Drawbacks of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC)
Posted on December 14th, 2016

By  Hosoya Kiyoshi

” UNHRC Committee members have little motivation to do the right thing and, as I mentioned earlier, no one monitors them. Perhaps that is why they accept invitations to all-expense-paid junkets, and in return, side with anti-Japanese nations and issue recommendations designed to emasculate and demolish Japan. The UN Human Rights Committee should concentrate on addressing human-rights violations occurring today. This is no time for it to be shirking its duties and torturing Japan (for more than 20 years!) about the comfort women controversy. The Committee is infringing upon the human rights of and vilifying the Japanese people. They say, the Congress dances, but does not progress.” In this case, the UN dances, but does not progress. Actually, what is happening is far worse: the UN Human Rights Committee has become toxic. This is one aspect of the United Nations that needs urgent reform.”
http://www.sdh-fact.com/book-article/872/
…………………………………………

The November 2014 issue of the monthly magazine Seiron carried an article I wrote about the members of the UNHRC (United Nations Human Rights Committee):

From the viewpoint of [anti-Japanese elements] who would attempt to influence [the Committee], members who have little knowledge about Japan, let alone specialized knowledge, are preferable because of their malleability. Because such members don’t know anything about Japan, they have no reticence about making [preposterous] claims about Japan. Self-proclaimed human-rights NGOs attempting to promote their anti-Japanese assertions manipulate Committee members. They are using spurious claims of their own invention to infringe upon the rights of Japan and the Japanese people. That is the unfortunate state of the UN today.

Such was the situation at the UNHRC two years ago, and it has not changed. Without knowing how the Committee operates, one would not have realized how pernicious the recommendation in the CEDAW report was that attempted to meddle in Japan’s imperial system.

The duties of Committee members are (1) examining reports submitted by national governments and evaluating progress made in the implementation of the Convention (Articles 17 and 20), and (2) submitting the results of their investigation to the General Assembly in the form of an annual report (Article 21).

This aspect is misunderstood by those who harbor the mistaken assumption that the Committee examines the Japanese government’s report on the human-rights situation, and then issues recommendations, meaning corrections to be made.

The Committee is decidedly not an examining body. The world is finally beginning to realize that CEDAW’s recommendations have neither legal force nor binding power. Nevertheless, until a few years ago, calls to adhere to UN recommendations were obeyed. Opponents of democracy wanted to perpetuate that misunderstanding, hoping to use the UN to force the Japanese government to implement recommendations, something they could not accomplish within Japan.

Those very same opponents of democracy are quick to espouse defending the Constitution.” Nichibenren (Japan Federation of Bar Associations), which professes to be a champion of law and justice, is one such group; it is a beaming example of hypocrisy. This time, the organization was plotting to introduce sham human rights into Japan’s imperial system, and for a reason far more malicious than the instance from two years ago, which I will demonstrate.

The source of information for the committees is government reports, discussions with government representatives during dialogues, and material provided by NGOs. Of course, some committee members will do research on their own, but they are obligated to examine reports; they are not permitted to incorporate their personal opinions into the reports.

To protect their reputations as intellectuals and human-rights specialists, committee members who are ignorant of the human-rights situation in Japan rely on information provided by Japanese NGOs. After going through the proper formalities, NGOs post information on the relevant committee’s website prior to meetings. This is a very convenient resource for committee members. Nevertheless, at a meeting held two years ago, a member posed a question to a government representative, prefacing it with, We have heard that … .”

However, what makes the incident relating to the imperial household particularly nefarious is the fact that the attack on Japan’s imperial-succession system in CEDAW’s concluding observations came without warning. There was no mention of imperial succession in the government report submitted to the CEDAW, or in reports from NGOs. Nor was the topic brought up in a dialogue.

For a topic to be broached in the CEDAW’s concluding observations, a decision to that effect must be made by the Committee.

According to Rule 31 (Adoption of Decisions) of the Rules of Procedure governing Committee work,

1. The Committee shall endeavor to reach its decisions by consensus.
2. If and when all efforts to reach consensus have been exhausted, decisions of the Committee shall be taken by a simple majority of the members present and voting.

This is just an hypothesis, but I would venture to say that CEDAW members voted twice on the imperial-succession matter, once before they included it in their concluding observations, and again when they made the decision to respect the Japan’s government request to delete that particular observation. One can only wonder how the members voted each time.

Hayashi Yoko, a Japanese woman, is the chairperson of CEDAW. Committee rules do not allow members to participate in the review of State reports emanating from their native countries. But as chairperson, she must have been involved to some extent. What sort of leadership did she provide on that occasion?

According to Article 17 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, members shall be experts of high moral standing and competence in the field covered by the Convention.” However, it appears that CEDAW members ignored the Convention, misrepresenting themselves as experts of high moral standing,” and engaged in a potential terroristic act by advocating the destruction of the most fundamental of Japan’s social and political system.

There is no system in place to monitor the members or to punish them for violations of the rules. It seems to be the nature of sessional committees to place all their trust in the high moral standing” of their members. We, its observers, are also to blame for overlooking CEDAW’s collusion with certain NGOs.

Six years have elapsed since my first visit to Geneva to attend a session pertaining to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. At the time, I had the opportunity to speak informally with a committee member from one of Europe’s leading nations. I was surprised to hear him state that, This job wears me out, and it’s pointless.” He explained that although committee members diligently examine the state of human rights in a particular nation and issue recommendations, the government of that nation tends to ignore them.

Committee members have little motivation to do the right thing and, as I mentioned earlier, no one monitors them. Perhaps that is why they accept invitations to all-expense-paid junkets, and in return, side with anti-Japanese nations and issue recommendations designed to emasculate and demolish Japan. The UN Human Rights Committee should concentrate on addressing human-rights violations occurring today. This is no time for it to be shirking its duties and torturing Japan (for more than 20 years!) about the comfort women controversy. The Committee is infringing upon the human rights of and vilifying the Japanese people. They say, the Congress dances, but does not progress.” In this case, the UN dances, but does not progress. Actually, what is happening is far worse: the UN Human Rights Committee has become toxic. This is one aspect of the United Nations that needs urgent reform.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2018 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress