PERMANENT MISSION OF INDIA TO THE UN, GENEVA
26TH SESSION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
(10-27 June 2014)
Agenda Item 5: General Debate
Statement by India
Mr. President,
1. The Special Procedures are an important mechanism of this Council for a “genuine dialogue for strengthening the capacity of member states”. It is therefore of fundamental importance that mandate holders remain truly independent, impartial and carry out their tasks in accordance with the mandate given by the Council and the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures as stipulated in Resolution 5/2. This Code establishes the standards of ethical and professional conduct of mandate holders. However, we regret that despite concerns raised in the past some mandate holders continue to disregard the Code of Conduct.
2. During country visits, instances where Special Procedures unilaterally change the agreed official programme after their arrival in the country undermine the arrangements made by receiving states, increase the work load and adversely impact the atmosphere of dialogue and cooperation. Some mandate holders also send OHCHR staff on their behalf to meetings during their country visits. Whatever the nature of these meetings, this is a flagrant violation of the Code of Conduct and totally unacceptable as the invitation by states is for the mandate holder and not his/her assistant.
3. With regard to the source of information, the Code of Conduct in Article 6 & 8 has clearly established the responsibility of Special Procedures to “ always seek to establish the facts, based on objective, reliable information emanating from relevant credible sources, that they have duly cross-checked to the best extent possible”. Information received should be taken into account only when they are sufficient in number to represent a pattern. Such an approach will enhance the credibility of the report as well as its utility for member states.
4. The recommendations of the Special Procedures should also conform to the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, be constructive and be relevant to the country and not ideologically driven. They should not be judgmental or recriminatory in nature. This will encourage states to pay due regard to their expert advice and recommendations.
5. We are also deeply concerned by the increasing politicization and controversies surrounding the selection of Special Procedures. Changes are being made in the recommendations of the Consultative Group without adequate reason and explanation. Lobbying by states, some even at the level of Ministers, undermines the work of the Consultative Group. Such derogations from the IB package endanger the credibility of the Special Procedure mechanism itself. It also has the potential to adversely impact the level of engagement by states with the Special Procedures.
Finally Mr. President,
6. We reiterate the importance of ensuring equitable distribution of financial resources among all Special Procedures mandate holders through a transparent process.