RIGHTS: Australia Threatens to Bar UN Human Rights Committees

By Thalif Deen Reprint | | Print |

Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS, Aug 30 2000 (IPS) - The Australian government, which has come under heavy fire for its shabby treatment of minorities and asylum seekers, has threatened to bar UN committees from visiting the country to probe human rights abuses.

A cabinet decision taken in Canberra Tuesday said the government will agree to future visits by UN treaty committees, including the UN Human Rights Committee, only where there is a “compelling reason” for such visits.

“This is an irresponsible over-reaction to recent poor report cards (from the UN),” Kate Gilmore, National Director of Amnesty International Australia, said Tuesday.

The human rights organisation said that it is “deeply disturbed” by the Australian government’s measures which severely limit its involvement with the international system of minimum human rights standards. Amnesty said that in choosing to act in what it thinks are its own interests, the Australian government is not acting in the interests of all Australians.

“It has clearly signalled that it is willing to dismiss the rights of the vulnerable, including indigenous Australians, women and refugees – as secondary to the needs of the state,” Amnesty International said.

“In placing the state above the individual, the government is tacitly encouraging other countries like Burma and China to act by any standards they choose,” Amnesty said. “Other governments in the region may thank them for it, but the individuals they attack torture and kill, will not.”

The government of Prime Minister John Howard, described as a right- wing government that has continued to cold-shoulder the United Nations, has also warned that it will reject “unwarranted requests” from UN treaty committees to delay the deportation by Australia of “unsuccessful asylum seekers.”

The cabinet also decided that it will not sign or ratify the optional protocol to the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

The protocol makes it possible for women, either as individuals or in groups, to submit complaints about alleged violations of the Convention. These complaints could deal with a wide range of discriminatory practices that women are subjected to the world over. The list includes complaints about sexual harassment in the workplace; denial of health care facilities and gender violence, among others.

Additionally, the Australian government said it would undertake a “comprehensive review” of the interpretation and implementation of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees.

Australia’s recent decisions to deport “unsuccessful asylum seekers”, most of whom had been refused refugee status, have been interpreted as being in violation of the UN Convention on Refugees which has been signed and ratified by Australia. If the Australian government is serious about its warning, it could pull out of the Convention but on one condition: it has to give 12 months advance notice.

In 1997, North Korea decided to withdraw from the International Covenant on Civil Rights. But unlike the Convention on Refugees, the International Covenant did not have provisions for withdrawal. The UN Legal Counsel, therefore, refused to accept North Korea’s unilateral withdrawal from the covenant.

Palitha Kohona, head of the UN Treaty Section, told IPS that traditionally Australia has had a “very good record” on human rights issues. But that moral authority which Australia enjoyed will soon be dissipated, he warned.

Australia, he said, “should be mature enough that when someone else criticises its record, it doesn’t just go off and sulk, but takes that criticism on board and does something to improve its standing.”

The government’s decision not to ratify the optional protocol on women’s rights, he said, would effectively bar Australian women from lodging complaints with the UN against policies they believe are discriminatory.

Senator Aden Ridgeway, of the opposition Australian Democrat’s Reconciliation, said “the timing of the government’s announcement is clearly linked to the fact that another UN Human Rights Committee is expected to criticise Australia about our treatment of indigenous peoples.”

“We find it extraordinary that Australia is prepared to single itself out from all other developed nations and say that we are beyond repute when it comes to our human rights record,” he added.

The language used by the government, he said, “is very hostile and borders on threatening.”

The Australian government, he continued, clearly seeks to overtly obstruct the work of UN committees “which we regard as critical to the operation of the UN Commission on Human Rights.”

Speaking before the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva last July, Ambassador Leslie Luck of Australia said Australians were drawn from many cultures, importantly from those of the indigenous people and of migrants from over 130 countries. However, the government recognised that indigenous people were disadvantaged within the Australian community, “largely as a result of the effects of European settlement.”

“While it was impossible to turn back the clock, the Australian government was strongly committed to addressing the unacceptable level of disadvantage suffered by many of Australia’s indigenous people,” he said.

In one of its official reports to the Committee, Australia admitted that since May 1991, 34 indigenous and 193 non-indigenous people were reported to have died in police and prison custody and juvenile detention in Australia.

Preliminary data for the period to the end of 1995 also indicated an increase in the number of aboriginal deaths in all forms of custody.