DOCSLIB.ORG

The Asian NGO Network on National Human Rights Institutions (ANNI)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Asian NGO Network on National Human Rights Institutions (ANNI) 2015 ANNI Report on the Performance and Establishment of National Human Rights Institutions in Asia The Asian NGO Network on National Human Rights Institutions (ANNI) Compiled and Printed by Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-­‐ASIA) Secretariat of ANNI Editorial Committee: Balasingham Skanthakumar (Editor---in---chief) Joses Kuan Tessa Baizer Layout and Printing: Prachoomthong Group IBSN: 978-616-7733-10-4 Copyright © 2015 This book was written for the benefit of human rights defenders and may be quoted from or copied as long as the source and authors are acknowledged. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-­‐ASIA) 66/2 Pan Road, Silom, Bang Rak Bangkok, 10500 Thailand Tel: +66 (0)2 637 91266-­‐7 Fax: +66 (0)2 637 9128 Email: [email protected] Web: www.forum-asia.org Table of Contents Foreword Regional Overview Southeast Asia Burma: All Shook Up Cambodia: Symbolic Institutions Are No Substitute Malaysia: Room To Be Pro-Active Thailand: Human Rights Crisis Timor-Leste: Proactive Steps Needed for Further Improvement South Asia Afghanistan: Still Stumbling Ahead Bangladesh: Failing To Fulfil Its Commitments India: Immediate Reforms Needed The Maldives: Zipped, Packed And Ready To Head Home Nepal: All Eyes On New Team Sri Lanka: Lost Opportunities Northeast Asia Japan: Eager To See A Breakthrough Mongolia: Amend The Law South Korea: Looking On When Not Looking Away Taiwan: Betting on the 2016 Elections Foreword The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), as the Secretariat of the Asian NGO Network on National Human Rights Institutions (ANNI), humbly presents the publication of the 2015 ANNI Report on the Performance and Establishment of National Human Rights Institutions in Asia. Our sincere appreciation goes to all 30 ANNI member organisations from across 17 countries in Asia for their participation and commitment to ANNI and continued advocacy towards the strenghtening and establishment of NHRIs in Asia. Similarly, we would also like to extend our sincere thanks to the National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) that have contributed valuable inputs and feeback to the concerned country reports. Reports submitted by organisations representing 15 countries consider the developments that took place in respective countries over the course of 2014 and significant events in the first quarter of 2015 As in previous years, the country reports have been researched and structured in accordance with ANNI Reporting Guidelines that were collectively formulated by the ANNI members at its 8th Regional Consultation in April 2015 (Dhaka, Bangladesh). The Report primarily focuses on issues of independence and effectiveness of the NHRIs and their engagement with other stakeholders such as civil society and Parliament. We believe that this annual report will continue to serve its purposes as an advocacy tool to enhance the effective work and functioning of NHRIs so that they can continue to play their role as public defenders and protectors of human rights on the ground. FORUM-ASIA would like to acknowledge the contribution of everyone who has dedicated their time and effort to the publication of this Report; namely Aklima Ferdows Lisa (Bangladesh), Shahindha Ismail and Jauza Khaleel (Maldives), Dinushika Dissanayake, Sabra Zahid, K. Aingkaran and PM Senarathna (Sri Lanka), Sue-yeon Park, Minjoo Kim, Da Hye Lee, Ha-neui Kim and Eunji Kang (South Korea), Shoko Fukui (Japan), Enkhtsetseg Baljinnyam and Urantsooj Gombosuren (Mongolia), Jose Pereira (Timor- Leste), Khin Ohmar, Alex James and Matthew Gumley (Burma), Almaz Teffera and Stella Anastasia (Cambodia), Mathew Jacob (India), Sevan Doraisamy (Malaysia), Prashannata Wasti (Nepal), E-ling Chiu, Song-lih Huang and Yibee Huang (Taiwan), Chalida Tajaroensuk and Chutimas Suksai (Thailand), and Hassan Ali Faiz (Afghanistan). Our sincere thanks extend to the Country Programme of FORUM-ASIA who has assisted throughout the process. ANNI would also like to convey its deep gratitude to Balasingham Skanthakumar for his expertise and guidance in editing the Report for a third successive year. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the financial support from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) in the publication of this Report. We hope that this publication will be beneficial for all stakeholders involved in the strengthening and establishment of NHRIs in the region. Evelyn Balais-Serrano Executive Director Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) Secretariat of ANNI Regional Overview ANNI Secretariat INTRODUCTION Approaching twenty-five years since the Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles) were first drafted, National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) have grown at an unprecedented rate. They total some 106 globally today. NHRIs have also been conferred a certain pride of place in the international human rights system, with formal roles and rights designated to them. This is further evinced in the steadily growing number of resolutions at the United National Human Rights Council and General Assembly. Notable shifts have been observed, from procedural texts to more issue-specific resolutions that reflect contemporary trends and issues (such as reprisals against NHRIs). Indeed, there seems to be a “global adoption” of NHRIs today. The sheer increase in recommendations made, as well as enthusiasm with which they are met and accepted, at various platorms such as the Universal Periodic Review and treaty bodies, lends further credence to this assertion. This seemingly unassailable tide has produced several milestones and achievements that should also be noted. These range from instituting dedicated HRD focal points/desks within NHRIs, to pivotal roles played in the passage of landmark legislation, to conducting national inquiries to investigate widespread, chronic and institutional human rights abuses and violations, and even joint campaigns with civil society to pressure governments to ratify important human rights instruments. However, the assessment by human rights defenders (HRDs) and civil society in the ANNI Report 2015 depicts a more nuanced picture that reflects the political contexts as well as circumstances governing the existence and performance of NHRIs in this region. CLOWNING AROUND WITH THE PARIS PRINCIPLES The “Paris Principles” spells out the minimum international standards for an NHRI’s structure, competence, working procedures. These principles provide guidelines for how NHRIs are to be independent from the government and reflect the pluralism of society in its membership. They address both promotional and protection aspects of the mandate and even provide some direction concerning the quasi-jurisdictional competence of NHRIs that possess such powers; a common feature of many NHRIs in Asia. However, it appears that many NHRIs are “set up to fail”, and this is most evident in problematic appointment and selection processes adopted by Asian NHRIs and their governments. With the exception of very few NHRIs, most are conducted in secrecy, devoid of consultation and public participation in the application, screening and selection process. There might be the occasional piecemeal concessions made through public calls in the national broadsheets or to civil society mailing lists, but very little else to substantially ensure the rigor and integrity of the process. A cursory scan of Asian NHRIs under review by the International Coordinating Committee of NHRIs’ Sub-Committee on Accreditation will reveal that recurring recommendations made in relation to independence and the process for the selection of Commissioners remain ignored (over at least two review cycles). This is certainly worrisome and a missed opportunity to restore confidence and legitimacy deficits, because a comprehensive selection criteria and a coherent selection processes can certainly bolster the independence and good governance of an NHRI. It is most ironic that civil society and HRDs- main constituencies of NHRIs- continue to be excluded from the process. The impacts are wide-reaching and long-lasting. The NHRC Thailand, criticized by the ICC-SCA for its lack of independence and neutrality and currently facing the imminent threat of downgrade, conducted a public inquiry into the 2010 political violence that suffered from poor turnout and distrust. More recently, while successful advocacy and pressure finally prevented the proposed merger of the NHRCT and Ombudman’s Office, deeply-entrenched issues continue to fester. Given a year after the ICC-SCA November 2014 review to “show cause” before the downgrade takes effect, a highly regressive selection process adopted by the military government that fell considerably short of the Paris Principles unsurprisingly resulted in the nomination of a candidate with a proven poor track record on human rights. The individual had even previously filed lese majeste (defamation of monarchy) charges against civil society activists and called for harsher enforcement and penalties under Article 112 of the Penal Code! In Korea, the controversial appointment of a Commissioner who had previously gone on record taking positions that openly endorse discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. This unilateral, non-transparent and non-inclusive selection process was again repeated in the nomination and confirmation of the incoming Chairperson (in August 2015), even despite being under intense scrutiny and confronting the possibility of a downgrade
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nepal: All Eyes on New Team
    NEPAL: ALL EYES ON NEW TEAM Informal Sector Service Centre (INSEC)1 1. INTRODUCTION The election of the Second Constituent Assembly (CA) paved the way for formation of a representative government. The country got a new and elected government in January 2014, nineteen months after the former Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai resigned. The Interim Election Government as it was called was headed by the then sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Khil Raj Regmi. His government completed the mandate and handed over the responsibility to the people’s government. The Common Program of the Government has mentioned that efforts shall be made to find consensus for promulgating new constitution, strengthening democracy and national interest by holding discussion with the political parties present at the CA and outside it. However the government’s effort is not fruitful in addressing the issues raised by political parties not present in the CA. As an important aspect of transitional justice, the Legislature passed the bill for formation of Truth and Reconciliation Commission despite criticism from national and international communities, saying the Bill is set to provide amnesty to perpetrators rather than punishing them and providing justice to victims. The verdict of the Supreme Court on 2 January 2015 ruled not to provide amnesty to persons involved in grave human rights violations and the Bill should be in line with the international principles of human rights. The trend of impunity continued as the human rights situation of the country did not improve for a long time. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) remained without office bearers for 13 months from 16 September 2013 to 20 October 2014 as the government failed to appoint its commissioners for months.
    [Show full text]
  • Annexes to the National Report Second UPR Cycle
    Annexes to the National Report Second UPR Cycle Submitted by The Government of Nepal Submitted to The UN Human Rights Council 2015 Annex – 1 Proceeding Reports of the Consultation Workshops Regional Consultations: 1. Proceeding Report on Regional consultation on UPR zero draft report for the preparation of 2nd National Report on UPR, Nepalgunj, 5 January, 2014 The program was coordinated locally by the District Administration Office where a total of 151 participants representing different government agencies, courts, security forces, NHRC, civil society, NGOs, human rights defenders, woman rights defenders, conflict victims, journalists participated in the program. The participants were provided with the draft UPR report and its summary in Nepali as reference materials for the consultation and comments. Secretary, OPMCM Chaired the Consultation where Joint Secretary of OPMCM presented the zero draft in Nepali language prepared by the inter-ministerial UPR Committee. After the presentation of the zero draft, the floor was opened to discuss, comment and garner inputs on the draft. The program was moderated by Under Secretary of the OPMCM. During the open floor discussion, participants, interacted and shared their concerns, provided suggestions in the format of the report and themes/data/progress status raised in the report. In the Closing session, the Chief Judge of the Appellate Court and the Regional Administrator addressed the program. The program was concluded with the Concluding remarks by the Chair. The issues raised by participants in the open floor discussion to be considered in the second national report are given below. Open Floor Discussion: Human Rights Defender (male) § The data presented on implementation status of NHRC’s recommendation are different with the NHRC's data.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace Audit Nepal
    a Peace audit nepal Understanding conflict. Building peace. about iNteRNATIONaL aLeRt International Alert helps people find peaceful solutions to conflict. We are one of the world’s leading peacebuilding organisations, with nearly 30 years of experience laying the foundations for peace. We work with local people around the world to help them build peace, and we advise governments, organisations and companies on how to support peace. We focus on issues that influence peace, including governance, the economy, gender relations, social development, climate change, and the role of businesses and international organisations in high-risk places. www.international-alert.org ackNowLedgemeNts This Peace Audit was written by Rabindra Gurung and Elizabeth Drew. We would like to thank Dominic de Ville, Pranav Manandhar, Sargam Ghimire and Care Nepal Hariyo Ban project for their support with the field research; Dan Smith, Phil Vernon, Markus Mayer, Charlotte Onslow, Jana Naujoks, Chandani Thapa and Joe Whitaker for their review and inputs; and to all the many people who gave up their time to speak with us to offer their views, expertise and insights to inform the analysis for this Peace Audit. International Alert is also grateful for the support from our strategic donors: the UK Department for International Development UKAID; the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency; the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The opinions expressed in this report are solely those of International Alert, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of our donors. © International Alert 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without full attribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Evaluation of Usaid/Nepal Strengthening Political Parties, Electoral and Legislative Processes Project
    Citizenship and voter registration camp in Nepal FINAL EVALUATION OF USAID/NEPAL STRENGTHENING POLITICAL PARTIES, ELECTORAL AND LEGISLATIVE PROCESSES PROJECT FINAL REPORT January 2017 This publ ication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared independently by CAMRIS International. USAID Nepal Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Project SPPELP Evaluation FINAL EVALUATION OF USAID/NEPAL STRENGTHENING POLITICAL PARTIES, ELECTORAL AND LEGISLATIVE PROCESSES PROJECT PROMOTING DEMOCRATIC POLITICS IN A TRANSITIONAL POLITICAL SYSTEM January 26, 2017 USAID Nepal MEL Project: AID-367-C-15-00001 DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. ii USAID Nepal Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Project SPPELP Evaluation CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... iv Evaluation Team Members ....................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 Evaluation Purpose .................................................................................................................... 6 Project Background ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 20171227 the Nature and Functions of Cambodia's Parliament And
    RESEARCH PAPER The Department of Information of the Senate of Cambodia The Nature and Functions of Cambodia’s Parliament and Government: Examined in an International Context Researcher: Dr. Jan Taylor May 2017 Mr. Hisham Mousar Mr. Nun Assachan Adviser: Mr.Khut Inserey Notice of Disclaimer The Parliamentary Institute of Cambodia (PIC) is an independent parliamentary support institution for the Cambodian Parliament which, upon request of the parliamentarians and the parliamentary commissions, offers a wide range of research publications on current and emerging key issues, legislation and major public policy topics. These publications provide information on subjects that are relevant to parliamentary and constituency work but do not purport to represent or reflect the views of the Parliamentary Institute of Cambodia, the Parliament of Cambodia, or of any of its members. The contents of these publications, current at the date of publication, are for reference purposes only. These publications are not designed to provide legal or policy advice, and do not necessarily deal with every important topic or aspect of the issues it considers. The contents of this website are covered by applicable Cambodian laws and international copyright agreements. Permission to reproduce in whole or in part or otherwise use the content on this website may be sought from the appropriate source. © 2017 Parliamentary Institute of Cambodia (PIC) Table of Contents Executive summary..........................................................................................................................i
    [Show full text]
  • LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING LEGISLATIVE Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung House No
    © Copyright 2016 by Permanent Secretariat of the Committee for Legal and Judicial Reform Ministry of Justice & Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Cambodia Published by Permanent Secretariat of the Committee for Legal and Judicial Reform Ministry of Justice & LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING LEGISLATIVE Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung House No. 4, Street 462, Introduction to Khan Chamkar Mon, P.O. Box 944 Phnom Penh, Kingdom of Cambodia Tel: (855-23) 996 861/ 726 221 LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING Fax: (855-23) 213 364 www.kas.de/kambodscha References & Techniques Graphic Design & Layout by Introduction to Christine Schmutzler Edited by The cover picture of the book was taken from the frescos of the Silver Pagoda inside ISBN: 978-99950-982-6-1 Kai Hauerstein the Royal Palace in Phnom Penh. It shows a scene from the “Reamker”, the Khmer adaption of the Indian “Ramayana” epic. Photo by Christine Schmutzler Printed in Cambodia www.kas.de/kambodscha ISBN: 978-99950-982-6-1 INTRODUCTION TO LEGISLATIVE DRAFTING References and Techniques Published by Permanent Secretariat of the Committee for Legal and Judicial Reform (Ministry of Justice) & Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung Edited by Kai Hauerstein THE PERMANENT SECRETARIAT OF THE COMMITTEE FOR LEGAL AND JUDICIAL REFORM Legal and Judicial Reform is essential to operationalize the 1993 Constitution and is an integral part of achieving Good Governance within the Rectangular Strategy (Phase III). The Committee for Legal and Judicial Reform (CmLJR) under the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is responsible for reforming the legal and judicial frameworks in Cambodia. The Permanent Secretariat of the Committee for Legal and Judicial Reform (PS-CmLJR) is the operational arm of the Committee and coordinates the implementation of the Plan of Action (2005) underlying the Legal and Judicial Reform Strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • SN Applicant Name Alotted Kitta BOID 1 AMBIKA DAHAL 10
    Nepal Agro Laghubitta Bittiya Sanstha IPO Result Alotted SN Applicant Name Kitta BOID 1 AMBIKA DAHAL 10 1301720000008683 2 MAHESHWORI DHUNGANA 10 1301120000464481 3 SHIVA SHANKAR BHANDARI 10 1301090000039971 4 Deepa Devkota 10 1301440000013531 5 SANTOSH KUNWAR YOGI 10 1301720000051011 6 DHAN MAYA DANGOL 10 1301250000126233 7 buddi bdr phuyal 10 1301250000044258 8 SANGITA REGMI 10 1301720000055244 9 SHAMBHAVI ACHARYA 10 1301330000049364 10 SUSHILA SUBEDI NEUPANE 10 1301120000349033 11 RAMITA PAUDYAL 10 1301350000075141 12 CHANDRAKALA BHATTRAI 10 1301120000329156 13 BINITA ARYAL 10 1301140000101320 14 NIRAJ KUMAR JOSHI 10 1301060000064699 15 Bhoj Prasad Gautam 10 1301070000266927 16 RAMILA DHUNGEL 10 1301390000059945 17 MAYA SHERPA 10 1301060001350941 18 Keshari Tandukar 10 1301120000378867 19 MADHAB PRASAD KOIRALA 10 1301390000012256 20 SANU SHARMA POUDEL 10 1301060000344816 21 PALPASA BHARATI 10 1301100000083422 22 DIPENDRA KUMAR AIER 10 1301310000094293 23 DIL KUMAR THAPA 10 1301020000257222 24 GEETA TANDAN 10 1301190000090746 25 KARNA BAHADUR THAPA MAGAR 10 1301720000046417 26 ANANDA PAUDEL 10 1301060000932335 27 REEWAZ BAR SINGH THAPA 10 1301720000066936 28 RITIMA THAPA 10 1301720000067000 29 AADITYA CHAUDHARY 10 1301720000026466 30 NIRAJ KARKI 10 1301720000012738 31 MITRA LAL LAMSAL 10 1301080000267934 32 SABITRA POKHREL 10 1301040000042248 33 PRAMILA JOSHI 10 1301480000096056 34 DURGA KUMARI ADHIKARI 10 1301090000646127 35 TULASA BASNET 10 1301720000033015 36 SITA SHARMA 10 1301220000015415 37 DEBAKI KAFLE 10 1301090000364095 38
    [Show full text]
  • Parliament Final Evaluation Report 2006.Pdf
    CAPACITY BUILDING OF THE PARLIAMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA Evaluation of Programme to Support Capacity Development of the Cambodian Parliament, and Options for Future Programmes MARCH 2006 LIST OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 5 Principal conclusions and recommendations 6 Background – UNDP programme 2002-2005 8 Background – Political context 8 Overview of the Parliament of Cambodia 10 The current composition of the National Assembly 10 The current composition of the Senate 11 Inner Organisation of the Cambodian Parliament 11 National Assembly and Senate Secretariats 12 Overall Assessment of Project Performance 2002-05 12 General 13 Areas of Success and Results 13 Project Management and Implementation 17 Summary of lessons learned 23 Overall Assessment of Parliament’s Institutional Capacity & Strategic Targets 23 Overall Assessment 24 Assessment of Parliament’s Legislative Capacity 25 Assessment of Parliament’s Oversight Capacity (political and budgetary) 27 Assessment of Parliament’s Representative Capacity 29 Assessment of the secretariat’s Institutional Capacity 32 Assessment of Parliament’s Infrastructure (library and information centre) 34 Assessment of Information Technology (IT) Resources and Facilities 35 Assessment of role of Parliament in attaining Millennium Development Goals 35 Recommended UNDP future action 37 General 37 Recommendations for short-term programming assistance to the National Assembly and Senate (2006-2008) 39 Recommendations for medium-term programming assistance to the National Assembly and Senate (2008-2013)
    [Show full text]
  • The Nepal Peace Monitor Annual Review 2017
    THE NEPAL PEACE MONITOR ANNUAL REVIEW 2017 COCAP 1 Acknowledgments: This report would not have been possible without the painstaking work and support of many people. First, we would like to thank COCAP’s District Focal Persons who collect the news daily in 25 districts and send in local media reporting on incidents. The NepalMonitor.org Mapping and Quality Control team checked, verified, and uploaded reports daily. Sabrina Shakya, Arpana Shrestha, Ekta Lamichhane, Raj Kumar Buda, Mahesh Bhatta, Balmukunda Humagain, Jasmine Hunt, Nathalie van Schagen, and Friso Hecker have all contributed to this report. Rosanne Teniente provided critical support in language editing. Kazi Studios designed the layout. Finally, we would like to thank Saroj Nepal, Program Manager of COCAP, and Badri Prasad Bhusal, Chairperson of COCAP, along with the entire COCAP board for their continued advice and support. We would also like to express our gratitude to Adrian Morel, Acting Director, Conflict and Fragility, The Asia Foundation, Bangkok. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License by COCAP 2 Foreword .................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 3 Trends of Incidents in 2017 - Overview .................................................... 7 Electoral Incidents and Instances of Political Contestation ..................... 11 Challenges to Governance
    [Show full text]
  • List of Participants in the 1St Trilateral Meeting Among the ICAPP Standing Committee, COPPPAL Coordinating Body and the CAPP Ex
    List of Participants in the 1st Trilateral Meeting among the ICAPP Standing Committee, COPPPAL Coordinating Body and the CAPP Executive Committee (Jakarta, Indonesia, April 22-24, 2016) As of April 22, 2016 I. ICAPP (International Conference of Asian Political Parties) Standing Committee ● Azerbaijan, Republic of (1) - Hon. Dr. Malahat Ibrahimqizi, Vice Chairperson of the ICAPP Women’s Wing and Member of Parliament, New Azerbaijan Party ● Cambodia, Kingdom of (10) - Hon. Sok An, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister in charge of the Office of the Council of Ministers, and Member of the Standing Committee of the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) - Hon. Tansri Chen Lip Keong, Co-Chairman (ICAPP) of the ICAPP-COPPPAL Business Council (ICBC) and Advisor to the Royal Government of Cambodia - Hon. Suos Yara, Member of Parliament and Vice-Chairman of International Relations Department, CPP - Hon. Sok Sokan, Member of Parliament, CPP - Hon. Tekreth Samrach, Secretary of State, Office of the Council of Ministers, CPP - Mr. Sim Saravuth, Assistant to Hon. Tansri Chen Lip Keong - Mr. Soeng Reth, Advisor to Hon. Sok An, CPP - Mr. Kong Chanveasna, Director of International Relations Department, Office of the Council of Ministers, CPP - Mr. Dim Sovannarom, Assistant tttached to the Office of the Council of Ministers - Mr. Sun Ly, Assistant to Hon. Sok An, CPP ● China, People’s Republic of (6) - Hon. Chen Fengxiang, Vice Minister of the International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (IDCPC) - Mr. Zhang Xuyi, Deputy Director-General, 1st Bureau, IDCPC - Ms. Jia Peng, Deputy Director, 1st Bureau, IDCPC - Mr. Liu Dongxiao, Third Secretary, General Office, IDCPC - Ms.Ruan Rui, Third Secretary, 1st Bureau, IDCPC - Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Speaker's Report
    July 2005 Issue A report of activities from Senator Dan Hays ear Readers, D A great deal has happened since my last newsletter, particularly the devastating tsunami in Southeast Asia. In fact, I witnessed the tragic consequences of this natural disaster first-hand in March when I paid an official visit to Indonesia. What was obvious to me, and Canadians in general, was the unprecedented level of destruction, but what was less-so was the triumph of the human spirit. From the students in dilapidated university dorms, to the family living in temporary shelter, to the children coping with their losses, I was moved by the resilience of the Indonesian people and by their ability to cope in the most difficult circumstances. Inside, you will find a brief glimpse of that visit, among the many others my diplomatic responsibility calls on me to do. Parliamentary diplomacy is one of my roles as Speaker of the Senate, and one I take very seriously. Moreover, as an Alberta senator, I believe this role also involves my province. Since my appointment as Speaker, I have always looked for ways to bring Alberta to the world and the world to Alberta. Accordingly, while over the last few years, I have had the honour to proudly represent Canada in more than 30 countries, I have also taken great pride in bringing delegations of parliamentarians from across the world to my hometown of Calgary. Indeed, delegates from Southeast Asia, to Europe, to the Middle East, to South America, and points in between, have all had the chance to see this great province and this great city.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the United Nations Universal Periodic Review
    Advocacy Forum-Nepal Asian Human Rights Commission The Redress Trust World Organization against Torture Submission to the United Nations Universal Periodic Review 23rd Session of the Working Group on the UPR Human Rights Council 22 March 2015 1 I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 3 II. ISSUES OF CONCERN ............................................................................................................ 3 A. CONTINUED IMPUNITY FOR SERIOUS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS ..................... 3 Background ............................................................................................................................... 3 Challenges in seeking justice ................................................................................................. 5 1. Authorities’ refusal to investigate ...................................................................................... 6 2. Interference with investigations ......................................................................................... 7 3. Lack of independent oversight of police and army ....................................................... 8 4. Inadequate legal framework ............................................................................................. 10 5. Failure to implement views of the UN Human Rights Committee in individual cases ................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]