Meanwhile, at Scandals-R-the-UN

By Claudia Rosett,

One way to bury a scandal is to hold a confidential investigation, ignore the findings and pension off the alleged culprit. The United Nations, helped along by diplomatic immunity, does this with such expertise that it’s surprising they haven’t set up entire agencies devoted to this art. Or maybe they have. At the UN, top management has been sitting for more than two months now on a confidential report from the UN’s own anti-corruption task force alleging ”gross negligence” and diverted funds within — I’m not kidding — the UN’s own good governance office. Does Ban Ki-Moon care? Or is he too busy jetting around the world opining that we should let the UN serve as world’s chief rationer of energy? More on UN lessons on how to indulge in bad governance and get away with it, in my article in today’s New York Post.

For connoiseurs of UN scandal, it seems the UN official currently busy burying these latest signs of institutional rot in his “In” tray is Under-Secretary-General Sha Zukang, a member of the UN Management Group which Ban Ki-Moon chairs.

Who is Sha Zukang?

He’s one of China’s men at Turtle Bay. Based in New York, Sha runs the UN’s sprawling Department of Economic and Social Affairs — an influential position with broad reach, spending lots of money (including lots of U.S. tax dollars) around the globe on all sorts of nebulous projects — including the dissemination of principles of governance.

That bears thinking about, because in a previous incarnation, Sha was based in Geneva as an envoy of the People’s Republic of China, busy shaping the disastrously warped dictator-friendly UN Human Rights Council (which replaced the grotesquely twisted Human Rights Commission). Among Sha’s functions, from 2004-2007, as described in his UN bio, was “Coordinator of the Like-Minded Group of the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Council.”

What was this “Like-Minded Group” that Sha Zukang coordinated, and on behalf of which he gave speeches urging the UN to avoid the practice of ”naming and shaming” the world’s worst human rights violators? It was a group of about 20 countries consisting largely of some of the world’s worst violators — including Sha’s own China, Belarus, Cuba, Iran, Burma, Sudan, Syria, Vietnam and Zimbabwe.

------------------------------------------

Statement by H.E. Ambassador SHA Zukang, on behalf of the Like Minded Group, at the Meeting between the President of the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights

2005-11-25

Mr. Chairman,

On behalf of the Like Minded Group of States: Algeria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bhutan, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe and my own country China, I warmly welcome Mr. Eliasson, President of the General Assembly and his two Co-Chairs on the establishment of the Human Rights Council to be here and exchange views with us on details of the Human Rights Council and the transitional arrangement. LMG fully support the work of Mr. Eliasson and it is our belief that under his leadership, the consultation process will be a successful one.

LMG welcomes the decision of Heads of States at the 60th Session of the GA to create a Human Rights Council, and deems it necessary to address the credibility deficit of the Commission on Human Rights. Human rights is not about the preach and the preached, the condemn and the condemned. LMG sincerely hopes that the Council will be a venue to promote international cooperation instead of naming and shaming. LMG takes note with appreciation of the effort made by the President of GA to organize inclusive, open and transparent consultations concerning details of the Council. LMG has participated actively in the consultations in a constructive manner and hopes a decision can be reached in due course with consensus. With regard to the specific issues of the Council, such as the mandate, modalities, functions, size, composition, membership, working methods and procedures and etc, the LMG is of the view as follows:

---The Human Rights Council should be a subsidiary body of the GA, and thus the rules of procedure of GA apply to it.

---The size of it should be the same as CHR, if not larger than CHR, in the interest of representativeness of the body.

---All member states, big or small, rich or poor, will have an equal chance to participate in the activities of the Council. Whatever the size of the Council, the principle of equitable geographic representation should be strictly abided by, with a due reflection of membership in different regional groups.

---In order for all countries, especially smaller countries to have a better chance to win elections, it would be preferable for its members to be elected by an affirmative vote of a simple majority of GA present and voting, which is the case for all subsidiary organs of GA. Candidates endorsed by regional groups should be duly acknowledged according to the election practice across the UN system.

---The Council should focus its work on national capacity building and technical assistance, provided upon request. The root causes of credibility deficit of CHR, which is characterized by politicization, double standards and selectivity, should be stamped out. A thematic rather than a country specific approach to consideration of human rights issues should be applied to help depoliticize the Council

---The Council should avoid naming and shaming that spoils the work of current CHR. Therefore, the country specific review under Item 9 of CHR should either be abolished or applied strictly to address "gross and systematic violations" and certain criteria should be introduced in this regard to rationalize the consideration of country specific issues.

---The Council shall report and recommend to the GA as its subsidiary body, while the GA shall decide whether it would convey relevant recommendations.

---The Council shall supervise the work of OHCHR by regularly reviewing its annual work program, budget as well as their implementation.

---All human rights, both civil and political and economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development, should be treated in a fair and equal manner.

---Improve NGO participation in the work of the Council based on the principles as contained in ECOSOC resolution 1996/31. The participation of NGO in the Council shall not constitute any precedent for future work of GA and its other subsidiary bodies.

---In case the Council meets regularly, the logistic difficulties of smaller countries should be bear in mind. Measures including a special trust fund should be taken into consideration to facilitate their participation.

---Transitional arrangement should be taken step by step smoothly in order not to disrupt UN human rights machinery. In establishing the Council, due considerations should be given to members who have yet to finish their terms in CHR, without prejudice to the ability of states which are presently not members of CHR to gain membership in the Council.

---The role of the Sub-Commission as an independent think tank should be preserved and strengthened. It should continue its work.