COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
ADOPTS RESOLUTIONS ON SITUATIONS IN FORMER
YUGOSLAVIA, MYANMAR,
EQUATORIAL GUINEA, AND RWANDA

In a resolution (E/CN.4/1999/L.34/Rev.1) on the situation of human rights in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the Republic of Croatia and Bosnia and
Herzegovina, approved by a roll-call vote of 46 in favour and 1 opposed, with 6
abstentions, the Commission stressed once again the crucial role that progress in promoting
and protecting human rights had to play in the success of the Peace Agreement, and the
need to focus international human rights efforts in the countries concerned on the core
problems of lack of full respect for the human rights of all individuals; massive forced
expulsions and obstructions of return of refugees and displaced persons in safety and
dignity, and return to them property and occupancy rights of which they were deprived; the
lack of resources for capacity building in the areas of rule of law and administration of
justice, and lack of independence of the judiciary; lack of respect for the freedom of
expression and association and for the freedom and independence of the media; continuing
obstruction of the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia;
and missing persons; the Commission appealed once more to the international community
to support efforts for the promotion and protection of human rights and insisted that the
parties act to promote and protect democratic institutions of Government; requested the
High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Secretary-General to take concerted action
with the assistance of the international community to develop early-warning procedures in
the field of human rights.

In regard to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the Commission
expressed its grave concern at ongoing abuses of human rights and the deteriorating
humanitarian and human-rights situation; condemned the continued repression of the
independent media, the passage of the Serbian Law on Public Information; regretted that
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had not complied with the recommendations of the
Personal Representative of the Chairman-in-Office of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe; and also regretted the express refusal of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia to allow a visit by the Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial, summary or
arbitrary executions; called upon authorities in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to
comply with all the previous resolutions of the Commission and with the recommendations
contained in the reports of the Special Rapporteur and to cooperate with other relevant
mechanisms of the Commission; to comply fully with its obligations to cooperate with the
Tribunal; to institutionalize democratic norms; to end torture and other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment of persons in detention; to respect the rights of all
persons belonging to minority groups, and to support the unconditional return of the
long-term missions of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe; welcomed
positive developments in Montenegro with regard to the democratization process, in
particular freedom of the media and the efforts to give shelter to Kosovars, and called upon
the international community to help the countries of the mandate to establish appropriate
safeguards to ensure the security and fair treatment upon return of those who sought
temporary protection and asylum, and to continue to support existing national democratic
forces and non-governmental organizations in their efforts to build a civil society and to
achieve multi-party democracy.

With regard to Kosovo, the Commission called upon the authorities of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) to ensure a verifiable stop to all military action and an
immediate ending to all violence and repression against the civil population of Kosovo; to
ensure the withdrawal from Kosovo of all military, police and paramilitary forces; to agree
to the stationing of an international military peacekeeping presence; to agree to the
unconditional return of all internally displaced persons and refugees; condemned the grave,
horrendous and ongoing war crimes and abuses of human rights in Kosovo, especially the
violent repression of the non-violent expression of political views, systematic terrorization of
ethnic Albanians and others, torture, deaths in detention, summary executions, and illegal
detentions and widespread destruction of property; also condemned the escalation of the
Serbian military offensive against the civilian population in Kosovo in recent weeks;
underscored the grave concern of member States regarding ethnic cleansing, war crimes
and crimes against humanity; condemned abuses by elements of the Kosovo Liberation
Army, in particular killings in violation of international humanitarian law, enforced
disappearances and abduction and detention of Serbian police, as well as of Serb and
Albanian civilians; emphasized that those found responsible for serious violations would be
held accountable and would not escape justice; insisted that the authorities of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia and the ethnic Albanian leadership in Kosovo condemn acts of
terrorism, refrain from all acts of violence, and encourage the pursuit of political ends
through peaceful means; insisted that the combatants implement a cease-fire and
demilitarize the province of Kosovo; insisted that the Government of Yugoslavia release all
political detainees; allow establishment of democratic institutions in Kosovo; and cooperate
with international humanitarian organizations in dealing with the issue of missing persons in
Kosovo; and work on the basis of the Rambouillet Accords to establish a political
framework agreement for Kosovo;; emphasized once again that improvement in the
promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Kosovo, as well as
in the rest of its territory would assist the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in establishing a
full range of relations with the international community; and expressed grave concern over
the overwhelming humanitarian crisis in Kosovo and the forced expulsion of hundreds of
thousands of Kosovar Albanians.

In regard to Croatia, the Commission welcomed the cooperation of the Government of the
Republic of Croatia with the Special Rapporteur, and took note of the request of the
Government for technical cooperation and assistance programmes; called upon the
Government to undertake greater efforts to adhere to democratic principles and to continue
its efforts to attain the highest level of compliance with international norms and standards of
human rights and fundamental freedoms, by full and fair implementation of its programmes
and by full cooperation with and implementation of the recommendations of the
international organizations operating in the Republic of Croatia, respecting the freedoms of
association and the press, respecting the right of non-governmental organizations to operate
without restrictions, undertaking serious judicial reform and guaranteeing the independence
of the judiciary, implementing swiftly and completely the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in all Government practices,
continuing to fulfill rights and guarantees as pledged; endorsed the recommendations of the
Special Rapporteur; called upon the international community to support the involvement of
the High Commissioner for Human Rights in human-rights monitoring in the region of
Eastern Slavonia, and continue to provide for an international presence.

In reference to Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Commission took note of the progress made
in some areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the implementation of the Peace Agreement
and improvement in respect for human rights; expressed its serious concern about
continuing human-rights violations within Bosnia and Herzegovina and continuing
obstruction of the full implementation of the human rights provisions of the Peace
Agreement; emphasized that the primary responsibility for ensuring the progressive
achievement of democratic goals and building a tolerant, multi-ethnic society lay with the
people of Bosnia and Herzegovina; underlined the obligation of the authorities of Bosnia
and Herzegovina at all levels to implement the recommendations of the High Representative
and the decisions of the Commission on Human Rights for Bosnia and Herzegovina; called
upon all parties to cease obstruction of the work of the common institutions of Bosnia and
Herzegovina; condemned the intimidation and perpetration of violence against minority
refugees and all acts designed to discourage their voluntary return and called for the
perpetrators to be brought to justice; called upon the officials of Bosnia and Herzegovina to
cooperate with relevant international humanitarian agencies and their neighbours to facilitate
such voluntary returns; endorsed the recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur;
emphasized the views of the General Assembly contained in paragraphs 18 and 19 of its
resolution 53/163.

In the context of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the
Commission called upon all States to meet their obligations to cooperate fully with the
Tribunal and urged them to support the Tribunal to the fullest extent possible; called upon
all indicted persons to surrender voluntarily to the custody of the Tribunal; urged all parties
to respect the "rules of the road"; urgently called once again upon the competent authorities
in Bosnia and Herzegovina to apprehend and surrender for prosecution all persons indicted
by the Tribunal; noted with dismay that the large majority of those indicted were still at
large and appeared to be living freely in Yugoslav territory; stressed the evidence that the
most senior leaders of the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were
responsible for the continuing refusal of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to meet its
obligations to cooperate with the Tribunal and demanded that they comply with their
obligation to cooperate with the Tribunal; demanded that the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia cooperate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia; urged all parties to respect the primacy of the Tribunal in all cases of war
crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions;
called upon the international community to give the Tribunal every appropriate help to bring
into custody suspects indicted by it.

In reference to missing persons, the Commission expressed its satisfaction with the
progress made in the exhumation of remains and the identification of missing persons;
welcomed the increased level of cooperation in the joint exhumation process in Bosnia and
Herzegovina; insisted that Federal Republic of Yugoslavia authorities cooperate with
international humanitarian organizations in dealing with the issue of missing persons in
Kosovo.

In reference to the Special Rapporteur, the Commission decided to renew for one year the
mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the region; requested
that the Special Rapporteur pay particular attention to discrimination against persons
belonging to ethnic minorities and displaced persons, refugees and returnees who fell within
his mandate, and address human rights issues that transcended the borders between the
States covered by his mandate and which could be addressed only through concerted
action in more than one country.

The roll-call vote on resolution L.34/Rev.1 was as follows:

In favour: Argentina, Austria, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Botswana, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile,
Colombia, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador,
France, Germany, Guatemala, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liberia,
Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Niger, Norway, Pakistan,
Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Rwanda, Senegal, South
Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tunisia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uruguay and
Venezuela.

Against: the Russian Federation.

Abstentions: China, Congo, Cuba, India, Mexico and Nepal.

An earlier roll-call vote was held on section 3 of resolution L.34/Rev.1, with the section
retained after 33 voted in favour, 4 against, and 16 abstained.

The roll-call vote was as follows:

In favour: Austria, Bangladesh, Botswana, Canada, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic
of the Congo, El Salvador, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liberia,
Luxembourg, Madagascar, Morocco, Niger, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland,
Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Rwanda, Senegal, Sudan, Tunisia, the United
Kingdom, the United States and Uruguay.

Against: China, Cuba, India and Russian Federation.

Abstentions: Argentina, Bhutan, Cape Verde, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Ecuador,
Guatemala, Indonesia, Mauritius, Mexico, Mozambique, Nepal, South Africa, Sri Lanka
and Venezuela.


SPOMENKA CEK (Croatia) said the Commission would shortly for the eighth time take
action upon this issue. Strengthening of human rights was a constant effort made by the
Croatian Government, despite constant Serbian aggression. Croatia was the only country in
the region where organized return of refugees was a reality. This was the result of a long
process of confidence-building measures taken by the Government. These measures were
not adequately reflected in the resolution. There had been a change of focus of the
international community. Attention had shifted from war to the building of peace and
security after conflict. The resolution dealt with gender issues and other matters in a way
that generally occurred under thematic issues. Croatia's human-rights performance had
been distinguished from that of the other countries involved by the international community.
The current approach of the Commission towards the three countries of the mandate was
redundant, and Croatia should be separated from the other two countries. The technical
cooperation programme soon to be signed was welcomed. With its implementation,
Croatia would move towards a truly democratic country, and it was hoped that the
Commission would recognize this.

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) said the draft resolution strongly pronounced on the situation
of human rights in Kosovo. The would have had co-sponsored the draft if some
suggestions had been considered. The delegation had asked to have language included
asking the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA)to respect humanitarian law. It had requested in
paragraph 19 a phrase condemning terrorism. It would have been realistic to delete
paragraph 16 and amend 19 to deal with current realities. Bosnians should have been listed
among the minorities. However, at the very least, Pakistan had suggested that in paragraph
9 there should be a reference to the Muslin minority. The United States should consider this
suggestion. It should not have been difficult for the co-sponsors to accept this. Having said
that, the delegation would vote for the resolution. It was hoped that these concerns would
be taken into account in the future.

H.K. SINGH (India) said that in several previous interventions, it had expressed serious
concern over the serious human-rights violations occurring in the FRY and the Kosovo
area. Full respect for human rights, including minority rights, was vital. It was regrettable
that several elements of the draft resolution were imbalanced, notably section 3, which did
not even indicate that Kosovo was an integral part of the FRY. This section ignored the
fact that the resolution of incidents of this nature required immediate cessation of conflict. A
peaceful solution obtained through negotiation was necessary. India could not go along with
this section, and requested that this section be cut from the resolution.

VLADIMIR PARSHIKOV (Russian Federation) said delegation had frequently given its
assessment of what was happening in Yugoslavia. It rejected NATO's involvement, and the
violation of NATO's charter. The aggressors who were subjecting civilians to daily
bombing did not have the moral right to talk about proper behaviour. NATO had bombed
radio and television stations while complaining about the treatment of media. The delegation
supported the proposal of the Indian delegation that there be a separate vote on part 3, and
the delegation would vote against it. The delegation asked the Chairwoman to put the entire
resolution to a roll-call vote, and Russia would vote against it. Without the Kosovo portion,
the delegation would have voted for the draft.

RODRIGO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that with regard to the request for a
separate vote on section 3, Cuba had voted in favour of condemning the violations
perpetrated by all sides of the conflict. Section 3 was most unbalanced. It was hypocritical
that it was the United States, which was bombing the FRY and causing deaths, was the one
to propose this resolution. Cuba would be voting against the resolution.

JORGE VOTO-BERNALES (Peru) said it would like to reiterate its position; it would
vote for the entire text of the pending resolution.

HAROLD KOH (United States) said the delegation could not support the proposal of
India, since section 3 was the heart of the resolution. To remove Kosovo from the mandate
of the Special Rapporteur would be to make his mandate pointless. The US would vote
yes to keeping section 3, and yes to the resolution.

HERNAN PLORUTTI (Argentina) said the delegation was struck by the fact that the
resolution was divided into chapters. In this way, the Serb province would have had its
own chapter. With regard to paragraphs 13 and 20 of chapter 3, the delegation would
abstain. Those elements were for the Security Council to deal with.

MARIE GERVAIS-VIDRICAIRE (Canada) said it was gravely concerned over the
situation in Kosovo, and stressed the responsibility of the Serbian authorities. Canada
would vote in favour of section 3.

WILHELM HOYNCK (Germany) said it was regrettable that matters involving Kosovo
might be separated from the resolution. Such a decision would make it difficult for the
Special Rapporteur to operate there. The EU would vote in favor of the section, and the
entire text.

PHILIPPE PETIT (France) said that France supported the statement of Germany. If there
were to be a separate vote on section 3, France would vote for it, and for two reasons.
First, the section had the merit of recalling the five conditions set to Belgrade to put a stop
to the intervention of NATO; second, the text condemned the grave violations of human
rights that had given rise to a humanitarian disaster.

JAVIER ILLANES (Chile) said it had already expressed its concern about the human
rights situation in Kosovo. It would have liked for this resolution to be more balanced.
Now, there was this third section, which could be voted on separately, and the delegation
would abstain. It lacked balance, it was too dense, it was full of opinions and judgments.
On the resolution as a whole, it would vote yes.

VICTOR RODRIGUEZ (Venezuela) said that as with previous resolutions, it had grave
concern for the human rights situation in the FRY. In voting on section 3, it would abstain,
since there was not sufficient balance. In voting on the resolution as a whole, it would vote
in favour. A separate chapter on the situation of the human rights in Kosovo could in no
way insult the territorial integrity of the FRY.

CARLOS SCARBI (Uruguay) said it supported the text of the resolution, and it would
vote for it as a whole. It felt, however, that there were formal defects since it set Kosovo
on the same footing as sovereign States.

CAMILO REYES RODRIGUEZ (Colombia) said there was grave concern over the
violation of human rights in Kosovo, and the responsibility for them lay with the Belgrade
authorities. Colombia would vote in favour of the resolution as long as it was not construed
as an insult to the territorial integrity of the FRY. In the case of a vote upon section 3,
Colombia would abstain.

MUNIR AKRAM (Pakistan) said it believed that the section relating to Kosovo was
indeed the most important part of the draft resolution given the current grave developments.
It would vote in favor of that section, as well as the entire resolution.

LIU XINSHENG (China) said that Kosovo was part of the FRY, and the issue was part
of the internal affairs of the FRY. The solution should be found via dialogue, considering all
the issues and respecting the territorial integrity of the FRY. NATO should cease its military
actions against the FRY to avoid further casualties. Some elements of the draft resolution
were not in conformity with the position of China, so it would abstain from the vote on the
entire draft.

DHURMAHDASS BAICHOO (Mauritius) said Mauritius would vote in favor of the
resolution.