Human Rights for All: No Exceptions - A Human Rights Agenda for Canada

Related Topics

Overview

Introduction

No Security Without Human Rights

The Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples must be protected

Protecting the Human Rights of Women

Safety for Refugees

Human Rights are a Business Matter

The Need for Strong Global Rules and Institutions

Summary of Recommendations

Take Action

Canada - Actions Index

 

• Print | 
• Email a friend

The Need for Strong Global Rules and Institutions

Ideally, all governments would take decisive action at a national level to ensure that human rights are consistently upheld and protected.  The reality is very different.  Governments are far too often the agents responsible for serious human rights violations, or they are unwilling or unable to take action to stop human rights abuses carried out by others.  Consequently, it is vitally important that there be a strong global system that holds governments to the human rights promises they have made.  This requires effective institutions that can review countries’ human rights records, identify shortcomings and demand change.  It also means ensuring that individuals who carry out human rights violations face justice and are held accountable for their crimes.

1. At the United Nations

In the past year, there has been a remarkable reform of the approach to human rights protection at the United Nations.  After more than six decades, the UN Commission on Human Rights was disbanded. While the Commission had been responsible for a wide range of important advances in human rights, its credibility and legitimacy had more recently been criticized.  Politics dominated the Commission’s proceedings, with governments expending more energy to find ways to keep serious human rights concerns off the agenda than in constructively taking action when needed.

The Commission has been replaced by a new Human Rights Council and a promise of a new era for human rights protection at the UN.  The Council will meet more often.  Governments have to make human rights pledges in running for election to the Council.  The Council will hold universal periodic reviews that will ensure that the human rights records of all countries are examined at regular intervals. 

Canada has been a champion of this reform process, reform has not been easy. The first two sessions of the new Council earlier this year were disappointing and seemed mired in some of the worst practices of the old Commission.  It is evident that if the Human Rights Council is truly going to work, governments will have to commit considerable energy and demonstrate true leadership.

• The government should make support for the UN Human Rights Council a top priority for Canada. Through concerted political leadership, it should encourage other governments to work to ensure the Council is a success.

2. At home

One crucial way that Canada can help ensure the success of the international human rights system is by demonstrating a willingness to adhere to the system and take it seriously on the home-front.  That means ratifying international human rights treaties and faithfully implementing those treaties domestically.  Canada has not yet ratified two UN treaties dealing with important human rights issues: the prevention of torture; and the rights of migrant workers and their families.  At home, Canada has an uneven record of complying with recommendations and requests originating with expert UN human rights bodies.  There is no publicly accessible process to oversee the steps taken by the federal, provincial and territorial governments in complying with international human rights obligations.  UN bodies, frustrated with the growing number of unimplemented recommendations, have frequently called on Canada to develop a new approach.

• The government should ratify the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and other forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.
  
  
• The government should convene a meeting of federal, provincial and territorial ministers responsible for human rights to develop and institute a publicly accessible, intergovernmental process for overseeing domestic implementation of Canada’s international human rights obligations.
  

3. In court

All over the world, a climate of impunity has long encouraged human rights violations to continue.  People  have planned genocide, orchestrated campaigns of mass rape, or ordered the systematic “disappearance” of thousands of people secure in the knowledge that they will pay no price.  The world’s worst crimes, mass human rights violations, have almost always gone unpunished. 

Over the past year, impunity has finally begun to give way to justice.  International tribunals have been established to prosecute human rights violators in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Cambodia.  The International Criminal Court, established in 2002, has begun its first prosecution, has issued a number of arrest warrants and is actively investigating in a number of countries.  At the national level, legislatures and courts are actively taking up the legal principle of universal jurisdiction. Under this, all countries are obliged to prosecute serious international crimes such as war crimes, crimes against humanity and torture, even when the crime, the accused and the victim have no connection with that country.

Canada is a leader in international justice, and has been a particularly strong champion of the International Criminal Court.  A recent media report suggests that Canada may be considering putting that leadership at risk by entering into discussions with the US government about signing a so-called bilateral immunity agreement. Under this agreement, Canada would promise to never turn over any US citizen to the International Criminal Court.  These agreements have been roundly criticized as contravening international law and undermining the International Criminal Court.  Canada should not, under any circumstances, enter into such an agreement with the United States.

Canada’s record at home has been disappointing.  Only one criminal prosecution has been started under the Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act since it was adopted in 2000. [1] In general, when faced with the presence of individuals who are accused of having committed serious human rights violations or acts of terrorism abroad, Canadian policy prefers deportation to prosecution.  Survivors of human rights violations abroad have turned to Canadian courts to try and launch lawsuits against the governments responsible for those violations.  The Canadian government has argued, however, that foreign governments are shielded from such lawsuits under the terms of Canada’s State Immunity Act.  The courts have upheld the government’s position. This means [2]  that lawsuits seeking compensation from foreign governments for torture have been routinely dismissed.

• The government’s strong principled support for the International Criminal Court should continue and Canada should not enter into discussions with the US government about signing a “bilateral immunity agreement”.
  
  
• The government should adopt a clear policy preferring criminal prosecution or lawful extradition over deportation in cases involving accusations of war crimes, crimes against humanity, torture, terrorism and other crimes subject to universal jurisdiction.
  
  

 

Posted: 14 December 2006