UN Human Rights Treaties

Distr.
GENERAL
E/CN.4/1994/45
23 December 1993
ENGLISH
Original: FRENCH/ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Fiftieth session
Item 11 (b) of the provisional agenda
FURTHER PROMOTION AND ENCOURAGEMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS, INCLUDING THE QUESTION OF
THE PROGRAMME AND METHODS OF WORK OF THE COMMISSION
NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS FOR THE PROMOTION
AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Report of the second International Workshop on
National Institutions for the Promotion and
Protection of Human Rights
(Tunis, 13-17 December 1993)
CONTENTS
Paragraphs Page
I. ORGANIZATION OF THE WORKSHOP . . . . . . . . . 1 - 24 3
A. Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 12 3
B. Opening of the Workshop . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 18 4
C. Appointment of officers, agenda and
organization of work . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 23 5
D. Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 7
GE.93-85954 (E)
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 2
CONTENTS (continued)
Paragraphs Page
II. TOPIC I. COOPERATION BETWEEN THE STATE AND
NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND SIMILAR BODIES . . . 25 - 41 8
III. TOPIC II. RELATIONS BETWEEN NATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS AND SIMILAR BODIES . . . . . . . . 42 - 49 10
IV. TOPIC III. STRENGTHENING OF RELATIONS BETWEEN
NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND THE CENTRE FOR
HUMAN RIGHTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 - 65 12
V. TOPIC IV. COOPERATION BETWEEN NATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 - 76 15
VI. ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSURE OF THE
SECOND WORKSHOP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 - 82 16
A. Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 16
B. Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 16
C. Message of support for the work of the
Algerian national institution . . . . . . . 79 22
D. Appeal to national institutions . . . . . . 80 23
E. Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 23
F. Closure of the Workshop . . . . . . . . . . 82 24
Annex:
List of participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 3
I. ORGANIZATION OF THE WORKSHOP
1. The second International Workshop on National Institutions for
the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights was held in Tunis
from 13 to 17 December 1993.
2. The Workshop, organized by the United Nations Centre for Human Rights in
cooperation with the Tunisian Higher Committee on Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms, followed on the first Workshop held in Paris in October 1991,
the conclusions of which were adopted by the Commission on Human Rights
(resolution 1992/54) and endorsed by the Economic and Social Council
(decision 1992/233). The Workshop was also held in the context established
by the Declaration and Programme of Action adopted at the World Conference
on Human Rights in Vienna in June 1993.
3. The final document of the World Conference thus indicated, inter alia,
that "the World Conference recommends that representatives of national
institutions should convene periodic meetings under the auspices of the Centre
for Human Rights to examine ways and means of improving their mechanisms and
sharing experiences".
4. It should be recalled that the first International Workshop led to the
adoption of "Principles relating to the status of national institutions".
The Principles were endorsed by the Commission on Human Rights in its
resolution 1992/54 and by the Economic and Social Council, which transmitted
them to the United Nations General Assembly, which in turn took note of
them with satisfaction at its forty-eighth session and annexed them to
a resolution on national institutions.
5. The purpose of the Tunis Workshop was to continue the strengthening and
establishment of national institutions for the promotion and protection of
human rights by further contributing to the achievements of the earlier
meetings.
A. Participants
6. Invitations to designate representatives were sent to the institutions of
the following countries: Algeria, Australia, Benin, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada,
Central African Republic, Chile, China, Denmark, France, India, Italy, Japan,
Kuwait, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Northern Ireland,
Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovenia,
Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Venezuela, Zambia.
7. The following institutions took part in the Tunis Workshop: National
Human Rights Monitoring Organization (Algeria), Human Rights and Equal
Opportunity Commission (Australia), Beninese Commission on Human
Rights (Benin), National Committee on Human Rights and Freedoms (Cameroon),
Human Rights Commission (Canada), State Nationalities Affairs Commission
(China), National Consultative Commission (France), National Commission on
Human Rights (India), Commission on Human Rights (Italy), Civil Liberties
Bureau (Japan), Committee on the Defence of Human Rights (Kuwait), Advisory
Council on Human Rights (Morocco), National Commission on Human Rights
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 4
(Mexico), Human Rights Commission (New Zealand), Commission on Human Rights
(Philippines), Human Rights Commission (Central African Republic), Permanent
Commission of Inquiry (United Republic of Tanzania), Human Rights Committee
(Senegal), Council on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Slovenia), Higher
Committee on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Tunisia).
8. Representatives of ombudsmen, mediators and people’s advocates of the
following countries responded favourably: Austria, Canary Islands, Cyprus,
France, Ghana, Senegal, Spain, Sweden and Tunisia.
9. Representatives of a number of States members of the United Nations
attended as observers.
10. Representatives of non-governmental organizations, regional institutions
and United Nations specialized agencies also attended as observers.
11. A complete list of participants is appended to the present report
(annex).
12. The Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights of the United Nations
was represented by Mr. John Pace; the Centre for Human Rights was represented
by Mr. Hamid Gaham, who acted as secretary to the Workshop.
B. Opening of the Workshop
13. In an introductory statement, Mr. Rashid Driss, Chairman of the
Tunisian Higher Committee on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, welcomed
the participants and described United Nations activities to encourage the
establishment of new institutions, as well as the work being done by the
Tunisian Higher Committee in order to protect and promote human rights.
14. Mr. Hamed Karoui, Prime Minister of Tunisia, opened the second
Workshop on National Institutions and transmitted the greetings of
President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. He said that Tunisia attached particular
importance to human rights and the genuine development of democracy and
fundamental freedoms, particularly economic and social rights, in order to
protect the most disadvantaged categories from marginalization. He stressed
that the activities of human rights institutions and government mechanisms
were complementary; such institutions must base their credibility on their
autonomy. The Tunisian Higher Committee had submitted several reports and
the Government had established a constructive dialogue with the various
non-governmental organizations in Tunisia.
15. The Prime Minister considered that, in order to enable national
institutions to be effective, an international coordination committee should
be set up to define their functions, powers and spheres of activity. He
stressed that human rights were a matter of priority and an indivisible whole,
particularly the right to development and solidarity among peoples without
discrimination or dependence; they must be protected from terrorism, religious
extremism and fanaticism and must be held up to the enemies of democracy.
16. Mr. Pace, opening the first meeting, reminded participants that the first
International Workshop held in Paris in October 1991 had led to the Principles
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 5
relating to the status of national institutions, which had since been endorsed
and adopted by various United Nations bodies. The Vienna World Conference had
reaffirmed the important and constructive role of the national institutions
which had played an essential role in its work. National institutions
occupied a middle position between the institutional framework of the State
and society, with the aim of making the rule of law a reality in the daily
life of citizens, both with regard to civil and political rights and with
regard to economic, social and cultural rights. The role of national
institutions was fully consistent with overall United Nations human rights
policy. He submitted to the Workshop a programme of action for the coming
years; it had been prepared by the Centre for Human Rights and would,
following consultation with the institutions present, be proposed for approval
by the Commission on Human Rights.
17. The plan had four objectives:
(a) To promote the concept of a "national institution" as a means of
reducing existing regional disparities in their distribution;
(b) To contribute to the emergence of independent and effective
institutions conforming to Principles adopted concerning their status;
(c) To improve the effectiveness of existing institutions;
(d) To promote cooperation and coordination among national institutions
at the regional and subregional levels.
18. He drew participants’ attention to the draft manual on national
institutions prepared by the Centre for Human Rights.
C. Appointment of officers, agenda and organization of work
19. Mr. Rachid Driss was elected Chairman of the second International
Workshop by acclamation.
20. Mr. Driss nominated Mr. Gérard Fellous as General Rapporteur; the
nomination was approved by the participants.
21. The Vice-Chairmen nominated and appointed were: Mr. Paul Bouchet
(France); Mr. Brian Burdekin (Australia); Mr. Peter Hosking (New Zealand);
Mr. Jorge Madrazo (Mexico); Mr. Solomon Nfor Gwei (Cameroon);
Mr. Sedfrey Ordonez (Philippines); and Mr. Maxwell Yalden (Canada). It
was decided that Mr. Virendra Dayal (India) should be added as a member of
the bureau composed of the above-mentioned Vice-Chairmen.
22. After discussion, the agenda was amended. The following subitem
was added to item 7: proposed international committee to coordinate the
activities of national institutions. It was also decided that the following
human rights topics should be discussed: education in democracy; the
situation of women, children, disabled persons and migrants; arbitrary arrests
and detentions.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 6
23. The agenda of the second Workshop included the following items:
1. Opening meeting
2. Election of officers
3. Adoption of the agenda
4. Organization of work
5. Cooperation between the State, national institutions and similar
bodies:
(a) Strengthening of national legislation on national
institutions in accordance with the "Paris Principles";
(b) Contributions of national institutions and similar bodies to
the implementation of international instruments;
(c) Contribution of national institutions and similar bodies to
United Nations human rights bodies and participation in the
work of those bodies
6. Relations between national institutions and similar bodies
7. Strengthening of relations between national institutions and the
Centre for Human Rights, and operating structure:
(a) Programme of action for technical cooperation;
(b) Proposed international committee to coordinate the activities
of national institutions;
(c) Consideration of the draft manual on national institutions
8. Cooperation between national institutions:
(a) Follow-up to the resolutions adopted by national institutions
at the World Conference on Human Rights relating to women,
children and disabled persons, and consideration of questions
relating to emigrants and education in democracy;
(b) Cooperation and coordination of the activities of national
institutions and strengthening of their relations with
non-governmental organizations
9. Adoption of the report
10. Closing meeting.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 7
D. Documentation
24. The following documents were prepared for the second Workshop:
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.1 Background paper prepared by the
United Nations Centre for Human
Rights on the programme of action
for technical cooperation to
encourage the creation of national
institutions, to strengthen existing
national institutions, and to develop
cooperation and coordination between
national institutions
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.2 Background paper prepared by the
Canadian Human Rights Commission -
Disabled persons
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.3 Background paper prepared by
Mr. Louis Joinet, Chairman of the
United Nations Working Group on
Arbitrary Detention - Present situation
and future prospects of national
institutions for the promotion and
protection of human rights
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.4 Background paper prepared by
Mr. Pelletier, Mediator for the French
Republic - Relations between national
institutions and similar bodies
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.5 Manual on the establishment and
strengthening of effective national
institutions
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.5/Add.1 Summary of the manual
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.6 Background paper prepared by the
New Zealand Human Rights Commission -
Rights of women
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/BP.7 Background paper prepared by the Human
Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
of Australia
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/WP.1 Working paper prepared by the Centre
for Human Rights - Excerpts from the
Vienna Declaration and Programme of
Action relating to national
institutions
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 8
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/WP.2 Working paper prepared by
Mr. Eugen Muhr, representative of
the Austrian Ombudsman Board
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/WP.3 Working paper prepared by the Tunisian
Higher Committee on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms - Role of national
institutions in human rights education
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/WP.4 Working paper prepared by the Indian
National Commission on Human Rights
HR/TUNIS/1993/SEM/WP.5 Working paper prepared by the Slovenian
Council on Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms.
II. TOPIC I: COOPERATION BETWEEN THE STATE AND NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
AND SIMILAR BODIES
25. The introductory report was submitted by Mr. Louis Joinet, Expert,
Chairman of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
26. Mr. Joinet said that a first major step had been taken at the first
Workshop with the adoption of the "common charter" constituted by the
Principles relating to the status of national institutions, known as the
"Paris Principles". He hoped that a further step forward would be taken
in Tunis. Although the principles represented an ideal to be achieved,
he wondered whether some flexibility should not be allowed in their
implementation. Each State could choose a context suited to its national
needs, but it had to be in keeping with the Paris Principles, which served as
a basis. He warned against the danger of the establishment of "alibi"
national institutions.
27. In the light of the experience gained since the first Workshop, he
reviewed political will, the problem of independence, the functions of
pluralism and international action. Whether national institutions were
consultative, quasi-jurisdictional or both, they were based on the highest
possible legal standard which reflected the legitimacy accorded to them by
means of political will. The synergy between the State and society would
thus be more fully ensured. Although the State alone was entitled to take
decisions, national institutions were a forum for constructive dialogue to
limit controversy and confrontation, without thereby concealing possible
substantive disagreements.
28. In his opinion, quasi-jurisdictional institutions must not take the place
of courts which already existed or were to be established. The requirement of
independence was the keystone of national institutions. Although independence
was granted by the State, democracy ensured that it was respected by means of
monitoring mechanisms. However, national institutions could in no
circumstances take the place of the executive, legislative or judicial
authorities; that would be a pretext for not having a representative
parliament or an independent judiciary.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 9
29. The four parameters for independence were:
(a) The power to hear a matter without referral to a higher authority,
which must comprise minimum procedural guarantees;
(b) The power to make the decisions, recommendations and work of
national institutions public, thereby keeping public opinion informed and
gaining in credibility;
(c) Sufficient stability in the mandate of the members, appointed by
means of an official act for a sufficiently long, predetermined period;
(d) The provision of sufficient financial resources by means of funds
budgeted over the long term.
30. Broad pluralism was linked to the institutions’ function of dialogue and
consultation. It formed the basis of their moral authority and ideological
independence, making their activities real and plausible in the eyes of the
public.
31. With regard to international action, he advocated the harmonization of
national legislation with the international human rights instruments to which
States were parties. He acknowledged that the participation of national
institutions in the preparation of reports which States were required to
submit to United Nations treaty bodies and committees and to regional bodies
was not without ambiguity. He advocated multilateral cooperation between
institutions in the form of a coordination or liaison committee or an
international federation with some type of liaison with the Centre for Human
Rights.
32. He suggested that rules of procedure should be adopted for the next
Workshop and that national institutions should be represented on the board of
directors of a United Nations fund for voluntary contributions.
33. Mr. Joinet’s statement was followed by a discussion in which a number of
national institutions and similar bodies described the work they were doing.
As far as political will was concerned, it was noted that, although the
criteria defined were indeed objectives to be achieved, some flexibility
should be accepted in order to encourage States to establish institutions. In
response to the opinion that the Principles were not immutable and must be
adapted to the local context without being slavishly bound by the text, the
majority of speakers considered that the Principles were an established fact
that served as a basis and that institutions must be developed to bring them
into line with the Principles. As to the parameters for independence, the
criterion of the power to hear a matter without higher referral could be
interpreted differently depending on whether the institution was consultative
or quasi-jurisdictional. In the first case, such power could be governed by
automatic procedures, or left to the discretion of members, who took their
decisions by consensus.
34. The public nature of the decisions and work of institutions raised the
question of the confidentiality of discussions, particularly in the case of
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 10
inquiries into individual petitions or the amicable settlement of disputes.
It was nevertheless agreed that activities and final decisions should be made
public.
35. The financial resources required for independence were often insufficient
in developing countries, not only because of the lack of political will, but
also because of the economic situation. Moreover, financing from government
funds could lead to retaliation by a Government which had been criticized.
Protection would then be ensured either by constitutional or by legislative
provisions.
36. In the opinion of the speakers, institutions which had to make
compromises must avoid any surrender of principle that would harm their
credibility.
37. With regard to international action, the hope was expressed that
institutions would define their relations with the Centre for Human Rights
more clearly and that bilateral relations would be encouraged.
38. The proposed establishment of an international coordination or liaison
committee was supported, as was the proposal for a bulletin to ensure liaison
among institutions; those questions were dealt with in greater detail under
agenda item 7.
39. The hope was also expressed that institutions would begin to draw up a
programme of joint activities. Three topics were proposed: human rights
education; the effective implementation of international instruments in each
country which had ratified them and ratification by countries which had not
yet done so; and the form of participation by institutions in national reports
to international human rights bodies.
40. In reply, Mr. Joinet said that pluralism was probably more important than
the nature of an institution’s legal basis. It was something acquired rather
than decreed. He agreed that the Principles constituted a common basis
towards which institutions must move and progress.
41. In the Chairman’s view, the Principles were a joint platform which
promoted relations between States and society, each country being able to
decide which legal framework was appropriate. The highest standard was the
constitutional law, which reflected political will and ensured genuine
independence. However, there was still the danger of the establishment of
institutions that would serve as alibis for Governments.
III. TOPIC II: RELATIONS BETWEEN NATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS AND SIMILAR BODIES
42. Agenda item 6 was introduced by Mr. Jacques Pelletier, Mediator for the
French Republic, who noted that, although national institutions and similar
bodies (ombudsmen, mediators, people’s advocates) accepted and complied with
the Principles adopted in 1991, they were extremely different; consideration
must therefore be given to the types of relations they might maintain.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 11
43. He proposed the following three topics for consideration:
(a) The current state of relations between ombudsmen, who had
established the International Institute of Ombudsmen, based in Edmonton,
Canada, in 1978 and a European Institute in Innsbruck. The ombudsmen met
every four years;
(b) The complementarity of the work of national institutions
(commissions, committees, councils) and ombudsmen. In the case of France, for
example, there was a dual link: the French Consultative Commission referred
the many individual petitions it received to the Mediator, who had been
appointed to the Commission;
(c) The nature and type of relations to be established between national
institutions and similar bodies. He expressed the hope that joint meetings,
such as the Tunis Workshop, would continue to be held under the auspices of
the Centre for Human Rights.
44. He made the following six proposals:
(a) A list to be prepared of all national institutions and similar
bodies complying with the Principles adopted in October 1991.
(b) The United Nations Centre for Human Rights to be designated as the
coordinating body for exchanges of information;
(c) An institutional link to be established between all or some
national institutions and similar bodies;
(d) Periodic and regular joint meetings to be organized;
(e) A programme of joint action to be drawn up;
(f) An information letter to be published.
45. The representative of the Mediator for the Republic of Tunisia,
Mr. Ridha Ben Youssef, described Tunisia’s experience of administrative
mediation. The Tunisian Mediator’s Office had been established by decree of
10 December 1992 and its competence and method of operation had been defined
by the Act of 1 May 1993. It reported directly to the President of the
Republic and had financial autonomy. The Mediator was appointed by
presidential decree on the Minister’s advice. He handled all individual
complaints, but not disputes between the Government and its officials or
disputes being heard or decided by the courts. Since 1 March 1993, the
Mediator had received several thousand written and oral complaints relating to
such varied matters as land ownership, tax disputes, administrative
authorizations, personal documents, social security, privatization, the
environment, land use, etc. In each ministry, coordinators who reported to
the Mediator had been appointed to handle complaints, 27 per cent of which had
been dealt with satisfactorily so far. The President of the Republic remained
the final judicial recourse, particularly for the adoption of amendments to
legislation and regulations to eliminate certain causes of disputes. The
Mediator published an annual report.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 12
46. The ideas and proposals contained in the introductory statements were the
subject of a discussion in which several mediators and ombudsmen described
their work and national experience. They stressed in particular that national
institutions and similar bodies were complementary and did not compete with
each other.
47. In national situations, the following types of cases could exist:
(a) The case where the national institution carried out both
consultative and quasi-jurisdictional functions;
(b) The case where a consultative national institution existed
alongside a mediator or ombudsmen;
(c) The case where both existed.
48. It was agreed that, in the second case, there should be close cooperation
between the two institutions, since they both had as their purpose the
strengthening of democracy and the protection of human rights. Such
cooperation was clearly provided for by the 1991 Principles. It was suggested
that, when the two institutions existed in the same country, their roles
should be clearly defined in order to avoid any confusion in the mind of the
public.
49. The desire was expressed that assistance should be given to young
institutions and that regional and thematic meetings should be organized.
IV. TOPIC III: STRENGTHENING OF RELATIONS BETWEEN NATIONAL
INSTITUTIONS AND THE CENTRE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
50. Agenda item 7 was introduced by Mr. Hamid Gaham, who described new
directions in the policy of the United Nations Centre for Human Rights with
regard to national institutions in the coming years. Such directions were in
conformity with the Programme of Action adopted by the Vienna World Conference
and related to technical assistance and advisory services.
51. Mr. Gaham submitted for approval by the Workshop a draft programme of
action focusing on the full implementation of the Principles relating to the
status of national institutions. In general terms, the programme of action
was designed:
(a) To continue to promote the establishment and strengthening of
national institutions, particularly in regions where they were still few in
number. The advisory services and technical assistance of the Centre for
Human Rights were available to States that wished to receive advice;
(b) To make officials from the Centre and experienced experts from
national institutions available to States;
(c) To organize regional seminars to overcome obstacles which might
hamper the establishment of new national institutions.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 13
52. In specific terms, the draft programme of action proposed technical
assistance both to States which requested it and to existing institutions
according to the needs they expressed in respect of independence, competence,
composition, operation and staff training.
53. The objectives of the technical assistance made available by the Centre
for Human Rights were:
(a) To help national institutions contribute more effectively to the
ratification and implementation of international human rights instruments;
(b) To train officials of national institutions in the preparation of
the reports to be submitted by Governments to United Nations bodies;
(c) To organize training courses for human rights practitioners
(judges, police officers, etc.);
(d) To teach methods of investigating violations;
(e) To devise methods of settling disputes;
(f) To establish cooperation with all persons working to promote human
rights (non-governmental organizations, etc.).
54. The Centre for Human Rights presented a draft manual on national
institutions which would provide detailed information on the nature and
activities of existing national institutions and would contribute to the
establishment of new institutions. It would also suggest different types of
cooperation, exchanges of information and joint activities. It was suggested
that the proposed committee to coordinate national institutions should take
part in the preparation of the manual.
55. The participants held a discussion during which it was agreed that the
technical assistance of the Centre for Human Rights should be made available
to national institutions at the request of States.
56. With regard to the programme of action, it was suggested that the
proposed assistance should be sufficiently flexible and should not overlook
bilateral cooperation.
57. It was suggested that forthcoming meetings of national institutions
should be held at set times, according to a schedule agreed on in advance.
Some speakers proposed regional meetings, while others warned against a
specific approach to human rights that might call their universality into
question.
58. In connection with technical assistance and in order to avoid
duplication, it was suggested that the Centre for Human Rights should take
account of other programmes, such as those of the Commonwealth Secretariat and
the Agency for Cultural and Technical Cooperation.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 14
59. As to the draft manual on national institutions, a number of editorial
amendments were requested and transmitted to the secretariat. It was decided
that the draft text of the manual would be translated into the United Nations
languages and sent to participants, who would have reasonable time to study it
and transmit their comments and suggested amendments in writing to the Centre
for Human Rights. The Centre would then send out a corrected version to all
participants, before submitting the text to the Commission on Human Rights.
60. The participants embarked on a debate on a committee for international
coordination of national institutions. It was pointed out that at the World
Conference in Vienna a committee for coordination of the national institutions
present had been spontaneously set up in response to practical and logistical
needs and that its functioning had proved entirely satisfactory.
61. The desire was expressed that the Tunis Workshop should culminate in the
establishment of a committee for coordination of national institutions. In
the course of a discussion, the nature, responsibilities and composition of
such a committee were defined by consensus.
62. In connection with the nature of the committee, it was stated that it
must be neither a bureaucratic body nor a supervisory or binding body, but a
small, flexible, open-ended, representative and transparent mechanism to
facilitate the exchange of ideas and meetings, in other words, an ad hoc
committee which would function until the next Workshop in two years’ time.
63. As to the committee’s responsibility and functioning, the desire was
expressed that it should perform the dual task of coordination and liaison:
(a) Coordination between all the institutions which recognized the
Principles annexed to the resolution of the General Assembly of the
United Nations; liaison between those institutions, and with the Centre for
Human Rights and the network of ombudsmen and mediators;
(b) It was also suggested that the committee should promote the
creation of new national institutions and supervise the implementation of the
various resolutions or recommendations adopted by the national institutions.
64. On the composition of the coordination committee, it was suggested that
the approach, adopted in Vienna, of representation on a geographical and
cultural basis should be continued and that it should be open-ended. Thus,
each region or subregion would decide for itself, if it so wished, to add to
the representatives appointed to the first coordination committee in Vienna
another representative of an institution conforming to the Paris Principles.
Each region or subregion would have one vote.
65. Special attention was paid to the representation of women both in each
national institution and in the coordination committee. The hope was
expressed that such representation would be encouraged and that it should be
effectively put into practice.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 15
V. TOPIC IV: COOPERATION BETWEEN NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
66. Following the resolutions adopted by the national institutions at the
World Conference in Vienna, the second Tunis Workshop took up six questions
relating to the protection and promotion of human rights which would be the
subject of final recommendations.
67. The rights of women: The participants expressed the desire that the
national institutions should take action in their respective countries to
promote the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women and the alignment of their national legislation
with that Convention, and that those institutions should report on their
efforts at the next international workshop.
68. The rights of children: A draft additional protocol to the Convention on
the Rights of the Child was proposed aiming at the effective implementation of
the Convention, particularly with regard to economic and sexual exploitation
of children.
69. The rights of disabled persons: A study was submitted to participants
recommending that institutions should, in their respective countries, exert
efforts to bring about a change of attitudes, to eliminate social barriers and
discrimination - particularly in employment, and to promote equality of
opportunity.
70. Education in human rights and democracy: It was emphasized that national
institutions must ensure that such education was in conformity with
universality and indivisible fundamental rights.
71. The rights of migrants, who encountered difficult situations in all
regions because of the exclusion, hostility and hatred to which they were
subjected. That was reflected in an increase in discrimination and
xenophobia.
72. Torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment: The desire was
expressed that each national institution should give absolute priority to
those serious violations and should intercede with the competent authorities
to ensure that they were eradicated. Similarly, it was requested that action
should be taken to assist victims of arbitrary detention.
73. The participants then gave lengthy consideration to the question of
strengthening relations between national institutions and non-governmental
organizations. It was emphasized that their roles were complementary. The
NGOs which spoke for those unable to speak for themselves must be helped and
encouraged by the national institutions, which must retain their confidence
and act as mediators between them and the Government.
74. It was emphasized that the national institutions maintained or, when that
was not yet the case, established close cooperation with the NGOs, not only
nationally but also by continuing to invite them to take an active part in
their International Workshops. It was therefore necessary and useful to work
together, particularly because of their comprehensive knowledge of local
problems and victims.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 16
75. Although the national institutions and the NGOs did have a common goal,
their methods of action were different and must not be confused. It was
proposed that the international committee for coordination of national
institutions should establish contacts with the international NGOs.
76. Concluding these deliberations, the Rapporteur observed that the Tunis
Workshop had taken place in an excellent atmosphere which had been not only
studious and very dignified, but also very friendly. This, in accordance with
the objectives set, had enabled participants to get to know each other better
and to gain an appreciation of each other in order to form the great family of
national institutions which would steadily grow.
VI. ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND CLOSURE OF THE SECOND WORKSHOP
A. Decisions
77. At the conclusion of their deliberations on 17 December 1993, the
participants in the second International Workshop took the following
decisions:
(1) The resolutions adopted by the national institutions at the World
Conference on Human Rights in Vienna should be transmitted to the
Commission on Human Rights at its fiftieth session;
(2) Concerning regional and subregional representation in the
international committee for coordination of national institutions,
India and the Philippines would represent the Asia region until the
next Workshop. The national institutions of the West European
countries decided that France and Sweden would represent that
region until the next Workshop.
B. Recommendations
78. The participants adopted the following recommendations:
1. Strengthening of national institutions
The National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human
Rights, meeting in Tunis (Tunisia) from 13 to 17 December 1993, under the
auspices of the United Nations Centre for Human Rights,
Emphasizing the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
the International Covenants on Human Rights and other international
instruments in promoting respect for, and effective enjoyment of, human rights
and fundamental freedoms,
Welcoming Commission on Human Rights resolution 1992/54 and the
resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 15 December 1993 establishing
the "Principles relating to the status of national institutions" ("Paris
Principles"),
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 17
1. Recommend that the Commission on Human Rights:
(a) Take the appropriate measures to ensure that the national
institutions participate actively, by right and with a specific status, in
the work of the United Nations human rights bodies;
(b) Request the Secretary-General to establish a voluntary fund for
national institutions, in accordance with the financial rules of the
United Nations, this fund to be managed by a board of directors comprising
appropriate representation of the national institutions;
(c) Request the Centre for Human Rights, with the assistance of the
Coordination Committee mentioned below, to develop a programme of technical
assistance for States wishing to establish or strengthen their national
institutions and to organize training programmes for national institutions
which request them;
(d) Request the Secretary-General to support when necessary the
implementation of the following provisions, notably those of paragraph 5,
through appropriate administrative and financial backing;
2. Undertake, through the Coordination Committee mentioned below, to
exchange information on matters relating to human rights and other matters of
mutual interest;
3. Take note with interest of the draft plan of action for technical
cooperation with the national institutions and the draft manual on the
establishment and functioning of national institutions submitted by the Centre
for Human Rights, and request the national institutions to transmit their
comments to the Centre by 15 February 1994;
4. Propose closer cooperation between the national institutions and
similar organs (ombudsmen, mediators, etc.), including the International
Institute of Ombudsmen, with a view to improved complementarity of their
initiatives;
5. Request the national institutions to ensure that the legislation
relating to them is adapted to bring their statutes and responsibilities into
line with the Principles relating to the status of national institutions
annexed to the General Assembly resolution of 15 December 1993. In this
context, they shall:
(a) Promote and protect all aspects of human rights which are
universal, interdependent and indivisible, as reaffirmed in the Vienna
Declaration and Programme of Action;
(b) Ensure the implementation in the national context, of the
international instruments relating to human rights;
(c) Contribute, whenever they consider it appropriate, to the reports
submitted to United Nations bodies;
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 18
(d) Endeavour to strengthen their legal status, their administrative
autonomy, in particular the right to adapt their working structures to the
responsibilities with which they are entrusted, and their financial autonomy
through an adequate budget;
(e) Strengthen their advisory role by giving opinions, when
appropriate, on draft legislation relating to subjects within their competence
and by transmitting their recommendations to parliament;
(f) Secure the right to consider without referral to a higher authority
problems within their competence at the national or international level when
they do not already have this right;
(g) Ensure that their views and recommendations are accessible to the
public;
(h) Promote the development of a human rights culture through the
media, if necessary by informing public opinion of violations of human rights;
(i) Submit a brief report on their activities, mentioning the status
of their country’s ratifications of international instruments and any
reservations to those instruments, and their efforts to implement these
recommendations, at their subsequent international workshops;
(j) Submit, by March 1994, to the Centre for Human Rights for
distribution a special "page of interest" of not more than one page
identifying any field activities of the national institutions which may be
of interest to other national institutions;
6. Instruct the national institutions of Australia, Cameroon, Canada,
France, Mexico, New Zealand, the Philippines and Tunisia, chosen on the basis
of the following geographical representation - North Africa, sub-Saharan
Africa, North America, Latin America, Asia, Europe and Oceania, to act as a
Coordination Committee with the aim of:
(a) Following up these recommendations;
(b) Maintaining regular contacts between the national institutions and
the Centre for Human Rights, in particular in order to establish and implement
a joint programme of action;
(c) Convening a third Workshop of National Institutions to be held in
(Asia or Latin America), and any other inter-sessional meeting that might be
envisaged;
(d) Submitting a report to this Workshop on the implementation of this
mandate.
Each of the regions or subregions represented shall have one equal vote and
each region or subregion shall have the possibility of appointing a second
representative within the Coordination Committee, chosen from among the
national institutions established on the basis of the Paris Principles, by
agreement within the region or subregion in question.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 19
2. Specific recommendations
(a) Concerning the protection of disabled persons
National institutions should:
(a) Seek a legislative mandate to protect the rights of persons with
disabilities. Institutions should also continue to encourage countries to
create effective institutions where they do not yet exist and to ensure that
these institutions have the authority to deal with issues concerning persons
with disabilities;
(b) In cooperation with persons with disabilities and their
organizations, take every appropriate action to inform disabled persons in
their respective countries of the rights they enjoy and the protection that is
afforded them by the institution. Institutions should use alternative formats
to get this message out;
(c) Actively support the development of organizations comprising
disabled persons or members of their families and make a contribution and
exert decisive influence with a view to ensuring that Governments accord to
organizations representing disabled persons the material and financial
resources necessary for their action;
(d) Be given, by Governments - after consultation with disabled persons
and their organizations, a special mandate officially designating them as a
"high authority" in the area of the realization of the fundamental rights of
disabled persons;
(e) Define a strategy and specific programmes in order to ensure that
the media display sensitivity and accuracy in the presentation and analysis of
the condition of disabled persons, particularly ensuring that disabled persons
are able to explain their situation for themselves to the general public and
to suggest means of dealing with that situation;
(f) Ensure in their ongoing activities that States at all times give
disabled persons and their organizations the possibility of actively
influencing policies and decisions in all areas of concern to them and at
any level;
(g) Ensure that disabled persons enjoy in national systems equality
of opportunity with regard to income, income guarantees and the various social
security benefits and services, including services geared to prevention,
rehabilitation and equalization of opportunities for disabled persons and
their families, and the possibility of appealing against decisions concerning
their rights in this area to an impartial authority;
(h) Make every effort to bring about the removal of physical and other
barriers to full participation in society. Special efforts should be made to
ensure that housing, public transportation systems, government offices and
facilities housing essential services, such as medical and financial services,
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 20
are accessible and that important government services and publications
designed for the public are available in formats suitable for persons with
disabilities;
(i) Recommend legislation and programmes that aim to ensure that
barriers to full employment for disabled persons are eliminated and, where
necessary, that suitable accommodation is provided, so that persons with
disabilities attain representativeness in rates of employment;
(j) Ensure, in full collaboration with the authorities responsible for
the education and organizations of disabled persons, that teaching services
are established for disabled adults and children conforming to certain
fundamental criteria, in particular that of integration within the overall
education system;
(k) Take account, in their ongoing activities, of the results achieved
in the area of the prevention of infirmity, disability and handicaps, and be
empowered actively to support coordinated prevention programmes and
information campaigns on these programmes at all levels of society;
(l) Report, at the next meeting of national institutions for the
promotion and protection of human rights, on the initiatives they have taken
to ensure that the rights of persons with disabilities are secured in their
countries.
(b) Concerning the protection of children
Considering that, in ratifying the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
States parties have committed themselves to undertake all appropriate
legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure the effective
implementation of the rights recognized in that Convention,
Noting that it is in the interests of States parties to harmonize, as far
as possible, their national legislation on sexual exploitation of children in
order to improve the coordination and effectiveness of action taken at both
national and international levels,
Recommend that the Commission on Human Rights should urgently consider
the draft additional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child
concerning the elimination of sexual exploitation and trafficking of children
annexed to the present report.
(c) Concerning the protection of women
Noting that the Principles relating to the status of national
institutions accord to those institutions the role of encouraging States
to ratify international instruments and cooperating with the various
United Nations agencies in the protection and promotion of human rights,
Also noting the goal, set out in the Vienna Declaration and Plan of
Action, of universal ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against Women by the year 2000, including the review
of reservations and their limitation wherever possible,
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 21
Agree to report to the next meeting of national institutions on such
matters as:
(a) Whether their State has signed and ratified the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and, if not, whether
the State has plans to ratify the Convention and by what date;
(b) Whether their State has lodged any reservations to the Convention
and, if so, the nature and scope of those reservations, and whether those
reservations have been reviewed by the State and removed or limited;
(c) What steps, if any, have been taken to implement the Convention in
domestic law;
(d) Where the State has reported to the Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women under the terms of the Convention, whether the
national institution has had an opportunity to contribute to such reports
and/or will have the opportunity to do so in the future;
(e) What steps, if any, have been taken by the national institution to
publicize the Convention among relevant governmental and non-governmental
bodies and the general public;
(f) What steps, if any, have been taken by the national institution to
implement the Convention in its own operations;
Also agree to place, to the extent their resources allow, particular
emphasis in their public education programme on the equal status and human
rights of women, recognizing that each national institution will judge the
most effective methods of undertaking such public education,
Recommend that the national institutions should persuade their respective
States to adopt policies aimed at eliminating all discrimination against women
and to take specific measures geared to the needs of women,
Agree that, given the acknowledged role of national institutions in
contributing to the reports States are required to submit to United Nations
bodies and committees, national institutions may include information about
reports in the preparation of which they have been consulted in their activity
reports to regular meetings of national institutions. This information, in
turn, could strengthen the case for other national institutions being
consulted by their Governments in the future,
Recommend that the national institutions should establish between
themselves links of cooperation in order to coordinate their action, in
collaboration with the United Nations bodies working for the advancement of
women,
Agree to consider future initiatives on the first possible occasion after
the appointment of a special rapporteur on violence against women.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 22
(d) Concerning migrants
Invite the national institutions to intercede with their respective
Governments to ensure that the rights and guarantees of migrants enunciated in
the international instruments are respected,
Call on all States to refrain from adopting legislative or administrative
measures or regulations incompatible with the international provisions
relating to the rights of migrants,
Call on all States which have not yet done so to ratify the international
treaties concerning migrants and to ensure their effective observance,
Invite the national institutions to submit, at each of their periodic
meetings, a detailed report on the implementation of the international
instruments in their respective countries concerning this problem and to
mention, where appropriate, any obstacles impeding the implementation of these
instruments, with a view to helping forthcoming international meetings of
national institutions to devise adequate solutions to these problems,
Invite the national institutions to launch a broad campaign to make
national and international opinion aware of the dangers of all forms of
intolerance, exclusion, xenophobia, racism and racial discrimination based on
ethnic considerations or cultural origin.
(e) Concerning arbitrary detention
The participants in the International Workshop on National Institutions
for Human Rights urge all national institutions and organizations active in
the defence of human rights to work for the release, as soon as possible, of
all hostages and all victims of arbitrary detention as defined in the relevant
international instruments.
C. Message of support for the work of the Algerian national institution
79. The participants adopted the following message:
The participants in the second International Workshop on National
Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, having been
unable to travel to Algiers in response to the invitation from the National
Human Rights Monitoring Organization, hereby send a message of solidarity in
support of the work of the Algerian national institution and the victims -
Algerian and non-Algerian - of violence based on racial and religious
discrimination and on intolerance.
Deeply concerned about the spiral of violence in Algeria and the
infringements of human rights in that country,
Perturbed by the continuation of an emergency situation limiting the
exercise of fundamental rights,
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 23
Indignant at the threats and murders which have claimed as their targeted
victims writers, journalists, university teachers, imams, trade unionists,
engineers, doctors, magistrates, local government officers, veterans of the
national liberation struggle, businessmen and ordinary citizens, both men and
women, as well as foreign nationals,
Express their solidarity with the families of the victims of all the acts
of violence,
Support the work of the Algerian national institution, and that of
Algerian civil associations, which, despite the threats to and murders of
their members, are courageously endeavouring to ensure respect for human
rights through their action vis-à-vis the national governmental,
administrative and judicial authorities and to promote the ideals of
dignity, tolerance and hospitality consistent with the civilized reference
values of the Algerian people.
D. Appeal to national institutions
80. The participants adopted the following text:
The national institutions for the promotion and protection of human
rights, meeting at their second International Workshop in Tunis under the
auspices of the United Nations Centre for Human Rights,
Recalling that, in accordance with article 5 of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment", and that no derogation or exception is
possible in this respect, regardless of the circumstances, as stated in the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
Urgently request each national institution to consider as an absolute
priority representations to all the competent authorities in order to prevent
and punish such infringements of human dignity.
E. Resolution
81. The participants adopted the following resolution:
The representatives of the national institutions for the promotion and
protection of human rights, meeting in Tunis from 13 to 17 December 1993 under
the auspices of the United Nations Centre for Human Rights, having been
informed by the representative of the Beninese Commission on Human Rights of
the present situation of Mr. Djovi, hitherto President of the Togolese
Commission on Human Rights and still a refugee in Benin,
Express to Mr. Djovi their solidarity following the ordeals to which he
has been subjected and their gratitude for the assistance he has given to his
fellow citizens in exile,
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 24
Solemnly request the Togolese authorities to take all necessary measures
to enable Mr. Djovi to return to his country with the benefit of the necessary
guarantees of security and freedom of expression.
F. Closure of the Workshop
82. The representative of the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights
made a closing address and Mr. Sadok Chaabane, Minister of Justice of Tunisia,
declared closed the second International Workshop for the Promotion and
Protection of Human Rights.
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 25
Annex
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
A. National institutions
National Human Rights Monitoring Organization (Algeria)
Mr. Pierre Chaulet
Vice-President
Mr. Said Ayachi
President of the Commission on External Relations
Mrs. Djoher Akrour
President of the Commission on Collective Rights
Miss Farida Hassissene
Director of Studies and Research
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (Australia)
Mr. Brian Burdekin
Federal Human Rights Commissioner
Beninese Commission on Human Rights
Mr. Saïdou Agbantou
President
National Committee on Human Rights and Freedoms (Cameroon)
Mr. Solomon Nfor Gwei
President
Human Rights Commission (Canada)
Mr. Maxwell Yalden
President
Mr. John Dwyer
Counsellor
Mr. Yves Lafontaine (Commission on Human Rights) (Quebec))
State Nationalities Affairs Commission (China)
Mr. Yang Houdi
Director
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 26
National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (France)
Mr. Paul Bouchet
President
Mr. André Braunschweig
Vice-President
Mr. Gérard Fellous
Secretary-General
Mr. Emmanuel Decaux
National Commission on Human Rights (India)
Mr. Virendra Dayal
Member
Commission on Human Rights (Italy)
Mr. Paolo Ungari
President
Mrs. Milena Modica
Member
Civil Liberties Bureau (Japan)
Mr. Hirushi Yamada
Human Rights Administrator
Committee on the Defence of Human Rights (Kuwait)
Mr. Abdelaziz Youssef Ansani
President
Mr. Abdelmouhsen Youssef Jamel
Mr. Abdallah El Anzi
Advisory Council on Human Rights (Morocco)
Mr. Mohamed Mikou
Secretary-General
Mr. Mohamed Bouzoubaa
Mr. Ahmed Lasky
Mr. Massaoud Mansouri
Mr. Lahcen Gboune
Mr. Thami El Khyari
Mr. Mohamed Chnouki
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 27
National Commission on Human Rights (Mexico)
Mr. Jorge Madrazo Cullar
President
Mr. Hector Davalos Martinez
Executive Secretary
Ms. Maria Luisa Escobedo Olea
Executive Secretary
Human Rights Commission (New Zealand)
Mr. Peter Hosking
Proceedings Commissioner
Commission on Human Rights (Philippines)
Mr. Sedfrey A. Ordonez
President
Human Rights Commission (Central African Republic)
Mr. Jean Kossangur
Permanent Commission of Inquiry (United Republic of Tanzania)
Mr. Gad J.K. Mjemmas
Legal Adviser
Human Rights Committee (Senegal)
Mr. Malleck Sow
Member
Council on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Slovenia)
Mr. Jernei Rovsek
Secretary-General
Higher Committee on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Tunisia)
Mr. Rachid Driss
President
Mr. Mohamed Mahfoudh
Mr. Zakaria Ben Mustapha
Mr. Hassib Ben Ammar
Mrs. Sarra Chaabouni
Mrs. Saïda Gherib
Mr. Béchir Larabi
Mr. Mohamed Talbi
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 28
B. Ombudsmen/Mediators/People’s Advocates
Austrian Ombudsman Board (Austria)
Mr. Eugen Muhr
Diputado del Comun de Canarias (Canary Islands)
Mr. Francisco Tovar Santos
Vice-Diputado del Comun
Mr. Luis Rodriguez Camino
Secretary-General
Commission for Administration (Ombudsman) (Cyprus)
Mr. Nicos Chr. Charalambous
Commissioner for Administration
Defensor del Pueblo (Spain)
Mrs. Margarita Retuerto Buades
Acting Ombudsman
Miss Loreto Feltrer
Director
Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (Ghana)
Mr. Emile Francis Short
Mr. B.K. Oppong
Mediator for the Republic (France)
Mr. Jacques Pelletier
Mediator
Mr. Philippe Bardiaux
Counsellor for External Relations
Mediator for the Republic (Senegal)
Mr. Mamadou Sall
Secretary-General
Ombudsman against Ethnic Discrimination (Sweden)
Mr. Frank Orton
Ombudsman
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 29
Médiateur administratif (Tunisia)
Mr. Hassin Sherif
Ministre médiateur
Mr. Ridha Ben Youssef
Chargé de mission
C. Regional institutions and research institutes
Arab Human Rights Institute (Tunisia)
Mr. Taieb Baccouche
Mr. Frej Fenniche
Human Rights Institute (Romania)
Mr. Ratoice Oana
D. Expert/Consultant
Mr. Louis Joinet (France)
Chairman of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
E. Specialized agencies in the United Nations system and other agencies
United Nations Information Centre
Mr. Louay El-Djoundi
Director
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
Mr. Khaled Abu Hijleh
Deputy Programme Specialist
United Nations Development Programme
Mrs. Cécile Molinier
F. Intergovernmental organization
Commonwealth Secretariat
Miss Madhuri Bose
G. Non-governmental organizations
World Association for the School as an Instrument of Peace
Mr. Abdelkarim Allagui
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 30
Palestinian Human Rights Association
Mr. Khalil Zaben
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
Mrs. Ellinor Kolstad
Defense for Children International Movement
Mrs. Leyla Khalfallah
International Federation of Human Rights
Mr. Taoufik Bouderbala
Force ouvrière
Mr. Bruno Quemada
International Service for Human Rights
Mr. Khémais Chammari
Arab Lawyers’ Union
Mr. Amin M. Medani
Inter-African Union for Human Rights
Mrs. N’Doure M’Bam Diarra
Inter-Parliamentary Union
Mrs. Fathia Baccouche Bahri
H. Governments
Angola Mr. José César Augusto
Mr. Idrïssa Ali
Chile Mrs. Marcia Covarrubias
Croatia Miss Ljerka Alajbeg
Cuba Mr. Alejandro F. Diaz Palacios
France Mr. Jean-Noel de Bouillane de Lacoste
Mrs. Assia Sixou
Germany Mr. Reiner Grüning
Guatemala Mr. Ramsés Segundo Cuestas Galvez
E/CN.4/1994/45
page 31
India Miss M. Manimekalai
Mr. Vikram Misri
Indonesia Mr. Mohamed Arif Sjahril
Mr. Hidayatus Sibjan
Iraq Mr. Qusay Mahdi Saleh
Israel Mrs. Daphna Sharfman
Mrs. Erela Hadar
Italy Mr. Francesco Caruso
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Mr. M. Haj Sassi Salem
Malaysia Miss Rohana Ramli
Mauritania Mr. Bedaha Ould Brahim Khlil
Namibia Mr. Issaskar V.K. Ndjoze
Pakistan Mr. Khayyam Akbar
Thailand Mr. Sirisak Tiyapan
United States of America Mr. Evan G. Reade
Yemen Mr. Hamoud Abdelhamid El Hitar
Mr. Hossan Dollel
-----