In an effort to put lipstick on a caterpillar, as UN Ambassador John Bolton once eloquently described goings-on at the UN, leading human rights NGOs held an event at UN Headquarters to whitewash the travesty of forthcoming elections to the UN's top human rights body. And surprisingly, a representative from the U.S. Mission to the UN praised the event.
There are no membership conditions to belong to the UN Human Rights Council, which explains why China, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela are members. But there is a process whereby states running for election "pledge" to protect human rights, reality notwithstanding.
So on September 11, 2017, Amnesty International, along with the International Service for Human Rights, held an event for candidates to make big promises that they have no intention of keeping. Left unsaid was that almost all candidates will be elected anyway because they have no opposition.
Each of the five UN regional groups are allowed to put forward fixed slates, whereby the number of states running is equal to the number of seats that the regional group has been allotted. The only requirement for election is to receive the votes of a minimum of 97 members of the General Assembly, a simple majority. And since fewer than half of U.N. members are themselves fully free democracies, voting is based on mutual backscratching, not commitment to human rights.
Hence, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Angola - both rated "Not Free" by Freedom House - didn't even bother to show up to Amnesty's shindig. As part of the African regional group's fixed slate, both have their spots on the Council in the bag.
In the case of the Asian regional group, however, there is a choice - but not one that would keep human rights abusers off the Council. There are only five candidates in total for the four seats available to the Asian regional group (Afghanistan, Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, and Qatar), leading to the election of at least one of the two human rights paragons Afghanistan or Qatar - both ranked "not free" by Freedom House.
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Qatar showed up at the event to shamelessly pat themselves on the back for their supposed human rights achievements. According to Afghanistan: "we remained committed to ensure a meaningful participation of women in decision-making in all sectors... we continue to foster genuine participation and meaningful involvement of civil society and human rights defenders in the promotion and protection of human rights... Afghanistan and the international community have been working together, and we've brought some positive change in our country of which we're all very proud."
But there is no reason to be proud of Afghanistan's actual human rights record. According to the U.S. State Department's country report on human rights: "The most significant human rights problems were... torture and abuse of detainees by government forces; widespread disregard for the rule of law and little accountability for those who committed human rights abuses; and targeted violence and endemic societal discrimination against women and girls."
Pakistan told the crowd: "Pakistan has consistently lent its voice to help consolidate the universal human rights agenda and to advance its endeavors for the promotion and protection of human rights for all at the national and the international level... , significant legislative and policy reforms have been undertaken, including legislation relating to rape and honor killing, forced marriages... A number of laws and administrative measures have been taken to safeguard the rights of minorities, including the Protection of Minorities Bill, the Christian and Hindu Marriages Bill, establishment of a special police force to provide security for places of worship of minorities, and measures to prevent the misuse and abuse of blasphemy laws... we have lent our support and our voice to the needs of vulnerable people across the world..."
Here is just some of Pakistan's actual human rights record according to the State Department's report on human rights:
"The most serious human rights problems were extrajudicial and targeted killings; disappearances; torture; lack of rule of law (including lack of due process, poor implementation and enforcement of laws, and frequent mob violence and vigilante justice); gender inequality; violence against gender and sexual minorities; and sectarian violence... Harassment of journalists continued, with high-profile attacks against journalists and media organizations. There were government restrictions on freedom of assembly and limits on freedom of movement. Government practices and certain laws limited freedom of religion, particularly for religious minorities. Discrimination against religious minorities, and sectarian violence continued. Corruption within the government and police, as well as rape, domestic violence, sexual harassment, honor crimes, other harmful traditional practices, and discrimination against women and girls remained serious societal problems...Lack of government accountability remained a problem, and abuses often went unpunished, fostering a culture of impunity among the perpetrators whether official or unofficial."
Qatar announced that: "Human rights and fundamental freedoms are embodied in Qatar's constitution and legislative system. This commitment is reflected in a range of human rights institutions and agencies that actively contribute to the promotion and protection of human rights... The State of Qatar is governed by the rule of law with just and inclusive institutions. The government's vision is of a country that safeguards the rights of all those who live in its territory, protects their dignity, and fulfills their hopes and aspirations to achieve development, progress, and prosperity... Qatar has also protected journalists and the freedom of press and media... It pledges to continue making an active contribution to the work of the Human Rights Council and contributes to the promotion and protection of human rights around the world... we do not have restrictions on the participation of civil society, foreign civil society movements, and organizations."
More accurately, according to the State Department human rights report: "The principal human rights problems were the inability of citizens to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections. ... The monarch-appointed government prohibited organized political parties and restricted civil liberties, including freedoms of speech, press, and assembly. ... Legal, institutional, and cultural discrimination against women limited their participation in society... [A]uthorities prohibited politically oriented associations... Journalists and publishers continued to self-censor due to political and economic pressures when reporting on government policies or material deemed denigrating to Islam..."
As for host Amnesty International, at an event run by the UN's Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People (CEIRPP) on October 18, 2016, a spokesman from Amnesty International claimed that firebombs do not threaten Israeli lives, making a response "unlawful." Amnesty International has recently dedicated its attention to the boycott of goods produced by Jews living on Arab-claimed territory. Amnesty has not applied the same treatment to the paragons of virtue currently sitting on the Human Rights Council or the newest batch of candidates.