REVISED INSTRUCTION: HRC RESOLUTION ON THE

UNCLAS STATE 102548 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM SUBJECT: REVISED INSTRUCTION: HRC RESOLUTION ON THE FINANCIAL CRISIS REF: A. BRANCATO - NEVILLE EMAIL 10.1.2009 1:33PM ¶B. STATE 102047 ¶C. BRANCATO - NEVILLE EMAIL 9.30.2009 9:39AM ¶1. Per RefB, the Department authorizes USDEL to join consensus, and deliver the explanation of position below, on REV1 of the resolution entitled "Follow up to the 10th Human Rights Council Special Session (Resolution 10/1) on the impact of the global economic and financial crisis on the universal realization and effective enjoyment of human rights." If a vote is called, USDEL is authorized to ABSTAIN and use the EOP included in RefB. ¶2. If REV1 is significantly changed from the wording contained in REFTEL to negatively affect vital U.S. interests or is replaced with REV2, USDEL is authorized to vote NO and deliver the statement below as an explanation of vote. ¶3. Explanation of Vote: The United States recognizes that the current economic and financial crisis presents unique challenges to all countries around the world. We appreciate Brazil's efforts to bring this issue to the attention of the Council and regret that we cannot support this version of the text. In his statement at the conclusion of the G20 meeting last week President Obama reiterated his call for a new era of engagement, &an era when nations live up to their responsibilities, and act on behalf of our shared security and prosperity.8 The United States emphasizes the primary responsibility of states to protect and promote human rights. We note that the current financial crisis may pose challenges to the universal promotion and protection of human rights. However, it is nonetheless imperative that States actively work to protect the human rights of individuals within their jurisdiction. While we all recognize that development facilitates the enjoyment of all human rights and that the global economic downturn presents unique challenges to the efforts of developing countries to achieve their national development goals, the lack of development may not be invoked to justify the abridgement of internationally recognized human rights. CLINTON