Former rtired diplomat described it as a “Mockery”… Sudan re-elected for the second time to human rights membership

Al-Yurae, Geneva, Khartoum (Agencies) – Retired former Canadian diplomat and the promenent auther Nicholass Coghalan who had expressed his surprise at the vote of many Muslim countries against the US call to discuss the rights of Muslim minorities in China, and the vote for Sudan’s re-election as (Mockery )
The result of the vote of the membership of the Council, which included many Muslim countries, was refused even not to discuss the report of the Council itself on China’s violations of human rights, which appears to be the unwillingness of many.
On the meeting of the 47-member U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva on Thursday voted 19-17 to reject a U.S.-led invitation to discuss the report at the next Human Rights Council in the spring. Eleven countries abstained. A simple majority is required.
While many global observers and lawyers of human rights groups also expressed astonishment regarding the re-election of Sudan and considered the decision discouraging, specially since human rights violation in Sudan quite identified.
While many international observers and representatives of human rights organizations also expressed surprise regarding the re-election of Sudan and considered the decision disappointing, especially since the issue of human rights in Sudan is not disputed.
The forces of freedom and change in Sudan, which are leading the protests and the current on going protests , which was overthrown by the current military regime in a coup October 25, 2021, issued a statement before the vote calling on the countries of the world not to vote to renew Sudan’s membership due to crimes against humanity and almost daily human rights violations that have continued to be committed to date.
In Khartoum, the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs today considered Sudan’s re-election for the second time to membership of human rights as its diplomatic victory, saying in a statement issued through the official news bureau (SUNA):
“Sudan has won a well-deserved re-election for the second time to the Human Rights Council for the period 2023-2025,” stating: “The diplomatic campaign resulted in Sudan’s landslide victory by receiving 157 votes out of 190 that qualified it to win, deservedly the membership of the Human Rights Council representing the East African Community of the Council for a new session,”
The statement continued “It should be noted that Sudan has faced a fierce campaign to hinder its re-election to the Human Rights Council, for which it ran among three other countries, Algeria, Morocco and South Africa, where the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its specialized departments, has led broad diplomatic moves within the framework of coordination and close cooperation with brotherly and friendly countries and regional and international partners and with the efforts appreciated by the leadership of the State, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and our permanent missions in Geneva, New York, Vienna and our embassies in various parts of the world.
Minister of Justice Maulana Mohammed Saeed Al-Helu praised all the efforts made by the Ministry of Justice, the National Human Rights Mechanism, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Sudan Mission in New York and Geneva, besides the efforts of the National Committee to deal with the United Nations mechanisms, which culminated in the re-election of Sudan to the Human Rights Council, adding that “the re-election of Sudan confirms the seriousness of the government in improving the human rights situation in the country.”
The members of the Human Rights Council are elected every two years on the basis of the regional bloc. The Committee meets in Geneva twice a year. The United States had left the council under Donald Trump.

A mockery of everything the HRC is meant to stand for

We asked Canadian retired diplomat and auther Nickolass Coghlan to shed more light of the nature of these UN meeting and the conterversy souround them each time held, here is a few point he made:

  • “The UN is what its members want it to be – no more and no less. Way back when the UN Charter was set, its members agreed that America, China, the UK, Russia and France should all have vetoes at the Security Council. It’s because of that, that we have the tragic situation of Russia being able to veto any sanction or criticism of its invasion of another UN member;
  • “At the Human Rights Council, the same applies. Many UN members do not want an activist human rights body that might publicly shame them, so they collude in electing members that have appalling records (typically while proclaiming the paramountcy of “non-interference”). Current members thus include China, Cuba and Eritrea – the latter is perhaps the most repressive state in the world on many criteria (perhaps rivalled by North Korea)”.
  • “Membership can only be suspended by a vote in the General Assembly (Russia was suspended earlier this year);
  • There is a lot of horse-trading that goes on: “You vote for us on the Human Rights Council, and we’ll , vote for you in Election X next year…”;
  • “Some regions present pre-determined slates. For example if there are four African seats up for election, then by consensual agreement (under the auspices of the AU), only four candidates are presented. This doesn’t actually guarantee election – members can leave “blank” their vote for/against a member of the slate they don’t like, but there’s a kind of gentlemen’s agreement that you don’t undermine another region’s slate – lest they undermine yours..(!)”
  • “It’s not just Africa that does this – usually the western European countries present a “slate”as well”.
  • In this case, Sudan was up for RE-election. First time around, they were endorsed by the AU. This time, the AU did not withdraw its endorsement. This is particularly egregious in that the AU has itself SUSPENDED Sudan from the AU. In my opinion, to be consistent, the AU should have clearly stated that it no longer endorsed Sudan; it did nothing;

-” So, indeed, the re-election of Sudan to the HRC is a mockery of everything the HRC is meant to stand for, and also an indictment of the AU. But you’d have to say the same about the election of Eritrea, notably. The problem is….many HRC members do not actually want the HRC to work as its meant to work…”

Share this post