Plenary Monday, 4 August 2003
Women and human rights, new priorities, in particular terrorism

Special Rapporteur, Iulia-Antoanella Motoc, began the session today with an introductory presentation of her working paper on bioethics and the human genome. She stressed that the human genome is a part of the common heritage of all humankind. She emphasized that although research continues to steadily develop, bioethical laws surrounding the topic advance at a slower pace. The introduction outlined the topic of genetic manipulation, discrimination, and intellectual property rights with respect to the human genome.

Ms. Motoc discussed both the possible medical advances with therapeutic cloning, as well as the consequence of negating human dignity with reproductive cloning. It is a general consensus that reproductive cloning is unacceptable. She also addressed the right to health, claiming that governments have the responsibility to protect against dangerous genetic manipulation.

Ms. Motoc's working paper warned that genetic screening and/or testing may arouse means for discrimination. Employers may choose to deny employment for those with genetic predispositions for genetic disorders, or monitor their progression in concordance with their genetic predispositions. Furthermore, the report warned of a possibility of a genetic hierarchy created with the manipulation of the human genome.

In regards to intellectual property rights, Motoc brought up the subject of patenting in relation to advances in the human genome research and activity. Patenting could lead to "monopolistic position" on human genes, which could, in turn, impede medical advances. Also, the set standards for research and patenting are varied in relation to Japan, the U.S., and Europe, which could potentially cause property rights issues.

Finally, Ms. Motoc suggested the development of an "international framework," a code of conduct, and a bioethics commission where human rights are accounted for and understood in relation to the research and activities with the human genome. At this point, the floor was opened to the sub-commission.

Sub-commission expert, Asbjorn Eide, expressed his concern over the potential discriminations caused by genetic manipulation, and asked about the role of the sub-commission in relation with UNESCO.

Ms. Francoise Jane Hampson then suggested that the WHO be involved with the research on the human genome, and later warned of the risk of genetic weapons (considered to be weapons of mass destruction). These weapons could cause temporary interference with how human bodies work. She then suggested that the legal implications be identified as the weapons are produced.
Mr. Soo Gil Park called this issue "disturbing," as there are so many unknown consequences. He advised strict controls be placed on the research, and that all research should be shared by all humanity. He also warned that a new species could lead to genocide or slavery. Later, he brought up that the protection of intellectual property rights, in this case, may bring about a "biotech divide" between poorer and richer countries.

Ms. Koufa then spoke of the use of "overzealous" of anti-terrorism measures, giving the example of the harsh treatment of immigrants justified by new international law. This, she stated, lowers the standards of human rights. Koufa declared that the protection of human rights should always be in effect while countering terrorism, and that there should be no "trade-off" between security and civil liberties. She pressed for the Security Council to take a more active role in monitoring anti-terrorism actions and to review these actions and anti-terrorism legislation with respect to human rights.

Subsequently, Madame Warzazi relieved the chair to Mr. Abdoul Sattar in order for her to present her report on the traditional practice of female genital manipulation (FGM). Her report asked for increased awareness and a plan of action for cessation. FGM makes women "third-class citizens," and therefore not only affects the physical health of the victim, but the mental health as well. Warzazi stated that FGM goes against human rights. She briefly discussed other infringes of human rights in relation to women and the girl child, such as honor killings and forced marriages. In order to help combat FGM and other traditional practices such as these, she affirmed, is through the "demystification of the role of girls in family honor" and through increasing the self-respect of women.

Ms. Hampson added another concerns when she took the floor, including the trafficking of these traditions with migrants or refugees to other countries and dowry killings. She asserted that legislation is not effective without "ground action," while paying heed that the change would be slow.

Mr. Guissée highlighted the importance of the cultural differences between occidental and African countries in the fight against FGM. He explained that the weight of traditions must be counterbalanced by education and information of peoples on the ground. He concluded with the complex relationship between exile and traditional practices.

Then, Ms Motta took the floor and underlined the problem of the reappearance of traditional practices (such as the belief that "a sexual relation with a virgin wife cures AIDS"). She also stressed the essential role that local NGOs played in the fight against such deleterious traditional practices.

Mr. Decaux discussed the importance of woman's rights in all the works of the Sub-Commission. Women's rights are a fundamental issue in the study of the broad spectrum of topics related to human rights, such as the feminization of poverty. He added that honor crimes have to be named "rape" in order to avoid confusion in vocabulary.

The debate was summed up by Ms Warzazi who linked the success of fighting against traditional, health-endangering practices with the evolution of mentalities of people who still live "faithful to their traditions". She highlighted the state's responsibility and the duty of complying with international obligations contracted by conventions.

She concluded by going over the ground that had been covered since the beginning of the Sub-Commission's work. One of the most important successes is the unanimous recognition of the fact that practices damaging women's health are "violations of human rights".

The remaining fundamental problem refers to Third World immigrants in industrialized countries who continue to use their traditional practices, in the face of cultural differences encountered in their adopted country. Immigrant populations have to face the rigidity of host countries. According to one expert, "the criteria of integration are imposed without awareness and sensitivity."

Given the fact that "the law is only relevant to those who understand it", Ms Warzazi noted that it was essential to concentrate on respect and dignity as a means of establishing adequate criteria imposed on Third World immigrants. In conclusion, she underlined a further condition for the respect of human rights in Third World societies: the evolution of the patriarchal system.

After this debate, the chairperson gave the floor to the 20 NGOs present, of which only three were able to contribute to the debate given the lack of time.

The Foundation of Japanese Honorary Debts representative Ms José Adriaansen-Smit demanded that the Japanese government repay damages caused by the Japanese occupation of South East Asia during World War Two. She asked for an official declaration of regret and appealed to the Secretary General of the UN to pressure the Japanese government to achieve this goal. She also noted that Japanese history books overlook the brutal attitude of Japanese occupying forces during World War 2.

Ms Yongu-Ae Yamashita, of the Asia-Japan Women's Resource Centre, stated that the majority of cases of violence against females are not investigated, particularly during armed conflict.

By: Clément THERME and Ashley FAULKNER

BACK