Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS
SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 24th MEETING
Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva,
on Tuesday, 27 March 2007, at 9 a.m.
President: Mr. DE ALBA (Mexico)
This record is subject to correction.
Corrections should be submitted in one of the working languages. They should be set forth in a memorandum and also incorporated in a copy of the record. They should be sent within one week of the date of this document to the Editing Unit, room E.4108, Palais des Nations, Geneva.
Any corrections to the records of the public meetings of the Council at this session will be consolidated in a single corrigendum, to be issued shortly after the end of the session.
Interactive dialogue on:
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism (continued) (A/HRC/4/26 and Add.1-3; A/HRC/4/G/4);
Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (continued) (A/HRC/4/33 and Add.1-3)
46. Mr. SCHEININ (Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism), ...
52. With regard to the extraterritorial effect of human rights and humanitarian law, the latter was applicable by definition when countries resorted to armed force outside their territory. Customary human rights norms were universally applicable. Some human rights treaties referred to territory or jurisdiction in their general provisions regarding State obligations, and those provisions required careful scrutiny. The Human Rights Committee, for example, had consistently held that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was applicable extraterritorially to acts of States that amounted to a human rights violation. The International Court of Justice had recently supported the Committee’s position in its Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. He also supported that position, but wished to point out that even in situations where some elements of a human rights treaty might not be applicable extraterritorially, customary human rights law would continue to apply.
94. Ms. SHARFELDDIN (International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) said that a major form of terrorism was foreign occupation, which subjected the rights of the people to the whim of the occupier, who sought to suppress any attempt at resistance. Yet such resistance was an expression of the historically recognized right to self-defence. Thus it was lawful for Palestinians and Iraqis to resist the foreign occupation of their countries. Yet some States seemed to believe that they had a God-given right to occupy the homelands of others and that resistance was unacceptable. Those States should ask themselves why they had been the targets of individual acts of terrorism while other States had not. Her question was in no way intended to condone the killing of innocent civilians, but it was very relevant to the issue of terrorism.