Overview of the 32nd Session of the UN Human Rights Council
Meeting was marked by reports of violations by companies in Brazil and setbacks caused by the Olympics and the country’s political crisis
The 32nd Session of the UN Human Rights Council took place between June 13 and July 1 in Geneva, Switzerland. The meeting was the first, for Brazil, since the removal of President Dilma Rousseff and it was marked by reports of violations in Brazil committed by companies, the worsening of the human rights situation in the country caused by the political crisis and the abuses committed in the preparations for the Olympic Games.
Also discussed was the report by the independent experts of the OAS (Organization of American States) on the disappearance of 43 students from Ayotzinapa, Mexico, and the resolutions on the restriction of civil society space, access to medicines and the creation of the new position of independent expert on sexual orientation and gender identity issues within the Council.
Dismantling the Constitution
On June 26, Conectas and ABGLT (Brazilian Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex Persons) denounced to the Council the threat of setbacks in Brazil caused by the current political crisis.
In an oral statement, the organizations said that measures taken by the interim government and by the Legislature, such as attempts to reduce the age of criminal responsibility and increase prison sentences, or to criminalize women and health professionals who perform abortions on rape victims (a procedure that is permitted by law), could dismantle guarantees contained in the Federal Constitution and lead the country to breach international treaties.
Click here to download the statement.
According to the organizations, executive acts, such as the downgrading of the Ministry of Women, Racial Equality and Human Rights to a department of the Ministry of Justice illustrate a lack of priority for this agenda.
A representative of the Brazilian government attending the session requested the right to respond to the statement and claimed that the country “is fully committed to the protection of human rights and to the defense of the rule of law”. “The government of Brazil fully respects the right of civil society organizations to express their views and opinions in the Human Rights Council, even when we directly disagree,” he said.
Watch the statement by the organizations (1:23) and the response by the government (1:43):
Exclusion Games
Brazil was also challenged in the Council on account of the arbitrary acts and violations committed during the preparations for the Olympic Games. Conectas, Justiça Global, Article 19 and ISHR (International Service for Human Rights) told the full session of the Council that the Olympic dream had become a nightmare for the most vulnerable communities of Rio de Janeiro and for the human rights defenders and activists attempting to denounce this violence.
According to the organizations, since 2009, when Brazil was chosen to host the Games, nearly 77,000 people have been evicted from areas of high-value real estate. During the event, the military will occupy six favelas and any person who is detained by the Armed Forces will be tried by military courts.
Click here to read the statement in full.
“Unfortunately, the promised legacy of the Olympic Games has in fact become a heavy burden. We will have new stadiums but at the cost of public bankruptcy and systematic violations of basic rights, such as housing, health and education. Unfortunately, the Olympic Games have thus become the Exclusion Games,” said the organizations in the statement.
Watch (2:04):
Companies in the hot seat
During the session of the Council, the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights presented a report on its visit to Brazil, in December 2015, in which it condemns violations related to the energy sector, the extractive industry, agribusiness and civil construction. In all, the report made 28 recommendations to the Brazilian government and to the public and private companies that operate in the country.
Click here to read the report in full.
The cases of the ruptured dam in Mariana, in the state of Minas Gerais, and the Belo Monte hydropower plant, in the state of Pará, were also given special attention by the Working Group, which criticized proposed legislation pending in Congress that relaxes the requirements and simplifies the approval process for large-scale infrastructure projects – such as Constitutional Amendment 65/12, which would in practice abolish the need for environmental licensing.
The Brazilian ambassador in Geneva, Maria Regina Dunlop, refuted the criticisms of the Working Group, arguing that “it is incorrect to affirm that projects with environmental impact lack regulation” and that “human rights are part of the rules and obligations for the licensing of large-scale projects”.
Conectas and the Chilean organization Corporación Humanas contested Dunlop’s assertions. In an oral statement, the organizations urged the government to comply with the recommendations made by the Working Group, particularly those regarding the incorporation of the affected populations in the decision-making processes.
Click here to read the statement by the organizations.
Watch the presentation of the report’s conclusions (00:11):
Watch the statement by the Brazilian ambassador (00h30):
Watch the statement by the organizations (00h53):
Justice for Ayotzinapa
The 32nd session of the Council was also used by human rights organizations and families of the victims to give visibility in the UN to the report prepared by the interdisciplinary group of independent experts of the OAS (a group known by the Spanish acronym GIEI) on the disappearance of 43 students in Ayotzinapa, Mexico, in 2015. Carlos Beristain and Claudia Paz y Paz, who were directly involved in the preparation of the report, met with Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to present the results of the investigation.
Conectas, Cels (Center for Legal and Social Studies, of Argentina) and the Mexican Commission for the Defense and Promotion of Human Rights also staged two meetings to present the case to authorities and other international organizations.
The first, a coordination meeting between civil society groups at the International Service for Human Rights, brought together organizations from several countries to discuss strategies for the presentation of the report of the independent experts.
The second was a side event in which Beristain and Paz y Paz presented details – including photos and videos – that conflict with the official version put out by the Mexican government on what happened to the students. They demanded a commitment from the authorities in the search for answers. Among those present at the meeting were Giovana Bianchi, a representative of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Jorge Lomónaco, the Mexican ambassador in Geneva.
Also on the topic of the presentation of the GIEI report and the Mexican government’s lack of commitment to the case, Conectas, Cels and the Mexican Commission met with the UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights Kate Gilmore, and they made an oral statement to the full session of the Council.
Resolutions
A total of 33 resolutions were approved during the session of the Council. Conectas and partners were particularly involved in the debate on three of them.
One resolution, introduced by Brazil, Egypt, Paraguay, Peru, South Africa and Thailand, determines that a panel discussion on good practices and key challenges relevant to access to medicines shall be convened at the 34th session of the Council, in March 2017, and that the High Commissioner shall prepare a report on this discussion and present it to the Council.
The GTPI (Working Group on Intellectual Property), of which Conectas is part, submitted contributions in response to informal consultations that were made to draft the resolution. According to the group, the document is an improvement over previous versions – namely, in its recognition that the lack of access to medicines is a global challenge. The resolution also supports the use of intellectual property rights flexibilities in the field of medicines and recognizes the importance of initiatives that support the delinkage of the final price of medicines from the cost of research and development.
Nevertheless, according to Marcela Vieira, coordinator of the GTPI, “the resolution could have made more progress”. “The document is flawed since it is not decisive enough on the responsibility and violations of pharmaceutical companies in the right to health. Moreover, the States should have been more categorical in their condemnation of recent free trade agreements with so-called TRIPS-Plus measures, that prevent the use of the flexibilities in TRIPS [the international treaty that establishes standards for intellectual property].”
Another clash between members involved the discussion on a resolution on the protection of civil society space around the world. The draft version of the document led by Chile, Ireland, Japan, Sierra Leone and Tunisia was broadly supported by NGOs from all over the world, but it received 15 amendments from Russia that removed essential elements from the draft and introduced restrictions that clearly conflicted with the protections established by international treaties and protocols.
In response to this move by Russia, 244 organizations from 90 countries, including Conectas, signed a joint letter calling for the rejection of all the amendments and the approval of the original draft. The pressure had an effect and the Council approved the resolution without the amendments.
The Council also approved a resolution that creates the new position of independent expert on protection against violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity – a proposal submitted by Brazil with the support of Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Uruguay. The independent expert will serve a term of three years.
Despite filling a historic gap in the Council’s special procedures, the text of the resolution and the definition of the scope of the position were criticized by a group of organizations that work with the topic for not addressing violations of sexual and reproductive rights more broadly.
In a press release, the Brazilian Foreign Ministry stated that “the resolution represents a concrete step towards UN recognition of the vulnerability of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons to violence and discrimination because of their sexual orientation and gender identity”.
