Project Resolution on Human Rights Goals

Informal Consultations
Submitted by Brazil
Timor-Leste is co-sponsor.

The aims of the Resolution are to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the UDHR, to give a substantive contribution to the celebration of the anniversary and not just celebrate social and cultural events and not to redefine the obligations.

Two main issues where at stake during the meeting. The one of the preamble paragraph 6 and the most discussed issue was the one of the Intergovernmental Working Group.

Brazil said it totally agrees to introduce the references not only to MERCOSUR but also the other regions that are willing to be referred. The delegate is just waiting to have a correct language.

As for the IWG, Italy taking the floor on behalf of the EU stated that they appreciate the initiative of Brazil, but they can not support the text as it is. One has to find possible alternatives:
- the goals should be elaborated directly by states through national governments,
- more active role of the High Commissioner Office. OHCHR should collect information given by the States.
- process where internationally recognized people would play an important role.
EU is also concern by the outcome of the process and stresses out two aspects:
- the concept of goals must not weaken existing obligations or create new instruments
- should have a precise list of issues which should be singled out by states.

India wonders how will the IWG would function? Will it set a frame for universal ratification and for the creation of national institution as it is mentioned in operative paragraph 2 ii? The Indian delegate ended his intervention by reminding that if one adds a scope like Italy suggested on behalf of EU, the outcome will therefore be different, thus discussion re-opened.

Bangladesh expressed the same matters on the IWG and pointed out the fact that the capacity of each country is different from one to another.

Pakistan reminded that the core human rights international instruments (7) mentioned in OP2i already have a their own Committee for ratification.

Ethiopia then joined by the above mentioned countries think that the use of the terms voluntary goals implies that the countries are not doing enough. According to him, one should focus on the socio-eco and cultural rights. Deplores that most of the elements treated in OP2 are already been carried on by existing mechanisms.

Mexico is not against the content of OP2 per say, but against the word goals and proposes to change with another language like score or strategy.

Ecuador proposes to have another co-sponsor meeting, and it has been agreed by all the member States. The date of the meeting has not been chosen but one meeting was already scheduled for November 27th.

Ismaila Pedro FAYE