Share
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE ON ARBITRARY DETENTION AND ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS
7 March 2012
The Human Rights Council this morning heard the presentation of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons and then held an interactive dialogue on arbitrary detention and on the human rights of internally displaced persons.
Regarding arbitrary detention, speakers said that the existence of habeas corpus was the best way to combat arbitrary detention and asked the Working Group to explain how it intended to use the new electronic database. Several speakers noted the different legal systems in the world and stressed that habeas corpus came from the common law system and thus, should be studied to determine whether it was applicable to other legal systems. Speakers asked what challenges the Working Group on arbitrary detention faced in collecting information on the thousands of individuals arbitrarily detained, especially when working with government bodies. What kind of follow up action could be envisaged when Governments failed to act upon the Working Group’s recommendations?
Speaking in the interactive dialogue were: Cuba, Austria, France, Pakistan speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, European Union, Hungary, Maldives, Switzerland, Norway, Angola, Bangladesh, China, Malaysia, Morocco, Bahrain, Bhutan, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, United States, Venezuela, Armenia, Greece, Georgia, Algeria, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uruguay, Sri Lanka, Colombia, and Bolivia.
Hungary said that many countries were still refusing to follow the recommendations of the Working Group on arbitrary detention and were failing to remedy situations of persons who had been arbitrarily deprived of their liberty. Hungary raised the issue of arbitrary detention of Mr. Toaso, a Hungarian national held in Bolivia for over three years, and urged this country to undertake immediate measures to remedy this situation. Hungary asked the Working Group what kind of follow up action could be envisaged where Governments failed to act upon its recommendations.
Bolivia said there was abundant proof that the person referenced by the Working Group belonged to a mercenary group that aimed to assassinate a democratically-elected president. It was very dangerous that Special Procedures were defending mercenaries. The Working Group should not adopt any measures related to the judiciary and anyone in provisional detention. The Working Group should revise its review of this case.
http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/2012/03/hungary-id-on-arbitary-detention-and-idps-21st-meeting-19th-session.html
http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/2012/03/bolivia-id-on-arbitary-detention-and-idps-21st-meeting-19th-session.html
Tóásó Edit
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS INTERACTIVE DIALOGUE ON ARBITRARY DETENTION AND ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS
7 March 2012
The Human Rights Council this morning heard the presentation of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons and then held an interactive dialogue on arbitrary detention and on the human rights of internally displaced persons.
Regarding arbitrary detention, speakers said that the existence of habeas corpus was the best way to combat arbitrary detention and asked the Working Group to explain how it intended to use the new electronic database. Several speakers noted the different legal systems in the world and stressed that habeas corpus came from the common law system and thus, should be studied to determine whether it was applicable to other legal systems. Speakers asked what challenges the Working Group on arbitrary detention faced in collecting information on the thousands of individuals arbitrarily detained, especially when working with government bodies. What kind of follow up action could be envisaged when Governments failed to act upon the Working Group’s recommendations?
Speaking in the interactive dialogue were: Cuba, Austria, France, Pakistan speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, European Union, Hungary, Maldives, Switzerland, Norway, Angola, Bangladesh, China, Malaysia, Morocco, Bahrain, Bhutan, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, United States, Venezuela, Armenia, Greece, Georgia, Algeria, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uruguay, Sri Lanka, Colombia, and Bolivia.
Hungary said that many countries were still refusing to follow the recommendations of the Working Group on arbitrary detention and were failing to remedy situations of persons who had been arbitrarily deprived of their liberty. Hungary raised the issue of arbitrary detention of Mr. Toaso, a Hungarian national held in Bolivia for over three years, and urged this country to undertake immediate measures to remedy this situation. Hungary asked the Working Group what kind of follow up action could be envisaged where Governments failed to act upon its recommendations.
Bolivia said there was abundant proof that the person referenced by the Working Group belonged to a mercenary group that aimed to assassinate a democratically-elected president. It was very dangerous that Special Procedures were defending mercenaries. The Working Group should not adopt any measures related to the judiciary and anyone in provisional detention. The Working Group should revise its review of this case.
http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/2012/03/hungary-id-on-arbitary-detention-and-idps-21st-meeting-19th-session.html
http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/2012/03/bolivia-id-on-arbitary-detention-and-idps-21st-meeting-19th-session.html
Tóásó Edit
Nincsenek megjegyzések:
Megjegyzés küldése