PORTUGUESE FOLLOW GERMAN STRATEGY FOR UN UNIVERSAL

C O N F I D E N T I A L LISBON 000162

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR DRL, IO

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/17/2019
TAGS: PHUM PREL UN PO
SUBJECT: PORTUGUESE FOLLOW GERMAN STRATEGY FOR UN UNIVERSAL
PERIODIC REVIEW OF HUMAN RIGHTS

REF: 08 STATE 130829


1. (C) SUMMARY: Portugal is preparing for a December
Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the UN Human Rights
Council (HRC). Portuguese MFA Director for Human Rights Sara
Martins outlined Portugal's plan to consult with NGOs,
coordinate a unified GOP response, and prepare for the HRC
Review in December. She noted that Germany and Russia
established different strategies for responding to the HRC's
inquiries, and said Portugal planned to follow the German
model with "murder boards" and one well-prepared spokesperson
to represent the government position. Martins added that the
U.S. decision to return to the HRC and close Guantanamo by
January 2010 would greatly enhance the tenor going into the
UPR in 2010. End summary.


2. (C) Portuguese MFA Director for Human Rights Sara Martins
told us that Portugal had begun consultations over a year ago
to formulate a proactive strategy for its Universal Periodic
Review (UPR) in December 2009. She said the MFA was busily
organizing a first draft of the GOP's report on its progress,
and planned to meet with interested NGOs in April to discuss
the draft and solicit input from civil society. According to
Martins, the German government advised that the Portuguese
follow this "strawman" approach rather than just asking for
NGO feedback generally. She said the NGOs were able to offer
better suggestions when presented with a framework and
recommended that the USG consider a similar approach next
year.


3. (C) After the initial NGO outreach, Martins said the MFA
planned to meet with the Portuguese Parliament's First
Committee, which addresses human rights issues, to encourage
additional GOP input into the report. Although the
Parliament may not have significant input, she said the idea
was to be as inclusive as possible to ensure a united front
at the UN's review process. Likewise, Martins is working
with senior officials at MFA to encourage interagency
involvement, particularly from the Ministry of Interior, to
respond to outstanding issues of excessive police force,
prison conditions, and immigration. Martins admitted that
the same problems that the USG highlights for Portugal in the
annual human rights report are likely to be the areas of
weakness cited by the UN officials.


4. (C) After the GOP submits its report to the UN in October,
it will have two months to prepare for its hearing before the
Human Rights Commission. Martins outlined two approaches -
one recommended by Germany, the other by Russia - to respond
to the panel's questions. The German model, she said, had
the Deputy Foreign Minister as the head of delegation with
representatives from other key agencies. After extensive
"murder boards," the delegation was able to answer any of the
key problem areas and could also respond to any issue
mentioned in the NGO's report to the UN. The Deputy FM
addressed the Commission and took written responses from the
rest of the delegation but was the only speaker. The Russian
model, according to Martins, involved a bigger delegation of
roughly twenty members, each speaking on his or her area of
expertise. As a result, the UN Panel had a more complete
answer, but this method made the Russian government appear to
lack a coherent approach, Martins reported. The GOP is
aiming to copy the German model and select one high-ranking
MFA official, comfortable in English and with public speaking
skills, to head the delegation. Unfortunately, the GOP will
have just come out of legislative elections and will be
establishing a new cabinet at that time, so Martins expressed
concern that the MFA might not have a Foreign Minister in
time to prepare properly for the review.


5. (C) Martins mentioned that Portugal will use the first
twenty minutes of its hour-long question and answer section
to outline the major human rights shortcomings and the
strategies for addressing the issues. She said the advantage
of using the initial remarks was that it allowed the
government to control the direction of questions; conveyed a
firm understanding of the issues; and limited the number of
questions that the panel could ask in those areas. If the
Review Panel asks about prison conditions, for example,
Martins said the delegation could offer a brief answer,
referring to the initial remarks rather than opening up to a
question and answer series that could focus on Portugal's
shortcomings.


6. (C) Regarding the US review in 2010, Martins predicted
that the United States would benefit from its return to
observer status with the Human Rights Council. She commented
that it demonstrated U.S. interest and willingness to work

with UN human rights agencies. Martins predicted that the
U.S. might even fare better than Canada did in its review if
it is able to follow some of the strategic techniques used by
other western nations to limit the damage and control the
hearing.


For more reporting from Embassy Lisbon and information about Portugal,
please see our Intelink site:

http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/portal:port ugal

STEPHENSON