HCR 16.03.07:THE REPORT on the High-Level Mission on the situation of human rights in Darfur pursuant to HRC decision S-4/101. By Corinne

10 a.m. to 1 p.m.

The report has be done by :Pr Jody WILLIAMS (head of the high level mission), Mart NUTT, Pr Bertrand RAMCHARAM, Dc Sima SAMAR and Patrice TONDA.

Ms Williams presented the report:
“The High-Level Mission has succeeded in carrying out tasks mandated to it under Human Right Council Decision.(…) In our recommendations, we have called upon the international community to take urgent action to protect the people of Darfur. We have respectfully proposed that this Council address these violations, establish a special mechanism to monitor the situation and press for protection and accountability, and support the establishment of an independent national human rights commission to further protection on the ground We have recommended that the General Assembly compile a list of foreign companies whose activities have an adverse impact on human right in Darfur. We have called on the international community to ensure the effective protection of civilians in Darfur by deploying the proposed peacekeeping/protection force (…)We have called on the Government of the Sudan to respect its international obligation by admitting the proposed UN/AU force (…) The Government should hold perpetrators to account, facilitate the safe return of refugees and IDPs, and ensure compensation for victims(…). The Human Rights Council must take action to alleviate their suffering and give people of Darfur hope for the future.”

Now the Chairman gives the floor to the Sudan:
The Council did not achieve to not be politicized. There is a conspiracy against the Sudan. This report is unfair. The members were not impartial. They estimate the need of Sudan from an other country and they did not come to Sudan. The mission accredit the one who destroy the infrastructure, the government’s project.
The Sudan did not give s visa for one of the member or the mission because he had done his opinion before he went to Darfur.
This report must be excluded and the council should not discuss and approves it.

The Chairman gave the floor to the delegations. 32 express their opinion. Some of them recognize the report and others reject it.

The one which accept the report are:
The European Union, Zambia, Japan, Ghana, Argentina, Korea, Canada, Senegal, Mexico, Switzerland and Brazil.
Their arguments are that the report is a good report and the situation is extremely urgent. The council has to act. The credibility of the Council is in play here.

The one which reject it are:
The countries of the “League of Arab States”, The countries of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, The Asian group, Bangladesh, China, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Cuba, Malaysia, India, Azerbaijan, Bahrain,
Their arguments are that the report is suspect: The mission did not go the Sudan but to the Chad and that the reason why one of the member of the mission gave up, because go to the Chad was not his mission. An other member of the mission took publicly a position before he did the mission. He accused Sudan of war crimes.