VZCZCXYZ0011
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0344/01 0550027
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 240027Z FEB 06
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 8058
INFO RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA PRIORITY 1922

C O N F I D E N T I A L USUN NEW YORK 000344 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FROM AMBASSADOR BOLTON 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/23/2016 
TAGS: PHUM KUNR UNGA PREL
SUBJECT: HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL: GA PRESIDENT PRESENTS NEW 
TEXT 
 
REF: A. USUN 293 
     ¶B. USUN 108 
     ¶C. USUN 166 
     ¶D. USUN 257 
     ¶E. STATE 2397 
     ¶F. MEHRA-WOLFF/ZACK E-MAIL OF FEBRUARY 17 
 
Classified By: Ambassador John R. Bolton, U.S. Representative to the Un 
ited Nations, for reasons 1.4(b) and (d). 
 
 ¶1. (C) Summary and Comment:  General Assembly (GA) President 
Eliasson presented February 23 to the GA his final text on 
the HRC (septel).  As foreshadowed in earlier reporting 
(reftels), Eliasson settled on arrangements for the HRC that 
fall short of U.S. positions on all key points: 
 
--  size:  Eliasson text: 47; U.S. position: initially 20, 
now up to 45; current Commission: 53; 
 
--  voting threshold: Eliasson text: individual absolute 
majority of 96 for each candidate; U.S. position: 2/3 
majority for each candidate; current Commission: majority of 
present and voting (and de facto vote by acclamation); and, 
 
--  membership criteria:  Eliasson text: hortatory standards 
and theoretical suspension mechanism; U.S. position: 
exclusions for countries under UNSC sanctions for human 
rights or terrorism reasons; current Commission: no criteria. 
 
 
In addition to these key elements, we have highlighted in 
paras 5-6 where Eliasson's new text disregards U.S. 
positions, where he has improved language over the previous 
text, and where he has introduced new elements. 
 
¶2. (C) The negative elements of the current text are 
compounded by the major setback for western interests 
introduced in Eliasson's previous text (and retained in the 
current one) whereby the adoption of "equitable geographic 
distribution" reduces the number of WEOG seats (from ten to 
seven) on the proposed Council -- and with it the number of 
available seats for which the U.S. could vie.  Under the new 
Council, Africa would get 13 seats, Asia 13, GRULAC 8, WEOG 7 
and Eastern Europe 6, ensuring a permanent majority for Asia 
and Africa. 
 
¶3. (C) UN Secretary General Annan has publicly endorsed the 
current text, and most like-minded delegations (including the 
EU, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand) have signaled that 
their capitals are likely to accept Eliasson's text, not so 
much because they are happy with it (the UK told us the text 
crossed some of their red lines), but because they fear a 
vacuum without it.  From where we sit, we see modest 
improvements over the Commission in this text (e.g., direct 
elections of each member, establishment of the principle of 
suspension, stronger language on human rights principles) 
outweighed by those elements that do not improve -- or even 
diminish -- the Commission's effectiveness and credibility 
(e.g., fewer Western seats, term limits, no binding mechanism 
to improve quality of membership).  Ultimately, this new 
Council will be judged by the composition of its membership 
and its ability to admonish human rights violators. 
Eliasson's text does not guarantee either.  End Summary and 
Comment. 
 
¶4. (C) Action Request:  Eliasson intends to move for adoption 
of his draft resolution next week and foresees no further 
negotiations.  We request instructions to reopen February 24 
objectionable provisions in direct intergovernmental 
negotiations.  End Action Request. 
 
¶5. (C) Additional Points Regarding the New Text follow: 
 
-- PP1: maintains the February 1 text regarding "developing 
friendly relations among nations based on respect for the 
principle of equal rights and self-determination of 
peoples..."  (U.S. sought deletion or less prominent 
placement in the text.) 
 
-- PP 2: maintains language "reaffirming" the Vienna 
Declaration (U.S. sought "recalling" vice "reaffirming") 
 
-- PP 7: is a new paragraph "Affirming the need for all 
States to continue international efforts to enhance dialogue 
and broaden understanding among civilizations, cultures and 
religions and emphasizing that States, regional 
organizations, non-governmental organizations, religious 
bodies and the media have an important role to play in 
promoting tolerance, respect for and freedom of religion and 
belief."  (Note:  This is in response to Pakistan/OIC 
 
 
proposals to address the issue of respect for religions and 
cultures, but is not the original proposed language.) 
 
-- PP 12 and OP 4: maintain references to the right to 
development (U.S. sought deletion) 
 
-- OP 5(d): continues to read "promote...the follow-up of the 
goals and commitments related to the promotion and protection 
of human rights emanating from United Nations conferences and 
summits" (U.S. sought deletion of the paragraph, or to insert 
"relevant" before "UN conferences and summits.")(Note:  The 
December 19 Co-Chairs text referred to "all" UN conferences 
and summits.) 
 
-- OP 5(e): maintains language on the universal periodic 
review.  A new sentence has been added to say "The Council 
shall develop the modalities and necessary time allocation of 
the universal periodic review mechanism within one year after 
the holding of its first session." 
 
-- OP 5(f):  Language is changed to read "the prevention of 
human rights violations and respond promptly to human rights 
emergencies" (vice February 1 text "respond promptly to 
deteriorating human rights situations).  (The U.S. had 
proposed a reference to responding to "emergencies" in this 
paragraph for an earlier draft of the text.) 
 
-- OP 5(i): maintains language from the last text "make 
recommendations with regard to the promotion and protection 
of human rights"  (This text neither specifies to which 
bodies recommendations might be made, as we might have hoped, 
nor does it call for recommendations to or through the 
General Assembly, as many delegations had requested, but 
which we opposed.) 
 
-- OP 6:  Text still decides that the HRC will assume, review 
and where necessary improve and rationalize all mandates, 
mechanisms functions and responsibilities of the CHR "in 
order to maintain" a system of special procedures, expert 
advise and individual complaint procedure.  Language remains 
unchanged from the February 1 text, except for the deletion 
of the word "individual" in reference to the CHR's complaint 
procedure and now calling for completion of the review 
"within" one year after the first HRC session.  (U.S. sought 
to make the language, particularly "in order to maintain 
them," less strong.) 
 
-- OP 7:  Size of the HRC in the new text is 47 (vice 45 in 
the February 1 text), and members are to be elected by the 
majority of members of the General Assembly (vice two-thirds 
or simple majority of the members present and voting).  The 
allocation of seats to the regional groups "based on 
equitable geographic distribution" is therefore modified, 
with the African Group getting 13, the Asian Group 13, the 
Eastern European Group 6, GRULAC 8 and WEOG 7.  (The new text 
maintains the language that HRC members shall be elected 
"directly and individually by secret ballots.") 
 
-- OP 8:  OP 8 has been changed.  The GA President's February 
23 text includes a new sentence which reads: "The General 
Assembly, by a two-thirds majority of the members present and 
voting, may suspend the rights of membership in the Council 
of a member of the Human Rights Council that commits gross 
and systematic violations of human rights."  The new text 
deletes the third sentence of the February 1 text (which had 
called for Member States, when electing HRC members, to take 
into account whether there are any situations that constitute 
systematic and gross violations of human rights or any agreed 
measures currently in place at the United Nations against a 
candidate for human rights violations).  The second sentence 
also has been modified slightly in the new text to read "When 
electing members of the Council, Member States shall take 
into account the candidates' contribution to the promotion 
and protection of human rights and their voluntary pledges 
and commitments made thereto." 
 
-- OP 9:  Text was strengthened to read Members elected to 
the Council "shall uphold" the highest standards in the 
promotion and protection of human rights (vice February 1 
text "shall be guided by" the highest standards). 
 
-- OP 10:  The text calls for "not fewer than" three sessions 
(vice "meetings") per year, including a main session for a 
total duration of no less than 10 weeks.  Special sessions 
can be held at the request of an HRC member with the support 
of one-third of the HRC membership.  (There is no provision 
for the additional possibility of meetings to be called by 
the High Commissioner for Human Rights or the 
Secretary-General, as we preferred.  U.S. also called for 
 
SIPDIS 
meetings to be agreed by a simple majority of the Council.) 
 
 
 
¶6.  Other small modifications to the text: 
 
-- PP 10: Small modification to refer to strengthening the 
capacity of Member States to comply with their human rights 
obligations for the benefit of all "human beings" (vice 
February 1 text referring to "all rights holders.") 
 
-- P 5(a):  Modification for providing technical assistance 
and capacity building "in consultation with and with the 
consent of the Members States concerned" (vice February 1 
text "in consultation and with the consent of Member States). 
 
-- OP 13:  Small modification to the date for abolishment of 
the CHR on June 16 (vice June 15 in February 1 text) 
 
-- OP 15:  Small modification to the date for the first 
meeting of the Council to be held on June 19 (vice June 16 in 
February 1 text). 
BOLTON