Day: April 7, 2022

The U.N. General Assembly voted Thursday to suspend Russia from the body’s Human Rights Council over atrocities it has been accused of committing in Ukraine.

In a vote of 93 to 24 with 58 abstentions, the assembly suspended Russia for its “gross and systematic violations of human rights” and violations of international law committed against Ukraine.

The resolution requires a two-thirds majority to be adopted; the abstentions are not counted.

“We view voting to suspend a state’s Human Rights Council rights as a rare and extraordinary action,” Ukrainian envoy Sergiy Kyslytsya said ahead of the vote.

“However, Russia’s actions are beyond the pale — Russia is not only committing human rights violations, it is shaking the underpinnings of international peace and security.”

Forty-seven countries are on the Geneva-based Human Rights Council. They are elected in secret ballot votes by the General Assembly. Russia is currently serving a three-year term that was due to expire on December 31, 2023.

Kyslytsya noted that April 7 is when the Rwandan genocide is commemorated, and said those massacres were due in large part to a lack of international action and failure by the United Nations to respond to warnings from the ground.

“On this day of grievances and bearing its own tragedy of thousands of Ukrainians killed by the Russian invaders, Ukraine stands together with Rwanda and calls to reaffirm our pledge to never forget and to never allow the recurrence of genocide, which was a result of the international community’s indifference,” the Ukrainian envoy said.

On Tuesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy admonished the U.N. Security Council in a video address for its inaction in stopping Russia’s war against his country. He called for Moscow to face accountability for crimes it has carried out there.

The United States led the move to suspend Russia and was joined by more than 60 countries in co-sponsoring the resolution.

“The country that’s perpetrating gross and systematic violations of human rights should not sit on a body whose job it is to protect those rights,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters in Brussels. “Today, a wrong was righted.”

“Unprecedented, historic vote,” U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told VOA after the vote. “We suspended a permanent member of the Security Council off of the U.N. Human Rights Council. We sent a strong message of support to the Ukrainians. We sent a strong message about human rights.”

She said the suspension is effective immediately.

Russian dismissals

Russia has repeatedly dismissed accusations of abuses and atrocities, saying they are either “fake news” or the Ukrainian side committed them to make them look bad.

Following the vote, Russia’s deputy U.N. ambassador, Gennady Kuzmin, said Moscow had taken its own decision to end its membership in the Human Rights Council and did not want to remain with Western states whom he accused of carrying out or abetting human rights abuses of their own.

“The sincere commitment of Russia to promoting and protecting of human rights does not make it possible for us to remain a member of an international mechanism that has become an enabler of the will of the above-mentioned group of countries,” Kuzmin said.

“You do not submit your resignation after you are fired,” Ukraine’s envoy told reporters in discussing Russia’s withdrawal.

This is only the second time the General Assembly has suspended a Human Rights Council member. It last happened in March 2011, when Libya was undergoing a brutal crackdown by then-dictator Moammar Gadhafi in a bid to suppress Arab Spring protests. He was ousted from power and later killed. Libya’s membership was restored eight months after its suspension, after a new government was installed.

Authority to investigate

The Human Rights Council has the authority to set up commissions of inquiry, fact-finding missions and investigations into rights abuses and has done so in many countries, including Syria, Myanmar and North Korea.

Last month, the council decided to establish an independent international commission of inquiry to investigate alleged violations and abuses in the context of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Three human rights experts have been appointed to collect and preserve evidence and testimony for any future legal proceedings.

Some countries that either voted against suspending Russia or abstained said they believed the move was premature and prejudges the outcomes of the commission of inquiry.

China, which had abstained in earlier assembly votes condemning Russia’s invasion and on the humanitarian consequences of the war, chose Thursday to side with Moscow and voted against the resolution.

“Such a hasty move at the General Assembly, which forces countries to choose sides, will aggravate the division among member states and intensify the contradictions between the parties concerned,” Ambassador Zhang Jun said. “It is like adding fuel to the fire, which is not conducive to the de-escalation of conflicts, and even less so to advancing the peace talks.”

Reluctance on suspension

Even some countries that have been vocal in condemning the war were not comfortable suspending Russia from the Human Rights Council, such as Mexico, which abstained.

“Yes, there is a commission of inquiry. We want to see the result of that commission of inquiry, but do we have to sit and continue to watch the carnage, watch the horror of Bucha happen over and over again, while Russia is sitting on the Human Rights Council?” Thomas-Greenfield told VOA.

Since its creation in 2006, the Human Rights Council has come in for frequent criticism because of the abhorrent rights records of some of its members. Currently, China, Eritrea, Pakistan and Venezuela are among its members.

The council has also been criticized for its focus on Israel. In 2018, the Trump administration left the body, calling it a “cesspool of political bias.” The Biden administration returned last year. Blinken said at the time that when the council works well, it shines a spotlight on countries with the worst human rights records.

Source: Voice of America

Pakistan’s Supreme Court on Thursday set aside a ruling by the deputy speaker of the national parliament that had blocked an opposition-led vote of no confidence against Prime Minister Imran Khan.

The controversial house ruling on Sunday led to the dissolution of the National Assembly, the lower house of parliament, by President Arif Alvi, acting on Khan’s advice. The president had also called for fresh elections in 90 days and appointed Khan as the interim chief executive after the prime minister dissolved his Cabinet.

The five-judge panel of the top court led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial, however, unanimously declared as unconstitutional all the steps stemming from the deputy speaker’s ruling, which had outlawed the no-confidence vote as having been sponsored by a “foreign power.”

The short judicial order Thursday declared the ruling “to be contrary to the Constitution and the law and of no legal effect, and the same are hereby set aside.” It went on to say that “the advice tendered by the Prime Minister … to the President to dissolve the Assembly was contrary to the Constitution and of no legal effect.”

The verdict also restored Khan as the prime minister and his Cabinet as well, ordering the session of the National Assembly to reconvene Saturday morning to reorganize the vote of no confidence to determine the fate of the embattled prime minister. It added that if the no-confidence resolution “is successful then the assembly shall forthwith, and in its present session, proceed to elect a Prime Minister.”

Khan had lost the majority in the 342-member house in the run-up to Sunday’s no-confidence vote after lawmakers from his ruling party defected and main coalition partners switched sides and joined the opposition.

The 69-year-old former cricket star’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party, or PTI, won the most seats in the 2018 election, but it did not get a majority, forcing Khan to form a coalition government.

Khan has repeatedly alleged that the United States conspired with the opposition to topple his government to punish him for his recent visit to Russia and for not supporting the West in condemning President Vladimir Putin’s war on Ukraine.

Pakistani opposition leaders have ridiculed the charges, and Washington has vehemently rejected them.

“There is absolutely no truth to the allegations,” State Department spokesman Ned Price reiterated to reporters Monday when asked if the U.S. was behind an effort to oust Khan.

“We do not support one political party over another. We support the broader principles, the principles of rule of law, of equal justice under the law,” Price added.

Khan’s attorneys had defended his actions as being in line with the constitution during their arguments before the Supreme Court.

Opposition leaders and rights activists declared the outcome of the legal proceedings as a landmark judgment. “It is not political parties or parliament that won or lost. The constitution retained its supremacy,” said Tahira Abdullah, an Islamabad-based civil society activist.

Pakistan’s powerful military distanced itself from the political crisis stemming from Sunday’s controversial proceedings in parliament.

The nuclear-armed South Asia nation has experienced three military coups since its founding 75 years ago, leading to prolonged dictatorial rules. Mainstream political parties admit that generals continue to influence democratically elected governments in policymaking matters when not in power.

Analysts blame direct and indirect military interventions for the fragility of democracy in a country where no elected prime minister ever has served out a full five-year term.

“After its euphoria subsides, and assuming it wins the no-confidence vote, the current opposition won’t have it easy,” said Michael Kugelman, an expert on South Asia affairs at the Washington-based Wilson Center, while commenting on the court verdict.

“It will face an economic mess, and it will be hounded relentlessly by an angry PTI in opposition. Can’t rule out the possibility of early elections down the road,” Kugelman added.

Even if Khan loses the no-confidence vote, his party will remain the largest political force, with at least 135 seats in the legislative assembly.

The united opposition already has announced that Shehbaz Sharif, the leader of the parliamentary opposition and head of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), will be their candidate for prime minister. The PML-N, with 83 seats, is the second-biggest party in the assembly, followed by the Pakistani Peoples Party, with 53 seats.

Khan has called Cabinet and parliamentary party meetings on Friday following the court ruling, saying he will also address the nation later in the day. “My message to our nation is I have always & will continue to fight for Pak till the last ball,” the embattled Pakistani leader wrote on Twitter.

Sharif told reporters the court ruling “fulfilled the people’s expectations.”

PPP leader Bilawal Bhutto Zardari hailed the verdict as a “victory for democracy and the constitution.”

Source: Voice of America