Speech Mensenrechtenraad VN in Geneve

Toespraak | 25-02-2013

Statement by H.E. Mr Frans Timmermans, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands

22nd Session of the Human Rights Council, 25 February 2013

Mr President, dear colleagues,

Justice implies that the loss of freedom for some can never be made right by a greater good shared by others. This is at the core of the Theory of Justice by John Rawls. In short this theory supports that human rights are universal. These are shared values. This is the foundation of our work. This is also the message of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. And everyone is entitled to these rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind.

To demonstrate our common, human values, Rawls came up with the ‘veil of ignorance’: imagine we would not know whether we were man or woman, what the colour of our skin was, whether we were straight or gay. We would give everyone the same, basic rights. We may be different, but we can agree on our common humanity. As we did in 1948.

Today, I want to set out our vision for human rights. Our vision is that human rights are indeed universal. No country is beyond scrutiny. That is why we welcome that the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights opened its doors last year. I strongly support this institute, especially since, if necessary, it calls us to order. I also welcome this Council’s Universal Periodic Review process as a major step forward. We were happy to submit our second report last year and are thankful for the comments and suggestions we received. 

Our vision also is that it is all about implementation. The norms to guide us are there. Now we need the political will to make sure they are realised. And this is not a matter for governments only. We have to engage our societies at large in the implementation and involve everyone in a societal dialogue on human rights.

The final part of our vision is that we need a strong and effective international system for human rights. The treaty bodies, this Human Rights Council and its special procedures are all part of that. Regional systems throughout the world have added to the strength of our common efforts on human rights. And we very much welcome the excellent work High Commissioner Pillay and her able staff are doing.

But as long as violations continue, it is clear we are not effective enough. We have to do more, we owe it to those suffering from terrible violations right now, such as in Syria, North Korea and elsewhere. I call on the Security Council to refer Syria to the ICC.

Over 70,000 people have been killed. The bloodshed must stop. And I urge the Human Rights Council to establish an inquiry mechanism on North Korea. The violations there have lasted more than long enough.

I also want to talk about three priorities of the new Dutch Human Rights Strategy, which we are finalising now.

First priority: NGOs and Human rights defenders

We are observing a new and exiting phenomenon. On the one hand, the speed of digital communication creates unprecedented freedom and opportunities for exposing human rights violations on a daily basis and also social media add to that process. However, on the other hand, the position of NGOs and human rights defenders is deteriorating. They are increasingly under pressure by governments.

Grass roots human rights organisations, but also individuals – often lawyers – are increasingly being harassed and criminalised. And the repression of freedom of speech, of citizens, bloggers and journalists, is on the rise in many parts of the world. This is simply unacceptable.

The Hague is a Shelter City, where human rights defenders can find refuge from harassment and intimidation. But more fundamentally, we support the continued efforts of NGOs, human rights defenders and other individuals in actively promoting respect for human rights very often at great peril. These people are true, true heroes.

Second priority: women’s rights

The famous American women’s rights activist Susan Anthony once wrote: “Men their rights and nothing more, women their rights and nothing less”. Our agenda on women’s rights is very clear.  We need to speak out and act against any form of violence against women.

One in three women is violated during their life by their partner. Women face rape, honor killing and human trafficking. Their sexual and reproductive rights should be respected. We need to enable increased participation of women in society, politics and business. In 2012 the World Bank reported that in 103 countries there is at least one legal difference made between men and women that hinder women’s economic opportunities. We can and should do better.  Some countries are leading the way on this. We should unleash the potential of half the world’s population. Simply men should be more selfish by allowing women more rights, because it helps the world advance and thus also the position of men. I am sure by giving women a bigger position in society the world will profit.

Third priority: LGBT rights

Roughly 80 countries still criminalise consenting same-sex relations between adults. Seven countries impose the death penalty for it. Approximately 200 transgenders are killed each year; simply hate killings. In Dutch Human Rights Policy one of the priority themes is combating discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. This is very much based on the universality I spoke of earlier. I feel we need to do three things:

First of all, we need to promote social acceptance. With this in mind the Netherlands is organising a conference on International Day Against Homophobia in May;

Secondly, we need to combat discrimination based on sexual orientation;

And thirdly, we need to abolish the criminalisation of homosexuality.

In 2011 this Council expressed grave concerns about continuing acts of violence and discrimination against LGBT persons in the ground-breaking resolution 17/19. We applaud the initiative taken by South Africa. It is imperative that in 2013 we follow up on this resolution and keep the issue high on the international agenda.

I think Human Rights Commissioner Pillay hit the nail on the head when she said: ‘Punish violence and hatred, not love’. I think there can be no excuse, either in culture, religion or tradition to not provide the same rights to people who are gay than to other people.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We often hear that we should be realistic when it comes to human rights. One of John Rawls’s students, Susan Neiman, wrote: ‘Consider what you mean when you tell someone: be realistic. It's another way of saying: lower your expectations’.

This makes me think of the Dutch former minister of foreign affairs Peter Kooijmans, who passed away two weeks ago. Kooijmans chaired the Commission on Human Rights, the predecessor to the Human Rights Council. He was the first UN Special Rapporteur on torture. Above all, Peter Kooijmans was a passionate defender of human rights. He would have objected to lowering our expectations and so should we.

It fills me with pride to be allowed to follow in his footsteps. It also fills me with pride to stand here today at the Human Rights Council. The way in which human rights situations are debated at this Council is a leap forward for international relations and respect for human rights worldwide. We will continue to work closely with the Council and we hope to be member of the council, because we are a candidate to join the council and we will continue to give strong political and financial support to the High Commissioner and her staff for their excellent work.

And we will not lower our expectations. When it comes to defending human rights defenders. When it comes to a just treatment of LGBT persons and when it comes to women’s rights. We need to foster inclusive societies, in which human rights are respected and every individual enjoys the freedom to live according to his or her personal identity of choice. This is essential for harmony, stability and prosperity. One of my favourite writers is Amin Maalouf, he once wrote: “For it is often the way we look at other people that imprisons them within their own narrowest allegiances. And it is also the way we look at them that may set them free’. 

I really believe in this, we can set each other free by respecting the choice we make of who we want to be, what we want to believe, where we want to stand.

Thank you very much.