BACKGROUND
--------------
5. (SBU) The Governments of Cuba and Belarus have demanded
that both of their country mandates be eliminated, and they
seem to have garnered the support in the Like-Minded Group,
portions of the NAM, OIC, and African Groups. We continue to
hear in public statements that Western Group members remain
united in asserting that all country mandates (vote (Item 9)
and consensus (Item 19)) be retained. Mission Geneva has
heard, however, from Canada, Czech Republic, and a handful of
others that they fear we may be fighting a losing battle.
Japan has been very active in calling for the retention of
all for the retention of all country mandates. The latest
version of the facilitator's paper contains the following
formulation: "66. Rationalized mandates could newly operate
within unified cycle (e.g. two years for thematic and country
mandates). Mandates could be extended in four different
groups, according to their original date of expiration. The
mandate-holders approaching or exceeding the maximum length
of fu
nction (i.e. 6 years) should be replaced, while reflecting on
the administrative burden to establish new selection
procedure. Rationalized mandates could be reviewed again
when up for renewal, in order to enable the stable
surrounding of a system." This leaves the Item 9 country
mandates immediately vulnerable, since former practice under
the Commission was to renew the mandates annually.
POINT OF CONTACT
--------------
6. (U) Please contact DRL/MLGA - Laura Jordan at
202-647-0293 or via email for further information or
argumentation to meet our objectives. Department appreciates
Embassy assistance on this important issue.
RICE