UN SUMMARY: US Periodic Review of Human Rights just keeps on ignoring the vast majority of US human rights violations
By Brenda Norrell
Censored News
http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com
Photo: Western Shoshone protest gold mining by Barrick Gold on sacred Mount Tenabo. Shoshone were in Geneva for the report.
The United Nations Human Rights Commission has written a summary of the report of the first ever US Periodic Review of Human Rights, which took place in Geneva on Friday, Nov. 5, 2010, with a list of Stakeholders and published the advance questions from other countries.
Below are the few items listed in the UN summary, under "Minorities and indigenous peoples,' The summary ignores nearly all the Native American testimony at the Listening Conferences, Human Rights Commission report and individual reports.
(The report, below, can be searched for other topics, such as torture, by downloading and using the pdf file search at the top center.)
EXCERPT, page 8 -- 9:9. Minorities and indigenous peoples
69. Nation of Hawai’i recommended securing the rights of all indigenous peoples under
ICCPR.114 FPHRC noted that, as a Member of the Human Rights Council, the US should
set a positive example in upholding Indigenous people’s human rights.115
70. According to the Navajo Nation, and the Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission
(NNHRC) the US continues to deprive indigenous peoples of their right to equal protection
under law.116
71. International Indian Treaty Council (IITC) recommended questioning the US about:
the failure to comply with the CERD and the IACHR decision regarding the Western
Shoshone; the destruction, desecration of, and denial of access to Indigenous Sacred Areas;
the failure to consult with Indigenous Peoples and to acquire their free, prior and informed
consent regarding matters that directly affect their interests; the unilateral termination of
A/HRC/WG.6/9/USA/3
9
Treaties with Indigenous Peoples; and the failure to implement a process to address
violations of these Treaties.117
72. Southeast Indigenous Peoples’ Center (SIPC) noted that though the Constitution
says that it will deal with ’Indian Tribes’ as nations, the US does not negotiate with
indigenous peoples.118
73. The Society for Threatened Peoples (STP) noted that the Havasupai and Hualapai
tribes have struggled for decades for the protection of their land from mining and expressed
concern at the risk of radioactive pollution.
74. American Indians Rights and Resources Organization made reference to the impact
of the disenrollment and banishment of Indians from their tribes.119
75. Akiak Native Community indicated that the indigenous people are still devastated by
the culture and traditions forcibly induced to the indigenous people.120
Displacement of Navajos and all Indigenous Peoples:
83. Diné Homeowners & Communities Association recommended prohibiting forced
relocation of indigenous people in the Americas.133
Download or print the UN summary at:http://www.scribd.com/doc/41916472/UN-report-on-US-Periodic-Review-of-Human-Rights-Nov-2010
Note: Although the Leonard Peltier Defense Offense Committee and other key organizations are listed as "Stakeholders," their issues are not included in the United Nations' summary.
1 The stakeholders listed below have contributed information for this summary; the full texts of all original submissions are available at: http://www.ohchr.org/ . (One asterisk denotes a non-governmental organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.)
Read more from the stakeholders and advance questions from other countries:http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/PAGES/USSession9.aspx
STAKEHOLDERSCivil society
ABA American Bar Association*, USA;
AC Accountability Counsel, USA
ACNU Asociación Cubana de las Naciones Unidas*, Cuba;
AFRE All For Reparations and Emancipation*, USA;
AHR Advocates for Human Rights*, Minnesota, USA;
AI Amnesty International *, UK;
AIJ The Association of Iraqi Jurists, Iraq;
AIRRO American Indians Rights and Resources Organization, USA;
AMSI-ABMA Joint submission No. 22 - Human Rights Division of the Association
of Muslims Scholars in Iraq - Al-Basaer Media Association, Iraq;
ANC Tribal Council of the Akiak Native Community, USA;
ANEC Asociación Nacional de Economistas y Contadores, Cuba;
APSA Atlanta Public Sector Alliance, USA;
Becket Fund The Beckett Fund for Religious Liberty*, USA;
CCERF Conservation Centre of Environmental and Reserves in Iraq, Iraq;
CEA Centro de Estudios sobre América, Cuba;
CESR Center for Economic and Social Rights*, USA;
C-FAM Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute, USA;
CGE Joint Submission No. 1 – The Council for Global Equality, USA;
CHRGJ Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, USA;
CISV Charitable Institute for Social Victims*, Iran;
COHRE Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions*, Geneva (Switzerland);
CONFEDERACY Haudenosaunee Confederacy Grand Council, USA;
CPTI Conscience and Peace Tax International*, Leuven (Belgium);
CSN Joint Submission No. 2 - Charity and Security Network, USA;
CURE Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants*, USA;
DHCA The Diné Homeowners & Communities Association, USA;
DREDF Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, USA;
Dui Hua The Dui Hua Foundation*, USA;
Earth Rights Earth Rights International* , USA;
EDM Episcopal Diocese of Maine, USA;
EMF EMF Sensitivity.org, USA;
EPOCH EPOCH-USA, USA;
ERI Edmund Rice International, Geneva (Switzerland);
FFF Four Freedoms Forum, USA;
FLOC-OXFAM Joint Submission No. 21 – Farm Labor Organizing Committee
(FLOC) and OXFAM, USA;
FMC Federación de Mujeres Cubanas, Cuba;
FPHRC First Peoples Human Rights Coalition, USA;
GFIW- GWAF Joint submission No. 23- General Federation of Iraqi Women and
General Arab Women Federation, Iraq;
GJC Global Justice Center, USA;
HAWAII Nation of Hawaii, USA;
A/HRC/WG.6/9/USA/3
13
Heritage The Heritage Foundation, USA;
HRA Human Rights Advocates*, USA;
HRAlert Human Rights Alert, USA;
HRF Human Rights First*, USA;
HRW Human Rights Watch*, New York (USA);
ICHR Iraqi Commission for Human Rights, Baghdad (Iraq);
ICJ International Commission of Jurists*, Geneva (Switzerland);
ICTJ International Center for Transitional Justice, New York (USA);
IHRB Institute for Human Rights and Business, Geneva (Switzerland);
IHRLS International Human Rights Law Society, Indiana (USA);
IITC International Indian Treaty Council*, USA;
ITHACA Ithaca rights, USA;
JDI Just Detention International, USA;
JS-3 Joint Submission No. 3 - Franciscans International* ; the
International Presentation Association of the Sisters of the
Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and UNANIMA
International*, USA;
JS-4 Joint Submission No. 4 - Black Communities Process (Proceso de
Comunidades Negras –PCN), Colombia and AFRODES USA;
JS-5 Joint Submission No. 5 - Best Practices Policy Project, Desiree
Alliance, and the Sexual Rights Initiative;
JS-6 Joint Submission No. 6 - Indigenous Peoples and Nations Coalition
and the Koani Foundation;
JS-7 Joint Submission No. 7 - Institute for Redress & Recovery, The
Institute for Study of Psychosocial Trauma and the Heartland Alliance
Marjorie Kovler Center , USA;
JS-9 Joint Submission No. 9 - Minnesota Tenants Union , Minnesota
Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, Minnesota Coalition for a
Peoples’ Bailout, St. Paul Branch of the NAACP, USA;
JS-10 Joint Submission No. 10 - National Coalition for LGBT Health and
the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States,
USA;
JS-12 Joint Submission No. 12 - International Association against Torture*
and the December 12th Movement International Secretariat *, USA;
JS-13 Joint Submission No. 13 – Earthjustice*, Greenpeace USA; Human
Rights Advocates*; and Many Strong Voices USA;
JS-14 Joint Submission No. 14 - Medical Whistleblower Stakeholder
Advocacy Network, USA;
JS-19 Joint Submission No. 19 - Heartland Alliance’s National Immigrant
Justice Center (NIJC); American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
The Center for Victims of Torture (CVT); Chad Doobay (attorney
doing pro-bono representation to asylum seekers at National
Immigrant Justice Center); Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center
(FIAC); Denise Gilman (professor at the University of Texas School
of Immigration Clinic); Immigration Equality; Jewish Council on
Urban Affairs (JCUA); King Hall Immigrant Detention Project at
University of California Davis School of Law; Legal Aid Justice
Center’s Immigrant Advocacy Program; Michigan Immigrant Rights
Center (MIRC); Midwest Coalition for Human Rights Physicians for
Human Rights (PHR); Dr. Mary White (volunteer with Physicians for
Human Rights); World Relief, USA;
JS-24 Joint submission No. 24 - Organization for Justice and Democracy in
Iraq (OJDI) and The International Organization for the Elimination of
All Forms of Racial Discrimination (EAFORD), Iraq;
JS-25 Joint submission No. 25 - The Iraqi Association Against War (IAAW)
and The Indian Movement (TUPAJ AMARU)*;
A/HRC/WG.6/9/USA/3
14
LIRS Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, USA;
LPDOC Leonard Peltier Defense Offense Committee, USA;
MCLI Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute, USA;
MICJ Maria Iñamagua Campaign for Justice, USA;
MITA- CMP Joint Submission No. 20 - Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru *, Geneva
(Switzerland) and Consejo Mundial por la Paz,
MOVPAZ Movimiento Cubano por la Paz y la Solidaridad, * La Habana, Cuba;
NACG Native American Church of the Ghost Dancers, USA;
NAPW National Advocates for Pregnant Women , USA;
NAVAJO The Navajo Nation Department of Justice, USA;
NCBL National Conference of Black Lawyers, USA;
NIYC The National Indian Youth Council,* USA;
NNHRC Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission, USA;
NOW West Virginia National Organization for Women ,* USA;
NWC National Whistleblowers Center, USA;
OAK Joint Submission No. 16 - Organizations Associating for the Kind of
Change America Really Needs, USA;
ODVV Organization for Defending Victims of Violence,* Iran;
OSPAAAL Organización de Solidaridad de los Pueblos de África, Asia y América
Latina, Cuba;
PEN International Pen*, London (United Kingdom) and PEN American
Center, USA;
PHR Physicians for Human Rights,* USA;
RCF The Rachel Corrie Foundation for Peace and Justice, USA;
RI Refugees International,* USA;
SCHRD Studies Center of Human Rights and Democracy, Iraq;
SIPC Southeast Indigenous Peoples’ Center , USA;
STP Society for Threatened Peoples*, Göttingen (Deutschland);
The 5-11 Campaign The 5-11 Campaign, USA;
USHRN Joint Submission No. 17 - US Human Rights Network (23 annexes),
USA;
WILD The Women's Institute for Leadership Development for Human
Rights, USA;
WR Worldrights, USA;
WWA-OWO Joint submission No. 26 - Women’s Will Association and the
Organization for Widows and Orphans, Iraq;
YAMASI Yamasi People, USA;
YAMASSEE At-sik-hata Nation of Yamassee Moors, USA;
Academic
JS-8 Joint Submission No. 8 - International Human Rights Law Clinic,
University of California, Berkeley, School of Law; Chief Justice Earl
Warren Institute on Race, Ethnicity and Diversity, University of
California, Berkeley, School of Law; Immigration Law Clinic,
University of California, Davis, School of Law, USA;
JS-11 Joint Submission No. 11 - University of Arizona, Indigenous Peoples
Law & Policy Program; Western Shoshone Defense Project; Human
Rights Research Fund; First Peoples Human Rights Coalition, USA;
JS-15 Joint Submission No. 15 - International Human Rights Law Clinic,
University of California, Berkeley, School of Law; Chief Justice Earl
Warren Institute on Race, Ethnicity and Diversity, University of
California, Berkeley, School of Law; Immigration Law Clinic,
University of California, Davis, School of Law, USA;
PIJIP-GAP Joint submission No. 18 - American University Washington College
of Law’s Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
(PIJIP) and Health Global Access Project (Health GAP), USA;
A/HRC/WG.6/9/USA/3Also see: Advance Questions: Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
GERMANY• CERD recommended, inter alia, that the US recognize the right of Native Americans to participate in decisions affecting them, and consult in good faith with them before adopting and implementing any activity in their lands, and that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples be
1
used as a guide to interpret the State obligations under the Convention relating to indigenous peoples.
Germany would be grateful for information how the United States of America is following-up on this recommendation.
NORWAY:• What is the scope for endorsement of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and ratification of ILO Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries? Could a national human rights institution, established in accordance with the Paris Principles, help advance indigenous issues in the United States?
2
ADVANCE QUESTIONS TO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA – Add.3
MEXICO
MIGRATION POLICY• (Paragraph 95 of the national report states that "only the federal government has the authority to establish and enforce immigration laws") What steps has the U.S. government taken to prevent the proliferation of cooperation initiatives with local authorities to implement schemes such as immigration legislation under Cooperation Agreements with the Communities to Improve Security (ICE ACCESS) - which include Memoranda of Understanding 287 g and the Safe Communities Program?
• Under the Safe Communities Program, what specific safeguards, including measures for the collection of data, has the U.S. Government taken to ensure that local jurisdictions that are part of the Program, avoid the implementation of practices aimed at increasing arrests on the basis of racial or national origin profiling, subsequently discharging minor offences ¿? that led to the initial arrest for the sole purpose of making a subsequent deportation?
• What legal remedies, whether local or federal, are available for individuals who allege to be victims of abuses by state and local authorities who are acting to implement federal laws?
• What actions have been taken by the U.S. Government to reduce the number of deaths of persons in immigration custody and to investigate the occurring ones, and to improve the medical services provided in immigration detention centers?
On the excessive use of force by immigration officials:
• What measures have been taken by the U.S. Government to regulate the proportional use of force when performing immigration enforcement duties, particularly to reduce the use of lethal force along territorial borders?
• To what extent such measures are in accordance with the provisions of International instruments to which the U.S. is a State party?
DEATH PENALTY
• (The national report notes in paragraph 54, the willingness of the USG to comply with its obligations under the Avena case of the International Court of Justice.) What future measures are envisaged by the Government of the United States to comply with the Avena Judgment of the International Court of Justice and especially to prevent the execution of Mexican nationals in violation of this ruling? b) what are the persisting obstacles that hinder the
1
undertaking of the review and reconsideration of the death penalty sentences of Mexican nationals who are covered by the ruling?
• What measures or actions have been taken by the the United States to request state governments to take into consideration recommendations or injunctions issued by international and regional bodies related to human rights violations of those sentenced to death?
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
• What obstacles does the United States face for the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and what measures have been undertaken to address them?
• Does the United States have the intention to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention,?
• ¿Se contempla que Estados Unidos ratifique igualmente el Protocolo Facultativo de la Convención, a fin de reconocer la competencia del Comité sobre los Derechos de las Personas con Discapacidad?
FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION
• What guarantees does the US have to allow the free association of migrant workers, including undocumented migrants, and to prevent immigration laws and policies from being used as threats or obstacles to hamper freedom of peaceful assembly and association?
FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM
• Bearing in mind that that there are provisions of international human rights that law that are non derogable under any circumstances, how does the United States ensure compliance with those norms in the armed forces activities, including in situations of armed conflict?
• What mechanisms does the US have in place to periodically review the provisions of the Army operations manual are compatible with International human rights norms and international humanitarian law, in particular on measures to prevent and punish torture?
No comments:
Post a Comment