ASSOCIATION FOR WORLD EDUCATION

STATEMENT: Representative David G. LITTMAN. Monday (3:45pm) 14 August 2006
[Main text drafted by René Wadlow, in collaboration with DGL, who delivered the statement for AWE]
[Passages in square brackets could not be read for lack of time]

58th SESSION: UN SUB-COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (7 – 25 August 2006)
Chairman: Mr Marc Bossuyt (Belgium)

Question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including policies of racial discrimination and segregation, in all countries, with…: report of the Sub-Commission under CHR resolution 8 (XXIII) (item 2)

Mr Chairman, for a dozen years we have intervened on the question of massive violations of human rights in Southern Sudan – and since 2003 in Darfur – at the Commission, this Sub-Commission, the Working Group on Racism last January, and recently at the Human Rights Council. Alas, we must again highlight this issue for – despite many efforts at a settlement of the conflicts, notably by the African Union – there are still daily killings and destruction. There are signs that the situation could grow much worse. Eight days ago, the Special Representative for the Sudan, Jan Pronk, was at the memorial ceremony for John Garang in Juba where he said that everyone there was united in the spirit of John Garang – a great leader, who we had the honour to introduce to High Commissioner Mary Robinson at the Palais Wilson during his March 1999 visit, when he was unable to address the Human Rights Commission as a result of ‘points of order’, although later – after a peace treaty was signed – he became the Vice-President of Sudan just before his untimely death in an air crash. Only last Wednesday, Jan Pronk stressed the significant rise of insecurity in Darfur. [Life in the refugee and displaced persons camps is increasingly difficult. There is terror around the camps; within the camps there is growing criminality. Unfounded rumours abound and are deliberately spread. People who try to return to their villages are killed or beaten.] He outlined the needs, stressing that: “It is necessary to go for reconstruction and development, poverty eradication and equality in decision-making power.” Yet, he indicated that such policies are not being implemented.

Darfur certainly merits the special attention of the Sub-Commission.

The large number of deaths due to fighting and conflict-related illness, the massive displacement of people, the refugee flows to neighbouring Chad, the systematic and multiple rapes of women and girls, other forms of torture, and the wide-spread destruction of the agricultural infrastructure of wells, livestock, and grain-storage buildings in Darfur have been highlighted by Special Rapporteurs of the Commission on Human Rights and staff of UN Agencies, as well as field workers of non-governmental humanitarian organizations. Jan Egeland, Undersecretary for Humanitarian Affairs, in a recent report, said that July has been one of the worst months ever in terms of providing assistance to vulnerable populations worldwide and safety and security to humanitarian workers in the field. As he put it: “The situation in Darfur was going really bad to catastrophic – the number of violent clashes in the first half of 2006 was twice the amount of the first half of last year.”

All observers have repeatedly reported that this destruction and rape are accompanied by verbal threats to destroy whole peoples such as the Fur, Massaliet and Zaghawa tribal groups among others. These reports and the grave violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention are noted in our written statement to the Commission, E/CN.4/2006/NGO/3: Urgent Appeal to stop crimes in Darfur by the Genocide Convention.

We shall only read the 1st of 4 new elements (of our text) that increase the dangers of the conflict

1) We have warned from the start of the danger that the conflicts in Darfur could spread to Chad where there have already been armed attacks and where ethnic-based rivalries have been a destabilizing factor. Now there seems to be a possibility of the spread of conflict and instability to the Central African Republic which is also a state with a relatively fragile government.

[2) There are divisions among the Darfur insurgencies, especially concerning the terms of the ceasefire agreement reached with the help of the African Union. Jan Pronk has likened the splits in the insurgencies to a jigsaw puzzle. The longer the conflict goes on, the more likely are splits and fighting among the insurgencies. There is a danger of a struggle for power among the insurgencies which has already led to attacks upon villages and violations of human rights.

3) The continuing conflict in Darfur endangers the “Comprehensive Peace Agreement” of 2005 which officially brought an end to the north-south civil war between the Government of Sudan and the SPLM. There are very real difficulties in putting the provisions of the Agreement into effect as long as the Darfur conflicts continue. The terms of the Agreement are being put into place very slowly as governmental attention is given to Darfur. People in the south of the country are not receiving the development benefits they expected as a result of the end of the civil war.

4) Attacks on humanitarian work and international NGOs have increased. Large areas of the country cannot be reached by aid workers. Planning for post-conflict reconstruction is also very difficult and is impossible in certain areas.]

In the light of these growing dangers, we propose 4 actions to be carried out in the short term:

1) There is a need for the UN system to discuss the situation in Darfur clearly and in the light of the reliable reports. Last December, we drafted a letter that was signed by 22 NGOs and sent to High Commissioner Louise Arbour – reprinted in our NGO/3 – expressing deep concern at the “No Action” motion in the UN General Assembly which, in effect, cut off all discussion as well as any action on Darfur. “No Action” motions prevent fair discussion and are a danger to the role that the UN General Assembly should play. As we have seen in the former Commission, once a “No Action” motion is used successfully it will be used again and again regardless of the merits of the situation to be discussed.

2) There is a need to safeguard humanitarian aid efforts carried out by UN agencies and NGOs. This requires more effective peacekeeping forces, either those of the African Union or the UN, whose troops the Sudanese Government refuses on dubious grounds. The issue of the nature, mandate, finance, and command of peacekeeping forces in Darfur is still under discussion. In the meantime, humanitarian efforts are endangered or impossible in certain zones.

3) We believe that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has an important role to play in appointing a sufficiently large team of human rights monitors and advisors to help ensure that the cease-fire becomes really effective, that refugees and the displaced can return in safety, and that efforts for the promotion of human development in the region can be undertaken. This, and other suggestions, are made in our 2nd letter to the High Commissioner three months ago (23 May 2006), which was co-signed by an exceptionally wide range of 43 NGOs; this text is provided here or on request.

4) Lastly, we would stress that planning for post-conflict reconstruction of Darfur needs to start now, drawing upon the ideas and insights of a wide circle of those concerned with the ecology of dry areas such as Darfur and the social coexistence of pastoral and agricultural groups. Physical reconstruction will be costly given the destruction of the agricultural infrastructure, but social reconstruction may be even more difficult. There have always been tensions between pastoralists and agriculturalists over water, grazing lands and different seasonal patterns of residence.

Post-conflict rebuilding is an important prerequisite for the prevention of future conflicts – an emphasis needs to be placed on mending relations and restoring trust and cooperation among people. This can be done, in part, by showing quick economic benefits from cooperation. The task of rebuilding must aim to exclude none. Planning for such holistic development needs to be started today by increased cooperation among the UN system, NGOs, and academic research institutions.

We believe that the Sub-Commission has a leadership role to highlight such cooperation.

Thank you, Mr Chairman