Arvind Narain Article Flashcards
What is the Human Rights Council?
The Human Rights Council is an intergovernmental body within the United Nations system made up of 47 States responsible for the promotion and protection of all human rights around the globe.
It has the ability to discuss all thematic human rights issues and situations that require its attention throughout the year. It meets at the United Nations Office at Geneva.
How do we obtain information regarding India’s involvement?
The negotiations of a draft resolution is conducted in what is called “informals” wherein the Office of the High Commission of Human Rights does not make minutes or record the discussion. Therefore, we have to resort to the reports of organisations like Forum Asia to identify India’s Stance.
What is India’s position with respect to Civil and Political Rights?
The role of India has been either complete silence or to water down the human rights standards in response to these. India has both proposed and voted in favor of amending whose sole purpose is to dilute the existing human rights standard.
Give examples where India has voted to dilute Civil and Political Rights?
The HRCouncil Resolutions on Civil Society Space noted that is is civil society (NGOs etc) that facilitate the achievement of principles of the UN. India argued that civil society must be subordinate to National laws and not international HR Law.
“Human rights defender” is a term used to describe people who, individually or with others, act to promote or protect human rights in a peaceful manner. an HR Council resolution proposed to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of Human Rights Defenders for a period of three years. India followed the group of authoritarian states who voted against the resolution.
Country specific views India has taken with respect to Syria?
With respect to Syria, India has repeatedly and consistently abstained from voting in resolutions that have the language of condemning the atrocities in the region.
India generally takes this view when dealing with country-specific resolutions.
What has been the exception to India’s stance of country-specific resoltutions?
Sri-Lanka
This is primarily due to the fact that because Sri Lanka is close neigbour and due to the historical links between Tamil Nadu and the Sri Lankan Tamil Community.
What does the Sri-Lankan resolution reveal about India’s stance at the HRCouncil?
India even in the SriLankan resolution, where it did not abstain like usual, preferred a no-action policy. It voted to first postpone the consideration of the resolution, and then voted to remove a key paragraph that dealt with calling for an investigation by the OHCHR.
It is not the Constitutional imperative, nor is it the adherence to international human rights law, but rather it is a perception of national self interest which determines the nature of the vote.
What is India’s stance on palestine in these resolutions?
The Indian position has been one of consistent support for all resolutions concerning rights violations in Palestine.
The abstention in 2015 and 2016 is the first step in turning away from a longstanding Indian foreign policy consensus. This indicates a broad re-alignment with Israel.
What is India’s stance regarding social economic and cultural rights? Examples of such resolutions?
Proactive and leadership in resolutions concerning socio-economic rights
Access to medicine
leadership role is in emphasizing that access to medicine is integral to ‘the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest standard of physical and mental health’. See Human Rights Council Resolution 12/24 (2 October 2009)
Human Rights Council Resolution 17/14 (17 June 2011) while retaining the substance of 12/34 and 15/22’s emphasis on access to medicine and the intellectual property regime moved from ‘‘calling on states’’ in Resolution 15/22 to ‘‘encouraging states’’ to ‘promote access to medicines for all, through the use of provisions of the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights which provides flexibility for that purpose’.
Human Rights and Transnational Corporations: The impetus to ensure that transnational corporations come within the framework of international human rights law comes from the developing world, including Russia, China, South Africa and India, as well as civil society organisations from around the world.
