2021 Human Rights Council President Nazhat Shameem Khan

2021 Human Rights Council President Nazhat Shameen Khan - Continuity

22:12

MP4

1.6 GB

16-12-2021

Edited News | OHCHR

2021 Human Rights Council President Nazhat Shameem Khan

ENG

Shotlist Story

STORY: 2021 Human Rights Council President Nazhat Shameem Khan

TRT: 03 min 54s

SOURCE: UNTV CH

RESTRICTIONS: NONE

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

ASPECT RATIO: 16:9

DATELINE: 16 DECEMBER 2021 GENEVA, SWITZERLAND

SHOTLIST

Exterior wide shot, United Nations flags flying.
Close shot, inside the UN Geneva Assembly Hall, Ambassador Khan using the gavel.
SOUNDBITE (English): Nazhat Shameem Khan, Human Rights Council President: “There were some substantive issues from the COVID 19 pandemic, and one was the access to vaccines. This is a conversation that is happening everywhere in the world, whether within countries, we have an equal access to vaccines by all communities, especially those which are most vulnerable. And secondly, are we having an equitable transfer of vaccines among countries? So I think that conversation was really amplified this year. There was a resolution which was adopted by consensus, which was led by Ecuador, which really discussed access to vaccines and really discussed the need to have equity both within countries and amongst them”.
Medium shot, inside the UN Geneva Assembly Hall, Ambassador Khan announcing the next speaker.
SOUNDBITE (English): Nazhat Shameem Khan, Human Rights Council President: “There are many people in the world who believe that the only conversation you can have on climate change is in Bonn with the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), and that is none of the business of the Human Rights Council to speak about issues which are relevant to the environment. But increasingly, I think many more countries have recognized that climate change is a relevant discussion in every UN agency, in every institution. It's the business of everyone. And so we have seen proportionately with the increasing numbers of small States in the Council, we have seen an increased focus.”
Medium-wide shot, inside the UN Geneva Assembly Hall.
SOUNDBITE (English): Nazhat Shameem Khan, Human Rights Council President: “One which recognized the right to a healthy, safe and sustainable environment. And the second was the creation of a mandate for climate change and human rights, and both are incredibly significant for the world. Of course, they're very important to small island States, particularly in the Pacific, but they are significant for the whole world. And the fact that there was such an overwhelming level of support for both resolutions, I think, really indicate an increasing consensus that this is an important conversation in the context of human rights.”
Medium shot, inside the UN Geneva Assembly Hall, Ambassador Khan concluding a Human Rights Council session.
SOUNDBITE (English): Nazhat Shameem Khan, Human Rights Council President: “Often when people speak at the Council, the question should be, are they speaking at a level which makes decisions because often in organizations and institutions, you will find 50% and more representation of women, but they are often at the level where they are not they're not really making the decisions. So the issue is where is the leadership of women? I think this is the very important issue for the Council. How many ambassadors in Geneva are women who are still in the minority, although there's a very, very good network.”
Medium-wide shot, inside Room XX (home of the Human Rights Council).
SOUNDBITE (English): Nazhat Shameem Khan, Human Rights Council President: “I spoke a little earlier about the recognition of the right to a healthy environment that did not start off as a consensus conversation, nor did the conversation on the creation of the mandate holder for climate change start off as a consensus conversation. But I think it was because there was a very inclusive conversation. There was a strong involvement by smaller States, which are not connected to any kind of big power brokers and which really insisted on having this conversation that changed the nature of the discourse in the Council.”
Close shot, inside the Assembly Hall, Ambassador Khan using the gavel.
SOUNDBITE (English): Nazhat Shameem Khan, Human Rights Council President: “The International Criminal Court is not just a court, it's also an international institution and it's also a multilateral body. And I believe that in fact, this particular step that I take now is a logical conclusion of the way that my career path has developed for the fight for my life. So I think that it is going to be an extremely challenging experience, but it is one for which I believe my career has prepared me for. I look forward to it. As to what areas of work I would be covering, that is, of course, entirely at the discretion of the (ICC) chief prosecutor (Karim Khan). And I don't know that yet. I'm assuming that in the next few months it'll become clearer.”
Medium-wide shot, inside Room XX (home of the Human Rights Council).

UN rights forum’s action on climate and COVID-19 vaccines shows its relevance, says President

After one of the busiest years in the history of the Human Rights Council, President Nashat Shameem Khan insisted on Thursday that the UN forum remains more relevant than ever, citing action on COVID-19 vaccine inequity, climate change and no less than five Special Sessions in Geneva.

Speaking to the UN as she prepares to step down from her one-year term at the Council at the end of the month, Ambassador Khan also looked ahead to her new role at the International Criminal Court (ICC), where her appointment as Deputy Prosecutor was announced at the start of the week.

Created by the UN General Assembly in 2006, of the most important roles of the Council is to address immediate and important human rights violations around the world – not least the coronavirus pandemic and vaccine inequity - Ambassador Khan explained.

“There were some substantive issues from the COVID 19 pandemic, and one was the access to vaccines,” she said. “This is a conversation that is happening everywhere in the world, whether within countries, we have an equal access to vaccines by all communities, especially those which are most vulnerable. And secondly, are we having an equitable transfer of vaccines among countries. So, I think that conversation was really amplified this year. There was a resolution which was adopted by consensus, which was led by Ecuador, which really discussed access to vaccines and really discussed the need to have equity both within countries and amongst them.”

And in a year that brought nations together for the COP26 Climate Summit in Glasgow, the Human Rights Council amplified calls for action on cutting emissions from a rights-based perspective, despite historic resistance in some quarters, Ambassador Khan continued.

“There are many people in the world who believe that the only conversation you can have on climate change is in Bonn with the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), and that is none of the business of the Human Rights Council to speak about issues which are relevant to the environment. But increasingly, I think many more countries have recognized that climate change is a relevant discussion in every UN agency, in every institution. It's the business of everyone. And so we have seen proportionately with the increasing numbers of small States in the Council, we have seen an increased focus.”

By way of example of this new awareness over the risks posed by climate change, Ambassador Khan pointed to increased international activity and pronouncements on the issue, within the sphere of human rights.

Then came comments, recommendations and reports about climate change from specialised bodies appointed by the Council, known as UN Special Procedures and Treaty Body experts. This included the Committee on the Rights of the Child, which issued a report on the impact of climate change and children.

It was this kind of foundational work “over many, many years” in the climate change versus rights nexus that work culminated in two landmark resolutions at the Council this year on climate and environmental rights, Ambassador Khan explained.

“One …recognized the right to a healthy, safe and sustainable environment; and the second was the creation of a mandate for climate change and human rights. Both are incredibly significant for the world. Of course, they're very important to small island States, particularly in the Pacific, but they are significant for the whole world. And the fact that there was such an overwhelming level of support for both resolutions, I think, really indicate an increasing consensus that this is an important conversation in the context of human rights.”

Reflecting the importance placed on achieving gender equality at the UN, Ambassador Khan underscored the Council’s support for this, and inclusivity in general, in particular for small island States.

But she explained that as only the third woman to sit in the President’s seat at the Council, although she was proud of her achievement, “we need to do a lot of self-examination” about why so few women have come before her.

“Often when people speak at the Council, the question should be, are they speaking at a level which makes decisions because often in organizations and institutions, you will find 50 per cent and more representation of women, but they are often at the level where they are not they're not really making the decisions. So, the issue is, where is the leadership of women? I think this is the very important issue for the Council. How many ambassadors in Geneva are women who are still in the minority, although there's a very, very good network.”

On a positive note, Ambassador Khan added that “after much effort and commitment”, more than half of the Council’s independent experts were women. “So, I think we've achieved something there, but it could fall back at any time,” she said. “I don't think we should be complacent about it.”

Responding to concerns that any politicisation of the Council risked paralysing its work - a longstanding criticism of the Council and something that the body’s next President raised shortly after his appointment – Ambassador Khan said that the body’s diverse range of views was no surprise, given its global membership of 47 States.

It was also important to note that there was no division of the Council “in two bands of sort of developed countries and developing countries”, she said. The current dynamic was more “nuanced”, she continued, with smaller countries that were “less likely to be connected to any large power group” responsible for promoting “helpful and productive” exchanges.

“I spoke a little earlier about the recognition of the right to a healthy environment that did not start off as a consensus conversation, nor did the conversation on the creation of the mandate holder for climate change start off as a consensus conversation,” she said. “But I think it was because there was a very inclusive conversation. There was a strong involvement by smaller States, which are not connected to any kind of big power brokers and which really insisted on having this conversation that changed the nature of the discourse in the Council.”

After presiding over no less than five Special Sessions at the Human Rights Council in 2021, in addition to the three regular sessions held in February, June and September, Ambassador Khan can expect little rest before taking up her next challenge at International Criminal Court (ICC).

The former Fijian criminal prosecutor and High Court judge will take with her a greater understanding of the world of international cooperation “and the importance of diplomacy”, she insists.

“The International Criminal Court is not just a court, it's also an international institution and it's also a multilateral body. And I believe that in fact, this particular step that I take now is a logical conclusion of the way that my career path has developed for the fight for my life. So I think that it is going to be an extremely challenging experience, but it is one for which I believe my career has prepared me for. I look forward to it. As to what areas of work I would be covering, that is, of course, entirely at the discretion of the (ICC) chief prosecutor (Karim Khan). And I don't know that yet. I'm assuming that in the next few months it'll become clearer.”

ends

Teleprompter

We're coming towards the end of your presidency at the Human Rights Council.

People might want to know how has it fulfilled its mission.

OK, Because we've seen growing inequality in during wars, Syria, Afghanistan, the Sahel, you, you know the score.

So I think what people want to know is also specifically, we've also had a lot of special sessions, which is I think a record number.

By the time we we will have had Ethiopia.

So again, back to that essential point, how has the Council impacted on people's lives this year?

Well, I think we need to remind ourselves about the role of the Council.

Of course, one of the most important roles of the Council is to address immediate and important human rights violations around the world.

And I think the Council, despite the COVID-19 pandemic, has responded very quickly, very effectively and in a very inclusive manner to those human rights violations.

But in addition to that role of the Council, we have to remember that the Council is really helping states on journeys to implement human rights obligations in their countries through mechanisms like the special procedures as well as the universal periodic Review.

And I think that also is an important journey.

I think it's a collaborative journey, a constructive 1.

And I think that's an important role for the Council.

But overall, the Council also has an advocacy role, an advocacy role on human rights issues specifically, but then globally, how does human rights, how do human rights fit with the peace and security pillars of the United Nations?

What is its relationship?

What is its role with the Security Council?

What's what is its role in the General Assembly?

These are important issues, both ideologically in relation to the work of the Council, but also very practically.

So if you look at all of these multifaceted roles of the Human Rights Council, I think that despite the pandemic and all of the difficulties which have faced us in this very difficult time in history, I think the Council's done very well indeed.

You mentioned the special sessions and by the end of this year we will have had five, which is a record in the, what, 15 plus years since the Human Rights Council was established.

You also mentioned the pandemic and the COVID crisis and again, going back to how relevant the council is to people's lives because they have been severely impacted, as you know, throughout the world, globally by COVID-19.

Critics of the United Nations, we often hear it, they say, well, it's just a talking shop.

[Foreign Language Spoken]

Tell me about the Technical Support, perhaps that the Council offers by way of its resolutions to to everyone in the world.

I think the relevance of the COVID-19 pandemic can be divided in three ways.

The first is the importance of the Council in the discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic on the implementation of human rights everywhere.

So what is the relationship between particular rights and what happened to us as as a global community in the midst of COVID?

So we started that conversation in 2020.

As soon as we knew that we were facing a pandemic, the Council responded very quickly and adopted a resolution asking the **** Commissioner to update the Council on the impact of COVID-19 on human rights everywhere.

And I think that very quick response indicates that the Council was aware of the importance of the relationship between COVID and human rights.

But secondly, I think very importantly, there was some substantive issues from the COVID-19 pandemic and one was the access to vaccines.

This is a conversation that is happening everywhere in the world, whether within countries we have an equal access to vaccine by all communities, especially those which are most vulnerable.

And secondly, are we having an equitable transfer of vaccines amongst countries.

So I think that conversation was really amplified this year.

There was a resolution which was adopted by consensus where which was led by Ecuador, which really discussed access to vaccines and really discussed the need to have equity both within countries and amongst them.

But the third aspect of the COVID-19 discussion is how COVID-19 has exacerbated the failure of some, some of us, in fact all of us, to enable equality within our countries.

I, I don't think there is any country in the world which has a perfect human rights record.

And when we confronted COVID-19, we realised that all the inequities and inequalities within our societies were exacerbated.

They were laid bare in this, you know, very, very harsh light of what was happening to us with COVID-19.

So this third area of the discussion is how we are going to recover and it can't be business as usual.

We do not go back to a world before COVID-19.

COVID-19 has really demonstrated to us that it cannot be business as usual.

So the third part of the discussion is building back better after COVID-19 in a way we that we can promote better adherence to the SDGS in the context the Sustainable Development Goals and also ensure that the inequalities that we have discovered within ourselves will not be repeated if we are ever to face such an emergency again in the future.

So I think really three ways in which the Human Rights Council has had those discussions in a very relevant, very focused way.

Another thing that's really dominated the last couple of years and certainly this year has been the COP 26, the climate change discussions.

And I know the Council has been very involved in that.

And perhaps because you come from Fiji, a small island state, the impact of climate change is very close to home.

Without being presumptuous, you know how important was the the resolution on climate change in the sense that you've appointed a special rapporteur on climate change for the very first time?

I think that one of the difficulties with the discussions at the Council in the past has been that there hasn't been enough acceptance that there is a relationship between human rights and climate change.

So when Fiji first opened its mission here in 2014, there were very few states which recommended to other states in the UPR process the Universal Periodic Review, that there ought to be a better connectivity between the human rights journey of a country and its work on climate action, for instance.

And when there is a new legislative framework, for instance, on climate change, that it really must be based on an acceptance that it is a human rights conversation as much as it is a scientific conversation about reducing carbon emissions.

Because fundamentally you will not change the world on this climate change journey unless you involve people.

People will make this change, and so when you're talking about people and relationships between the States and their people, then fundamentally you're talking about human rights.

So this conversation has grown and I really see this as a direct result of the increasing numbers of small island States and LDCs which have become a member of the council.

So this is about the inclusivity of the Council.

The more inclusive the Council is, the more varied you will see the discussions and the more you will hear discussions around subjects which are important to these parts of the world.

So as we saw this with Fiji, as we were in in Geneva, as we increased our interaction with the with the Council and its mechanisms, as we invited the Special Rapporteur and the right to healthy environment to our country, for instance, the more we saw a focus on the climate change and human rights.

Fiji is also a member of the Geneva Pledge, which is a group of countries recognising this close Nexus between the two issues.

But of course it's not an easy conversation.

There are many people in the world who believe that the only conversation you can have on climate change is in bond with the UNF Triple C, and that is none of the business of the Human Rights Council to speak about issues which are relevant to the environment.

But increasingly I think many more countries have recognised that climate change is a relevant discussion in every UN agency, in every institution.

It's the business of everyone.

And so we have seen proportionately with the increasing numbers of small states in the Council, we have seen an increased focus and I think that started a trajectory.

First we saw more recommendations in the UPR process on climate change and human rights.

Then we saw special procedures and treaty bodies making comments and recommendations and making reports about climate change and their particular right.

So for instance, the Committee on Children issued a report on the Nexus between climate change and children and Seedor has done the same.

So that kind of connection, Seedor is the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

So that kind of relationship I think has had a real focus in the Human Rights Council and I think all that work over many, many years culminated in the resolution this year in the last session.

But of course there were two, one which recognised the the right to a healthy, safe and sustainable environment, and the second was the creation of a mandate for climate change and human rights.

And both are incredibly significant for the world.

Of course, they're very important to small island states, particularly in the Pacific, but they are significant for the whole world.

And the fact that there was such an overwhelming level of support for both resolutions, I think, really indicate an increasing consensus that this is an important conversation in the context of human rights.

[Foreign Language Spoken]

And it's interesting you talk about the small island States and the Council is very much interested in trying to get more smaller developing countries in in the forum.

And I wonder with COVID and more virtual meetings, has that been easier or more difficult?

Because diplomacy is often not just about what happens on the floor, it's what happens in the the corridors outside the council.

So maybe you could give us some insight from behind the scenes?

I think there have been advantages and disadvantages.

The advantages for small countries, which are perhaps are based on the other side of the world and for instance, when they attend sessions here, they might not come with a very large delegation on.

On many cases, the Uprs of some smaller countries have seen the head of delegation as being the ambassador in New York, for instance, especially if they don't have a mission here.

So when we shifted to a virtual mode for the Universal Periodic Reviews, we saw very large delegations on the ground because they were able to participate virtually and we saw a much more inclusive process.

We saw that the delegation on the ground was represented by a multifaceted set of government agencies, so there was a sense of ownership.

So there were more agencies on the ground which were connected to the UPI process and felt that they were part of it.

And I think that's a very, very good and positive consequence of virtual modalities.

But of course, the downside is that many NGOs particularly were able to speak to states representatives in the corridors of the council.

There were side events where we saw a very good mixture of States and, and, and NGOs and we saw experts coming to address those side events often.

I think that, you know, the heartbeat of many of the sessions of the council were in the side events and these were very interesting.

We were able to really have a conversation with which was pushing the discourse on on human rights and on several fields.

So I think that's unfortunate that we were not able to have the side events that perhaps civil society could not connect as effectively, especially in the corridors.

And you know, I think in relation to the negotiations of resolutions for the open-ended session, the open-ended consultations where those NGOs which had already been accredited and have AUN badge could simply walk into the room to take part in the negotiations.

When you are talking about providing links, it becomes a little bit more difficult.

So I think in that way also there was less inclusivity and I do hope that, you know, we do return to a far more vibrant connection between civil society and states when everyone is able to come into the Palais.

And I I do hope that that time is coming soon.

But I do see a greater level of inclusivity in relation to the the participation of small States and those states which ordinarily might not have come here.

Lastly, I would say that we saw a much better cross section of Ng OS speaking at the Council.

So we saw and heard from voices on the field, from NGOs which might not have been able to afford to send people to Geneva to speak in person, NGOs which are actually involved in the in the midst of a conflict or a crisis and really did make some heart rending appeals to the Council for Action.

And I think that hearing those voices was absolutely important.

I hope in the future that we continue to have this sort of hybrid modality that allows us to hear those voices.

[Foreign Language Spoken]

Let's move on to another element of inclusivity.

One in two of the world's population are women.

You are the third Human Rights Council female president.

Congratulations to you for that.

What would your message be to aspiring women and girls?

You want to work in international relations and diplomacy.

So on the one hand I would say I feel very proud that I am the third woman, but on the other hand I would say what only the 3rd because this is the Human Rights Council.

It is supposed to be the one agency that promotes gender equality and in in fact equality of every type and recognises the intersectionality of different types of discrimination.

So only the 3rd.

And so I think we need to do a lot of self examination about why it is that I am only the third.

The other thing is I think the important thing about gender equality is visibility.

So we have a gender focal point.

Her Excellency the Ambassador of Angola is the gender focal point for the Human Rights Council and I was very happy to continue with the appointment that was made by my predecessor in this regard.

And the purpose of this visibility is for us to never take our eye off the ball.

So how many women are coming to our meetings?

How many civil society organisations have women speaking and has COVID-19 been better or worse for the representation of women?

These are the sorts of questions that I think we all want to answer and we will not answer them unless we make the issue of gender equality visible.

And you know, often when people speak at the council, the question should be are they speaking at a level which makes decisions?

Because often in organisations and institutions you will find 50% and more representation of women.

But they often at the level where there's not, they're not really making the decisions.

So the issue is where is the leadership of women?

I think this is the very important issue for the council.

[Foreign Language Spoken]

We're still in the minority, although there's a very, very good network.

But I will say on a positive note that finally, after much effort and commitment, the council has achieved more than 50% representation on the the special procedures.

So we now have mandate holders and experts and they are women and the number is now 51%.

So I think we've achieved something there, but it it could fall back at any time.

So I don't think we should be complacent about it.

That's perhaps something for your successor to think about and promoter, Ambassador Federica Villegas of Argentina, now he has spoken about the need to avoid the politicisation of the Council.

[Foreign Language Spoken]

That's something perhaps for your successor to think about.

Ambassador Federica Villegas of Argentina, who has spoken about the need to avoid the politicisation of the Council, which he says would deteriorate and paralyse its work.

So this is a recurring concern, isn't it, for, for all those who are involved and follow the work of the Council.

So in your opinion, Ambassador Khan, what's the key to keeping states talking despite the many inflammatory situations that we see around the world today in the pressures and inequality that we've already spoken about?

I think the structure of the council itself is intended to prevent politicisation of issues.

If you recall, the council replaced the old Commission on Human Rights and there is a smaller membership and we have to remember that there is no country which has the power of veto, so there is less likelihood of having a conversation shut down.

The important thing I think about the council is to really celebrate its inclusivity, to ensure that when we have important and sometimes robust conversations that we do not shut down dissent, although we cannot of course allow conversations which have a chilling effect.

So insulting language, personal attacks, all of these have a chilling effect on others who might want to speak freely in the council.

So it's a delicate balance and of course it's an enormous responsibility on the presidency every year to ensure that they get the right balance.

The other important thing about politicisation is that we do not see a division of the council in, in 2 bands of sort of developed countries and developing countries.

I think it's much more nuanced than that.

And I do see that the more we we see membership by of countries which are smaller and less likely to be connected to any large power group, the more we see a helpful and productive conversation.

And I spoke a little earlier about the recognition of the right to healthy environment.

That did not start off as a consensus conversation, nor did the conversation on the creation of the mandate holder for climate change start off as a consensus conversation.

But I think it was because there was a very inclusive conversation.

There was a strong involvement by smaller states which are not connected to, you know, any kind of big power brokers and which really insisted on having this conversation.

That changed the nature of the discourse in the Council.

I think that's the key, inclusivity, A robust conversation which really celebrates dissent because, you know, the people of the world are not the same.

Why should we expect member states of the Council to have the same uniform, politically correct view on human rights?

So to celebrate different opinions and at the same time enable the reaching of a consensus and if we can't reach a consensus, ensure that we are ready and courageous enough to take a vote so the majority have the decision.

I think this is the key to the non politicisation of the council and I think we're getting there.

I think the discussions this year have shown that this is possible.

[Foreign Language Spoken]

Well, of course, only time will tell, but you have done everything you possibly can for the council.

And my last question to you, of course, we couldn't end this interview without talking about your next step, which is at the International Criminal Court where you're going to be a taking up your position as a deputy prosecutor.

It's just been announced, in fact.

So fascinating to hop from 1:00.

Hot pot to another one if you like.

Do you, I mean, do you know which dossiers you're going to be covering?

Do you know what you might be taking from the Council to this this this criminal process?

Well, you know, I started off my career as a prosecutor.

I prosecuted for 16 years and then I moved on to the **** Court bench in Fiji as a criminal judge largely.

So my work really over my life has been in relation to the administration of criminal justice.

And it was this move into diplomacy that was really a very big step for me, quite an unusual step.

But I'm so glad that I did that because I think that it's my work here in Geneva, not just in the Human Rights Council, but with all the international institutions, which really introduced me to the concept of multilateralism, the importance of diplomacy, the importance of having conversations cross regionally.

I think these are skills that I've acquired in the last seven years as a diplomat.

And of course, we have to remember the International Criminal Court is not just a court, it's also an international institution and it's also a multilateral body.

And I believe that in fact, this particular step that I take now is a logical conclusion of the way that my career path has developed for my life.

So I think that it is going to be an extremely challenging experience, but it is one for which I believe my career has prepared me for.

[Foreign Language Spoken]

As to what areas of work I'll be covering, that is of course, entirely the discretion of the chief prosecutor and I don't know that yet.

I I'm assuming that in the next few months it'll become clearer.

Human Rights Council Lithuania for a video statement is concerned, which is irrelevant and which makes it subject.

And this was the last speaker on my list.

It is so decided you should Madam John Fong.