You are here:   Constitutional Affairs > ONLINE ONLY: The UN Human Rights Council: Not Fit for Purpose
 

Zimbabwe and Libya are off. But Azerbaijan, China, Cuba, Jordan, Malaysia, Russia and Saudi Arabia are on. Next year's members include Angola, Egypt, India and Qatar. The Council, like its predecessor, is obsessed with Israel, the most criticised and condemned UN member state in history. Israel has been criticised 15 times since the Council was set up. Four resolutions passed at the June 2008 Human Rights Council meeting criticised Israel: Burma and Sudan got one each.

The Council's stands and resolutions are weakening rather than strengthening human rights at the UN, says one UN official. Meaningful political freedoms are marginalised in favour of nebulous social and economic rights. "Human rights at the UN are under threat because of the Council. It can co-ordinate proposals, it can dictate human rights policies. It's focusing on social and economic rights, and Israel and Palestine. The countries on the Council are much more organised than we expected, especially the Non-Aligned Group's proposals and resolutions."

In March the Council passed a resolution proposed by Islamic countries expressing concern about the defamation of religion, and urging governments to outlaw it. It was adopted 21-10, with the US, Canada and European Union states opposing. The text of the resolution refers to protecting all religions, but the only faith mentioned by name is Islam.

At the same time, varioius Arab and Islamic states are pushing to change the meaning of the term "Anti-Semitism" to argue that it includes prejudice against Arabs, as Arabs are also Semites. This is a subtle and dangerous sophistry, for the word now means exclusively anti-Jewish prejudice.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Ron
September 22nd, 2008
4:09 PM
The UN has become some sort of comfort or addiction because otherwise it’s hard to see why western countries put up with it. Absolutely nothing of value has come out of this organisation in a long time and now it is used to destroy the very foundations on which it stands. The countries doing it are, as the article suggest, well organised and the UN now is just another tier in the struggle to destroy western values which are seen as a threat.

john d
September 22nd, 2008
12:09 PM
Against Richard: we should, pace John McCain, found a League of Democracies (membership by invitation onlyWe should not quit the UN where the West still has 3 vetos. Only if the ~General Assembly attempts to take over from the Security Council. Only then should we quit the UN en bloc and immediately suspend all foreign aid to those states who support the OIC's destruction of the UN.

devorgilla
September 22nd, 2008
12:09 AM
The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights (1990) is sharia based and has been adopted by all the Organisation of the Islamic Conference countries (57 states) in 1997. The aim is to supplant UNDHR (1948) with this document. That will mean global human rights will be defined by sharia, which is a discriminatory system which does not recognise the rights of other religions or non-Islamic world views. IF this succeeds it will be Stage One in the Global Caliphate. Frightening.

Richard
September 21st, 2008
11:09 PM
I spoke about this hijacking and abuse the language of human rights last year during a symposium about Amnesty International. The only course left to the West in the long run is to abandon the United Nations as a failed institution and form a league of democracies. We cannot pretend that the UN has any sort of legitimacy,

Frances Waddams
September 21st, 2008
11:09 PM
Well said, Sir!

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.