Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the Maternal Mortality Panel of the 14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 14 June 2010
Mr. President,
Based on the significant commitment and experience of the Catholic Church in assisting mothers and newborn babies, since the earliest of times, especially through its hospitals and maternity and pediatric clinics, my delegation wishes to express its urgent concerns about the shocking number of maternal deaths that continue to occur – estimated by reliable indicators at 350,000 a year – most especially among the poorest and most marginalized and disenfranchised populations.
The Holy See's approach to Maternal Mortality is holistic, since it gives priority to the rights of mothers and child, both those already born and those awaiting birth in the womb of the mother. Not surprisingly, a strong correlation is revealed between statistics related to Maternal Mortality and those related to Neonatal Death, indicating that many measures aimed at combating maternal mortality, in fact, also contribute to a further reduction of child mortality. Moreover, we should not forget that 3 million babies die annually during their first week of life, another 3 million are stillborn, 2.3 million children die each year during their first year of life.
Mr. President,
Improvements to reduce Maternal Mortality have been made possible due to higher per capita income, higher education rates for women and increasing availability of basic medical care, including "skilled birth attendants". A recent study on Maternal Mortality has suggested that maternal mortality in Africa could be significantly reduced if HIV-positive mothers were given access to antiretroviral medications. The availability of emergency obstetric care, including the provision of universal pre and post-natal care, and adequate transport to medical facilities (when necessary), skilled birth attendants, a clean blood supply and a clean water supply, appropriate antibiotics, and the introduction of a minimum age of 18 years for marriage, are all measures that could benefit both mothers and their children. Most importantly, if the international community wishes to effectively reduce the tragic rates of maternal mortality, respect for and promotion of the right to health and of access to medications must not only be spoken about, but also be put into action, by States as well as by non-governmental organizations and by civil society.
Mr. President,
Policies aimed at combating Maternal Mortality and Child Mortality need to strike a delicate balance between the rights of mother and those of the child, both of whom are rights bearers, the first of which is the right to life. The maternity clinics and hospitals promoted by the Catholic Church do exactly that: they save the lives both of mothers and of child, born and yet-to-be-born.
Thank you Mr. President.
Stemma Episcopale
Questo e lo Stemma Episcopale del ArciVescovo Mons. Silvano Maria Tomasi, missionario Scalabriniano. Lo stemma ricorda il patrono della congeregazione Scalabriniana voluto dal Beato G.B. Scalabrini, San Carlo Borremeo nel suo stemma ce questa scritta Humilitas.
martedì 15 giugno 2010
mercoledì 9 giugno 2010
H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi: 14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the General Debate Item 3 of the 14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 8 June 2010
Mr. President,
With regard to the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, my delegation wishes to raise additional concerns regarding the need for effective action in order to guarantee Universal Access to medicines and diagnostic tools for all persons. The Special Rapporteur focused on this issue during his Report to the Eleventh Session of this distinguished Council . However, continued vigilance must be maintained in this regard.
As the members of this Council already are well aware, the right to health is universally recognized as a fundamental right. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) includes the right to health and medical care within the more general rubric of the right “to enjoy an adequate standard of living.” Article 12.1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), however, directly recognizes the right to enjoy the best physical and mental condition. .
The Committee on Economic and Cultural Rights, in its General Comment No. 14 , moreover, identified the following minimum requirements for States to ensure: (1) the right of access to health care in a non-discriminatory way, (2) access to basic nutritional level, (3) access to housing, basic sanitation and a sufficient supply of drinking water, (4) the supply of essential drugs, (5) an equitable distribution of benefits and health services, and (6) adoption of national strategies to prevent and combat epidemics.
Mr. President, the Catholic Church provides a major contribution to health care in all parts of the world – through local churches, religious institutions and private initiatives, which act on their own responsibility and in the respect of the law of each country – including the promotion of 5,378 hospitals, 18,088 dispensaries and clinics, 521 leprosaria, and 15,448 homes for the aged, the chronically ill, or disabled people. With information coming from these on-the-ground realities in some of the most poor, isolated, and marginalized communities, my delegation is obliged to report that the rights detailed in the international instruments already mentioned are far from being realized.
One major impediment to the realization of these rights is the lack of access to affordable medicines and diagnostic tools that can be administered and utilized in low-income, low-technology settings. Among the disturbing trends and findings reported by the Special Rapporteur are the following: “Diseases of poverty” still account for 50 per cent of the burden of disease in developing countries, nearly ten times higher than in developed countries ; more than 100 million people fall into poverty annually because they have to pay for health care ; in developing countries, patients themselves pay for 50 to 90 per cent of essential medicines ; nearly 2 billion people lack access to essential medicines .
One group particularly deprived of access to medicines is that of children. Many essential medicines have not been developed in appropriate formulations or dosages specific to pediatric use. Thus families and health care workers often are forced to engage in a “guessing game” on how best to divide adult-size pills for use with children. This situation can result in the tragic loss of life or continued chronic illness among such needy children. For example, of the 2.1 million children estimated to be living with HIV infection , only 38% were received life-saving anti-retroviral medications at the end of 2008 . This treatment gap is partially due to the lack of “child friendly” medications to treat the HIV infection.
Thus the Committee on the Rights of the Child has declared: “The obligations of States parties under the Convention extend to ensuring that children have sustained and equal access to comprehensive treatment and care, including necessary HIV-related drugs … on a basis of non-discrimination. ”
My delegation is well aware of the complexities inherent in the intellectual property aspects related to the issue of access to medicines. These considerations, including the flexibilities available to applying the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, are well documented in the 2009 Report of the Special Rapporteur. We further recognize that serious efforts already have been undertaken to implement the Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property, established in 2008 by the 61stWorld Health Assembly. However, the intense debates recently pursued at the 63rd World Health Assembly demonstrate that the international community has not yet succeeded in its aim to provide equitable access to medicines and indicate the need for further creative reflection and action in this regard.
Mr. President, my delegation urges this Council to renew its commitment as a key stakeholder in efforts to assert and safeguard the right to health by guaranteeing equitable access to essential medicines. We do so with a firm conviction that “… treatment should be extended to every human being” and as an essential element of “the search for the greatest possible human development… and with a strong belief that “[t]his ethical perspective [is] based on the dignity of the human person and on the fundamental rights and duties connected with it …”
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the General Debate Item 3 of the 14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 8 June 2010
Mr. President,
With regard to the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, my delegation wishes to raise additional concerns regarding the need for effective action in order to guarantee Universal Access to medicines and diagnostic tools for all persons. The Special Rapporteur focused on this issue during his Report to the Eleventh Session of this distinguished Council . However, continued vigilance must be maintained in this regard.
As the members of this Council already are well aware, the right to health is universally recognized as a fundamental right. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) includes the right to health and medical care within the more general rubric of the right “to enjoy an adequate standard of living.” Article 12.1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), however, directly recognizes the right to enjoy the best physical and mental condition. .
The Committee on Economic and Cultural Rights, in its General Comment No. 14 , moreover, identified the following minimum requirements for States to ensure: (1) the right of access to health care in a non-discriminatory way, (2) access to basic nutritional level, (3) access to housing, basic sanitation and a sufficient supply of drinking water, (4) the supply of essential drugs, (5) an equitable distribution of benefits and health services, and (6) adoption of national strategies to prevent and combat epidemics.
Mr. President, the Catholic Church provides a major contribution to health care in all parts of the world – through local churches, religious institutions and private initiatives, which act on their own responsibility and in the respect of the law of each country – including the promotion of 5,378 hospitals, 18,088 dispensaries and clinics, 521 leprosaria, and 15,448 homes for the aged, the chronically ill, or disabled people. With information coming from these on-the-ground realities in some of the most poor, isolated, and marginalized communities, my delegation is obliged to report that the rights detailed in the international instruments already mentioned are far from being realized.
One major impediment to the realization of these rights is the lack of access to affordable medicines and diagnostic tools that can be administered and utilized in low-income, low-technology settings. Among the disturbing trends and findings reported by the Special Rapporteur are the following: “Diseases of poverty” still account for 50 per cent of the burden of disease in developing countries, nearly ten times higher than in developed countries ; more than 100 million people fall into poverty annually because they have to pay for health care ; in developing countries, patients themselves pay for 50 to 90 per cent of essential medicines ; nearly 2 billion people lack access to essential medicines .
One group particularly deprived of access to medicines is that of children. Many essential medicines have not been developed in appropriate formulations or dosages specific to pediatric use. Thus families and health care workers often are forced to engage in a “guessing game” on how best to divide adult-size pills for use with children. This situation can result in the tragic loss of life or continued chronic illness among such needy children. For example, of the 2.1 million children estimated to be living with HIV infection , only 38% were received life-saving anti-retroviral medications at the end of 2008 . This treatment gap is partially due to the lack of “child friendly” medications to treat the HIV infection.
Thus the Committee on the Rights of the Child has declared: “The obligations of States parties under the Convention extend to ensuring that children have sustained and equal access to comprehensive treatment and care, including necessary HIV-related drugs … on a basis of non-discrimination. ”
My delegation is well aware of the complexities inherent in the intellectual property aspects related to the issue of access to medicines. These considerations, including the flexibilities available to applying the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, are well documented in the 2009 Report of the Special Rapporteur. We further recognize that serious efforts already have been undertaken to implement the Global Strategy and Plan of Action on Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property, established in 2008 by the 61stWorld Health Assembly. However, the intense debates recently pursued at the 63rd World Health Assembly demonstrate that the international community has not yet succeeded in its aim to provide equitable access to medicines and indicate the need for further creative reflection and action in this regard.
Mr. President, my delegation urges this Council to renew its commitment as a key stakeholder in efforts to assert and safeguard the right to health by guaranteeing equitable access to essential medicines. We do so with a firm conviction that “… treatment should be extended to every human being” and as an essential element of “the search for the greatest possible human development… and with a strong belief that “[t]his ethical perspective [is] based on the dignity of the human person and on the fundamental rights and duties connected with it …”
H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi: (WTO)-Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Council
Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the World Trade Organization (WTO)-Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Council
Geneva, 8 June 2010
Mr. President,
I join previous speakers and congratulate you on your election.
1. On the issue of article 27.3(b), Patentable subject matter, the delegation of the Holy See wishes to provide some comments and raise some additional concerns.
2. Article 27.3(b) allows Members to exclude from patentability plants and animals, but not micro-organisms, and allows Members to exclude from patentability biological processes which are essential for the production of plants and animals, but not non-biological or microbiological ones. The rationale behind this provision is to reinforce the international protection of patents and other Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) on non-biological and microbiological life developments by linking such protection to the general legal framework on trade of other goods and services. Such protection, however, should be promoted fairly and in full accord with the development objectives established by article 7 of TRIPS, with the provisions of article 8 related to the political freedom of States to protect public health and nutrition, and to promote the public interest in sectors of vital importance to their socio-economic and technological development, and with provisions of article 27.2, which allows members to “exclude from patentability inventions, the prevention within their territory of the commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to the environment”.
3. The patenting of life forms could sometimes serve as a tool to support biotechnologies that are problematic both from an ethical point of view and from the point of view of a “development-friendly” intellectual property system.
4. In relation to human life, article 4 of the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights states that "The human genome in its natural state shall not give rise to financial gains"[1] while article 21 of the Council of Europe Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine, that: "The human body and its parts shall not, as such, give rise to financial gains”[2]. In the same regard, the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning[3] acknowledges the ethical concerns that certain applications of rapidly developing life sciences may raise with regard to human dignity, human rights and the fundamental freedoms of individuals, and calls States to adopt all measures necessary to protect adequately human life in the application of life sciences. Thus, the TRIPS agreement, other WTO rules, and all other international, regional and bilateral trade and IPR agreements should not reduce ability of States to govern the aspects of IPR related to human life and dignity.
5. Mere commercial control of production and distribution of new life forms could affect both food security and development prospects of poor countries. Private monopolistic rights should not be imposed over those biological resources, from which the basic food and medicine requirements of human life are derived. An inclusive approach to IPR should not ignore the major economic, environmental, and ethical concerns about the patenting of life, since such action would exert a negative impact on consumer rights, biodiversity conservation, environmental protection, indigenous rights, scientific and academic freedom, and, ultimately, the economic development of many developing countries insofar as it depends on new technologies.
6. In 2007, the United Nations adopted a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which recognizes, in Article 31, that "indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts" and the "right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property aver such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions". When opportune and feasible, the WIPO/GRTKF developments and conclusions should be acknowledged within the context of the TRIPS rules.
7. Among agents of development, there is a significant concern about patenting of varieties of seeds that are genetically engineered. An unlimited application of Patent procedures to biological, scientific, and technical developments could be harmful to both traditional and modern methods of research and production, especially with regard to new varieties that are beneficial in the developing world. Concentration of seed ownership could threaten the autonomy of local farmers, who are forced to buy seeds every season from a handful of companies with whom they have little power to negotiate competitive prices. Ownership of Intellectual Property Rights to seeds could seriously jeopardize the practice of saving seeds in order to trade or replant them during the next season. most small and medium-scale farmers routinely save seeds, and an important portion of world population depends on the continued financial stability of farmers who do so. The International Community should render due attention to concerns about the concentration of technology and resources in food production by a small group of entities and companies that are driven by purely commercial goals. Special attention also should be given to intellectual property protection of seeds discovered by individual farmers – both from developed or developing countries – and to the rights of indigenous people to the traditional use and ownership of those plants that are essential to their livelihoods and cultures.
8. The main goal of the international community should be to promote the common good. Moreover, international trade rules and negotiations should aim toward the good of all, especially of those people who are poor and vulnerable, should ensure both the means for human sustenance, such as food, water, medicines, health environment, etc., and the means for the cultural, social and spiritual development of people.
Discussions about the international protection of intellectual property rights and about the scope and consequences of article 27, 3.b, also should be guided, in all sincerity, by the promotion of the common good and of human dignity, as it is rightly stated in the Declaration, the Final Act, the Preamble and the Annex 1C of the Agreement of Marrakech.
at the World Trade Organization (WTO)-Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Council
Geneva, 8 June 2010
Mr. President,
I join previous speakers and congratulate you on your election.
1. On the issue of article 27.3(b), Patentable subject matter, the delegation of the Holy See wishes to provide some comments and raise some additional concerns.
2. Article 27.3(b) allows Members to exclude from patentability plants and animals, but not micro-organisms, and allows Members to exclude from patentability biological processes which are essential for the production of plants and animals, but not non-biological or microbiological ones. The rationale behind this provision is to reinforce the international protection of patents and other Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) on non-biological and microbiological life developments by linking such protection to the general legal framework on trade of other goods and services. Such protection, however, should be promoted fairly and in full accord with the development objectives established by article 7 of TRIPS, with the provisions of article 8 related to the political freedom of States to protect public health and nutrition, and to promote the public interest in sectors of vital importance to their socio-economic and technological development, and with provisions of article 27.2, which allows members to “exclude from patentability inventions, the prevention within their territory of the commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to the environment”.
3. The patenting of life forms could sometimes serve as a tool to support biotechnologies that are problematic both from an ethical point of view and from the point of view of a “development-friendly” intellectual property system.
4. In relation to human life, article 4 of the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights states that "The human genome in its natural state shall not give rise to financial gains"[1] while article 21 of the Council of Europe Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine, that: "The human body and its parts shall not, as such, give rise to financial gains”[2]. In the same regard, the United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning[3] acknowledges the ethical concerns that certain applications of rapidly developing life sciences may raise with regard to human dignity, human rights and the fundamental freedoms of individuals, and calls States to adopt all measures necessary to protect adequately human life in the application of life sciences. Thus, the TRIPS agreement, other WTO rules, and all other international, regional and bilateral trade and IPR agreements should not reduce ability of States to govern the aspects of IPR related to human life and dignity.
5. Mere commercial control of production and distribution of new life forms could affect both food security and development prospects of poor countries. Private monopolistic rights should not be imposed over those biological resources, from which the basic food and medicine requirements of human life are derived. An inclusive approach to IPR should not ignore the major economic, environmental, and ethical concerns about the patenting of life, since such action would exert a negative impact on consumer rights, biodiversity conservation, environmental protection, indigenous rights, scientific and academic freedom, and, ultimately, the economic development of many developing countries insofar as it depends on new technologies.
6. In 2007, the United Nations adopted a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which recognizes, in Article 31, that "indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts" and the "right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property aver such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions". When opportune and feasible, the WIPO/GRTKF developments and conclusions should be acknowledged within the context of the TRIPS rules.
7. Among agents of development, there is a significant concern about patenting of varieties of seeds that are genetically engineered. An unlimited application of Patent procedures to biological, scientific, and technical developments could be harmful to both traditional and modern methods of research and production, especially with regard to new varieties that are beneficial in the developing world. Concentration of seed ownership could threaten the autonomy of local farmers, who are forced to buy seeds every season from a handful of companies with whom they have little power to negotiate competitive prices. Ownership of Intellectual Property Rights to seeds could seriously jeopardize the practice of saving seeds in order to trade or replant them during the next season. most small and medium-scale farmers routinely save seeds, and an important portion of world population depends on the continued financial stability of farmers who do so. The International Community should render due attention to concerns about the concentration of technology and resources in food production by a small group of entities and companies that are driven by purely commercial goals. Special attention also should be given to intellectual property protection of seeds discovered by individual farmers – both from developed or developing countries – and to the rights of indigenous people to the traditional use and ownership of those plants that are essential to their livelihoods and cultures.
8. The main goal of the international community should be to promote the common good. Moreover, international trade rules and negotiations should aim toward the good of all, especially of those people who are poor and vulnerable, should ensure both the means for human sustenance, such as food, water, medicines, health environment, etc., and the means for the cultural, social and spiritual development of people.
Discussions about the international protection of intellectual property rights and about the scope and consequences of article 27, 3.b, also should be guided, in all sincerity, by the promotion of the common good and of human dignity, as it is rightly stated in the Declaration, the Final Act, the Preamble and the Annex 1C of the Agreement of Marrakech.
mercoledì 2 giugno 2010
H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the Holy See to the United Nations in Geneva
Intervention by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations in Geneva
Urgent Debate on the Israeli raid on the flotilla sailing to Gaza
14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 1 June 2010
Mr. President,
With profound sadness the Holy See delegation notes that the unsettled situation in the Middle East remains a source of tragic events. The latest loss of life caused by the use of force in the Israeli attack in international waters against the humanitarian flotilla of ships sailing to the Gaza Strip unfortunately adds another link in the long chain of conflicts and confrontations that produce suffering and tensions for the Palestinian population and the population of Israel.
To the families of the new victims goes our solidarity and condolences. It is hoped that recent and past victims may encourage a wide understanding that violence does not lead to enduring peace, but that dialogue, respect of rights and mutual acceptance do.
To make an effective dialogue possible, a full, impartial and transparent investigation into the latest incident, based upon international law and international humanitarian law, is necessary.
While all the facts are ascertained, it is clear that the humanitarian needs of the people of Gaza are not met and all parties involved and the international community have a responsibility to cooperate so that the fundamental human rights of those persons are implemented.
As the Holy See has previously stated, it is always opposed to the use of violence from whatever side it may come. Violence makes even more difficult the search for peaceful solutions, the only ones that can build a future of constructive coexistence.
My delegation calls once again upon all parties involved to come to a durable solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through negotiation, leading to a two-State solution, with Israel and an independent Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security.
Thank you Mr. President.
Holy See to the United Nations in Geneva
Urgent Debate on the Israeli raid on the flotilla sailing to Gaza
14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 1 June 2010
Mr. President,
With profound sadness the Holy See delegation notes that the unsettled situation in the Middle East remains a source of tragic events. The latest loss of life caused by the use of force in the Israeli attack in international waters against the humanitarian flotilla of ships sailing to the Gaza Strip unfortunately adds another link in the long chain of conflicts and confrontations that produce suffering and tensions for the Palestinian population and the population of Israel.
To the families of the new victims goes our solidarity and condolences. It is hoped that recent and past victims may encourage a wide understanding that violence does not lead to enduring peace, but that dialogue, respect of rights and mutual acceptance do.
To make an effective dialogue possible, a full, impartial and transparent investigation into the latest incident, based upon international law and international humanitarian law, is necessary.
While all the facts are ascertained, it is clear that the humanitarian needs of the people of Gaza are not met and all parties involved and the international community have a responsibility to cooperate so that the fundamental human rights of those persons are implemented.
As the Holy See has previously stated, it is always opposed to the use of violence from whatever side it may come. Violence makes even more difficult the search for peaceful solutions, the only ones that can build a future of constructive coexistence.
My delegation calls once again upon all parties involved to come to a durable solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through negotiation, leading to a two-State solution, with Israel and an independent Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security.
Thank you Mr. President.
.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi,
Intervention by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the Interactive Dialogue on Human Rights and Foreign Debt, Item 3
14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 2 June 2010
Mr. President,
Let me start by thanking the independent expert for his report presented to the Council. The reports draws attention to the negative impacts of “vulture fund” activities on international debt relief efforts and on the capacity of indebted poor countries that have benefitted from debt relief to create the necessary conditions for the realization of human rights. It also examines the measures and proposals designed to combat these speculative investors.
The sharp contraction of the global economy that began in the second half of 2008 and accelerated into the first quarter of 2009 doesn’t appear to be slowing down. The economic situation is still fragile and prospects are still uncertain in all regions of the world. The financial crisis was harsher in the developed countries and consequently its effects have been felt most severely there, but the subsequent collapse of aggregate demand in those countries is still working its way through the global economy and in particular on the Least Developed Countries. The international community cannot ignore this fact; while reaffirming the principle that debts must be repaid, ways must be found that do not compromise the “fundamental right of peoples to subsistence and progress” .The economy is not above the priority of human rights since it is at the service of the human person and the common good.
The voluntary nature of international debt relief schemes has created opportunities for vulture funds to acquire defaulted sovereign debt at vastly reduced prices and then seek repayment of the full-face value of the debt through litigation, seizure of assets or political pressure. The goal of such activities is to obtain high returns at bargain prices regardless of the ethical consequences of such actions. The so-called vulture fund activities complicate sovereign debt restructuring by causing inequitable burden sharing among creditors, and undermine trade and investment relations of the countries that they target.
The debt of the developing countries must be placed in a broader context of economic, political, human rights and technological relations concerns as well as of international collaboration in pursuing the objectives of the common good. This interdependence calls for a new and more comprehensive concept of solidarity which respect the equal dignity of all peoples. Solidarity implies an awareness and acceptance of co-responsibility for the causes and the solutions relative to international debt. Co-responsibility will help to create or restore relations based on trust between nations (creditors and debtors) and between the various actors (political authorities, commercial banks, international organizations) for cooperation in the search of solutions. Thus mutual trust is an indispensable value which must be constantly renewed.
While we support the solution proposed in the report, our delegation would like to ask the independent expert what form of State control and preventive measures in the financial market could impede the emergence of manipulative strategies that damage the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries(HIPCs).
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the Interactive Dialogue on Human Rights and Foreign Debt, Item 3
14th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 2 June 2010
Mr. President,
Let me start by thanking the independent expert for his report presented to the Council. The reports draws attention to the negative impacts of “vulture fund” activities on international debt relief efforts and on the capacity of indebted poor countries that have benefitted from debt relief to create the necessary conditions for the realization of human rights. It also examines the measures and proposals designed to combat these speculative investors.
The sharp contraction of the global economy that began in the second half of 2008 and accelerated into the first quarter of 2009 doesn’t appear to be slowing down. The economic situation is still fragile and prospects are still uncertain in all regions of the world. The financial crisis was harsher in the developed countries and consequently its effects have been felt most severely there, but the subsequent collapse of aggregate demand in those countries is still working its way through the global economy and in particular on the Least Developed Countries. The international community cannot ignore this fact; while reaffirming the principle that debts must be repaid, ways must be found that do not compromise the “fundamental right of peoples to subsistence and progress” .The economy is not above the priority of human rights since it is at the service of the human person and the common good.
The voluntary nature of international debt relief schemes has created opportunities for vulture funds to acquire defaulted sovereign debt at vastly reduced prices and then seek repayment of the full-face value of the debt through litigation, seizure of assets or political pressure. The goal of such activities is to obtain high returns at bargain prices regardless of the ethical consequences of such actions. The so-called vulture fund activities complicate sovereign debt restructuring by causing inequitable burden sharing among creditors, and undermine trade and investment relations of the countries that they target.
The debt of the developing countries must be placed in a broader context of economic, political, human rights and technological relations concerns as well as of international collaboration in pursuing the objectives of the common good. This interdependence calls for a new and more comprehensive concept of solidarity which respect the equal dignity of all peoples. Solidarity implies an awareness and acceptance of co-responsibility for the causes and the solutions relative to international debt. Co-responsibility will help to create or restore relations based on trust between nations (creditors and debtors) and between the various actors (political authorities, commercial banks, international organizations) for cooperation in the search of solutions. Thus mutual trust is an indispensable value which must be constantly renewed.
While we support the solution proposed in the report, our delegation would like to ask the independent expert what form of State control and preventive measures in the financial market could impede the emergence of manipulative strategies that damage the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries(HIPCs).
lunedì 19 aprile 2010
General Debate Item 3 of the 13th Session of the Human Rights Council Geneva, 12th March 2010
Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the General Debate Item 3 of the 13th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 12th March 2010
Mr. President,
Three weeks ago the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the permanent Committee of al-Azhar University for Dialogue among the Monotheistic Religions held the annual meeting of their Joint Committee for Dialogue in Cairo (23-24 February). In their joint declaration the participants recommended paying “greater attention to the fact that the manipulation of religion for political or other ends can be a source of violence”, and avoiding “discrimination on the basis of religious identity”.
Mr. President, in a number of countries freedom of religion is not yet fully guaranteed. Recent surveys indicate that nearly 70 percent of the world’s 6.8 billion people live in countries with high restrictions on religion, the brunt of which often falls on religious minorities. The latter’s rights are seriously violated, their freedom of worship hampered. In some regions followers of minority religions, that are not recognized by law, have to confess their faith in hiding and illegally, in fear of prison terms and persecution. In other places, while the right to freedom of religion is legally recognized, religious minorities are harassed and persecuted by members of the majority religion. Their properties are damaged, their houses of worship are destroyed, their lives severely threatened. These criminal acts are often committed in total impunity. Authorities stand idly by or are partisans in the conflict. Victims are forced to desist from reporting the injustice done to them for fear of further negative repercussions. Perpetrators harassing religious minorities feel encouraged by the silent collusion of State authorities and by a judicial system that is ineffective or partial. The limitation clauses in international instruments should not be used in a disproportionate manner to strike at the rights of religious and ethnic minorities and political opponents but only to protect and promote the human rights of all.
The Holy See calls therefore upon States to respect and promote the right to freedom of religion in all its aspects, through national legislation, including appropriate sanctions against violators to eradicate impunity effectively.
Mr. President, victims of discrimination and violent attacks have a right to obtain redress and compensation for the harm done to them by public or private agents. The State has the responsibility of protecting the fundamental human rights of all people in its territory. In order to obtain just redress, standard and objective methods should be laid down in national legislation for working out retribution and relief measures. As long as the State is not able or willing to provide effective legal protection for all its citizens, the continuous persecution of ethnic and religious minority communities will continue to afflict the world and to weaken the human rights of everyone.
Mr. President, in his address to the members of the Diplomatic Corps last January, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI underlined that “sadly, in certain countries, (…) one increasingly encounters in political and cultural circles, as well as in the media, scarce respect and at times hostility, if not scorn, directed towards religion (…). It is clear that if relativism is considered an essential element of democracy, one risks viewing secularity solely in the sense of excluding or, more precisely, denying the social importance of religion. But such an approach creates confrontation and division, disturbs peace, harms human ecology and, by rejecting in principle approaches other than its own, finishes in a dead end. There is thus an urgent need to delineate a positive and open secularity which, grounded in the just autonomy of the temporal order and the spiritual order, can foster healthy cooperation and a spirit of shared responsibility.”
Mr. President, the way forward rests on an effective implementation of all human rights by recognizing and respecting the dignity of each human being, without distinction of ethnicity or religion; on rejection of all forms of discrimination on the ground of race, colour, sex or religion; on fair treatment in the courts; on an educational system that teaches peaceful coexistence built on mutual respect, solidarity and cooperation as means that promote a healthy social pluralism and a prosperous life for all members of our one human family.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the General Debate Item 3 of the 13th Session of the Human Rights Council
Geneva, 12th March 2010
Mr. President,
Three weeks ago the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the permanent Committee of al-Azhar University for Dialogue among the Monotheistic Religions held the annual meeting of their Joint Committee for Dialogue in Cairo (23-24 February). In their joint declaration the participants recommended paying “greater attention to the fact that the manipulation of religion for political or other ends can be a source of violence”, and avoiding “discrimination on the basis of religious identity”.
Mr. President, in a number of countries freedom of religion is not yet fully guaranteed. Recent surveys indicate that nearly 70 percent of the world’s 6.8 billion people live in countries with high restrictions on religion, the brunt of which often falls on religious minorities. The latter’s rights are seriously violated, their freedom of worship hampered. In some regions followers of minority religions, that are not recognized by law, have to confess their faith in hiding and illegally, in fear of prison terms and persecution. In other places, while the right to freedom of religion is legally recognized, religious minorities are harassed and persecuted by members of the majority religion. Their properties are damaged, their houses of worship are destroyed, their lives severely threatened. These criminal acts are often committed in total impunity. Authorities stand idly by or are partisans in the conflict. Victims are forced to desist from reporting the injustice done to them for fear of further negative repercussions. Perpetrators harassing religious minorities feel encouraged by the silent collusion of State authorities and by a judicial system that is ineffective or partial. The limitation clauses in international instruments should not be used in a disproportionate manner to strike at the rights of religious and ethnic minorities and political opponents but only to protect and promote the human rights of all.
The Holy See calls therefore upon States to respect and promote the right to freedom of religion in all its aspects, through national legislation, including appropriate sanctions against violators to eradicate impunity effectively.
Mr. President, victims of discrimination and violent attacks have a right to obtain redress and compensation for the harm done to them by public or private agents. The State has the responsibility of protecting the fundamental human rights of all people in its territory. In order to obtain just redress, standard and objective methods should be laid down in national legislation for working out retribution and relief measures. As long as the State is not able or willing to provide effective legal protection for all its citizens, the continuous persecution of ethnic and religious minority communities will continue to afflict the world and to weaken the human rights of everyone.
Mr. President, in his address to the members of the Diplomatic Corps last January, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI underlined that “sadly, in certain countries, (…) one increasingly encounters in political and cultural circles, as well as in the media, scarce respect and at times hostility, if not scorn, directed towards religion (…). It is clear that if relativism is considered an essential element of democracy, one risks viewing secularity solely in the sense of excluding or, more precisely, denying the social importance of religion. But such an approach creates confrontation and division, disturbs peace, harms human ecology and, by rejecting in principle approaches other than its own, finishes in a dead end. There is thus an urgent need to delineate a positive and open secularity which, grounded in the just autonomy of the temporal order and the spiritual order, can foster healthy cooperation and a spirit of shared responsibility.”
Mr. President, the way forward rests on an effective implementation of all human rights by recognizing and respecting the dignity of each human being, without distinction of ethnicity or religion; on rejection of all forms of discrimination on the ground of race, colour, sex or religion; on fair treatment in the courts; on an educational system that teaches peaceful coexistence built on mutual respect, solidarity and cooperation as means that promote a healthy social pluralism and a prosperous life for all members of our one human family.
Thank you, Mr. President.
giovedì 11 marzo 2010
Permanent Mission of the Holy See
Statement by H.E. Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Permanent Representative of the
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the Annual full-day meeting on the Rights of the Child of the
13th Session of the Human Rights Council:
The fight against sexual violence against children
Geneva, 10th March 2010
Mr. President,
“Sexual abuse of minors is always a heinous crime”. To this unambiguous condemnation of sexual violence against children and young people, the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has added the religious dimension, pointing out that it is also a "grave sin" that offends God and human dignity. The child's physical and psychological integrity is violated with destructive consequences. Studies have shown that abused children react in different ways to sexual violence and have a higher likelihood of teen pregnancy, homelessness, risk of drug and alcohol dependence. In a word, the evil committed against these little ones often stigmatizes them for their entire life.
As you are aware, in the last years, Catholic clergy, religious and lay workers in a number of countries have been accused , and several have been convicted, of child abuse. There is no excuse for this behavior, which is a grave betrayal of trust. In some cases heavy fines had to be paid while in other cases the culprits were given custodial sentences. Protection from sexual aggression remains high on the agenda of all church institutions as they struggle to come to terms with this serious problem. Likewise, concrete measures to ensure transparency and assistance to the victims and their families are the way to alleviate the pain, grief, and bewilderment caused by the abuse that has occurred.
The Catholic community continues its efforts to deal decisively with this problem. Thus, those who are found guilty of these crimes are immediately suspended from exercising their office and are dealt with according to the norms of civil and canon laws. Other legal measures have been taken in order to ensure that children and young people cared for in schools and institutions are safe. Many of the measures taken, legal or administrative, deal with recognition and punishment of abuse. Prevention is the best medicine, and this begins with education and promoting a culture of respect of the human rights and human dignity of every child, and especially through the implementation of efficient methods for the recruitment of school personnel.
Could the panel share some best practices that can help children to recognize and report the improper behavior of educators and caregivers?
Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva
at the Annual full-day meeting on the Rights of the Child of the
13th Session of the Human Rights Council:
The fight against sexual violence against children
Geneva, 10th March 2010
Mr. President,
“Sexual abuse of minors is always a heinous crime”. To this unambiguous condemnation of sexual violence against children and young people, the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI has added the religious dimension, pointing out that it is also a "grave sin" that offends God and human dignity. The child's physical and psychological integrity is violated with destructive consequences. Studies have shown that abused children react in different ways to sexual violence and have a higher likelihood of teen pregnancy, homelessness, risk of drug and alcohol dependence. In a word, the evil committed against these little ones often stigmatizes them for their entire life.
As you are aware, in the last years, Catholic clergy, religious and lay workers in a number of countries have been accused , and several have been convicted, of child abuse. There is no excuse for this behavior, which is a grave betrayal of trust. In some cases heavy fines had to be paid while in other cases the culprits were given custodial sentences. Protection from sexual aggression remains high on the agenda of all church institutions as they struggle to come to terms with this serious problem. Likewise, concrete measures to ensure transparency and assistance to the victims and their families are the way to alleviate the pain, grief, and bewilderment caused by the abuse that has occurred.
The Catholic community continues its efforts to deal decisively with this problem. Thus, those who are found guilty of these crimes are immediately suspended from exercising their office and are dealt with according to the norms of civil and canon laws. Other legal measures have been taken in order to ensure that children and young people cared for in schools and institutions are safe. Many of the measures taken, legal or administrative, deal with recognition and punishment of abuse. Prevention is the best medicine, and this begins with education and promoting a culture of respect of the human rights and human dignity of every child, and especially through the implementation of efficient methods for the recruitment of school personnel.
Could the panel share some best practices that can help children to recognize and report the improper behavior of educators and caregivers?
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)
