All eyes on Nigeria, as government promises to involve civil society in UPR report

Written by Innocent Anaba

Friday, 31 October 2008

Come early next year, Nigeria will be on the spot light, as it faces the United Nation’s Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The country’s preparedness for the UPR, dominated the closing session of the one day conference on the Human Rights Conference and 2nd Open Society Forum: Human Rights and Foreign Policy Dialogue held in Abuja, last week, aside the issue of advancing human rights in Nigeria, which was the main trust of the meeting. The event which had in attendance leading human rights organisation and civil society groups in the country, including top United Nation’s Human Rights Council officials, discussed varying human rights issues, ranging from the rights of the physically challenged, the rights of people living with HIV/AIDS, reform of the country’s justice system administration, police reforms, political and economic rights, amongst others. The workshop was declared open by the House of Representative Committee chairperson on Human Rights, Ms Beni Lar, who said that the country will take seriously, the upcoming UPR review and hinted that broad consultation will soon take place, to aggregate government, civil society and rights groups positions on what should be included in Nigeria’s report to the UN Human Rights Council, which organises the UPR. The conference was organised by the Open Society Initiative for West Africa (OSIWA) and the Nigeria Human Rights Consortium, in collaboration with the National Human Rights Commission. UNHCR’s President, Amb Martin Uhomoibhi, who delivered the key note address, said that “one of the fundamental challenges in human rights advocacy is how to make sure that people, ordinary people, know their rights, so that they can claim them”. According to him, “it is important for the man or woman on the street to know his or her rights because, after all is said and done, universal human rights rightly begins at home”. Further he said, “by placing so much premium on the rule of law and due process, the administration of President Yar’Adua has signaled a determination to be an advocate for human rights and having government in our corner in the fight for human rights is always a bonus, given that the human rights endeavour is about partnership, involving government, international organisations, human rights teachers, human rights defenders, religious leaders, academics and civil society”. Olawale Fapohunda, who spoke on perspective on Nigeria’s compliance with its commitment to the United Nations Human Rights Council, said, “the challenge that we face today is not so much our action at the international level but in action at home. There is an emerging consensus among human rights workers that while there is no deliberate systemic abuse of human rights there appears to be little that is been done to promote human rights at home. Indeed what we are experiencing today appears to be a climate of non-chalance to human rights issues. There seems to be no ideological or philosophical basis for the promotion and protection of the rights of Nigerians”. Further he said, “poverty alleviation measures are not tied to the protection of socio-economic rights and governments intervention in the rights of the more than 25,000 remand inmates in our prisons nationwide is been implemented as a stand alone project and not as a crucial component of a criminal justice review. Also while there is so much talk about transparency, accountability and good governance neither the presidency nor our elected parliamentarians see importance of passing the freedom of information bill. Strangely, the issue of human rights seems to have been omitted from the Federal government’s rule of law agenda”. According to him, “the commitment of the government to promote and protect human rights at home by strengthening and actively supporting the work of the National Human Rights Commission, has not been kept. The National Human Rights Commission Act Amendment bill is in its fifth year in the National Assembly. Also there is no visible evidence of a government inspired process to accelerate the process of full domestication of relevant international human rights conventions. What opportunities exist for CSO advocacy. We continue to say that Nigeria by its election to onto the Human Rights Council have committed herself to be active and progressive in the promotion and protection of human rights at the National, Regional and International level”. The closing session of the conference proved very insightful, as speakers, took turn to ask of Nigeria’s preparedness for the UPR. It is instructive to point out that in 2006, the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) established the Universal Periodic Review as a mechanism to review, every four years, the fulfillment by all UN Member States of their human rights obligations and commitments. General Assembly Resolution A/60/251, which created the HRC, mandated the Council to “undertake a universal periodic review (UPR), based on objective and reliable information, of the fulfillment by each State of its human rights obligations and commitments in a manner which ensures universality of coverage and equal treatment with respect to all States.” Discharging this mandate in June 2007, the Council adopted Resolution 5/1, which laid out the objectives and procedures of the review process. The objectives of the review were multi-fold. The purpose was, first and foremost, to improve the human rights situation on the ground. The UPR process was also designed to access the fulfillment of each State’s human rights obligations, enhance each State’s capacity to meet those obligations, share best practices among States and other stakeholders, support cooperation in the promotion and protection of human rights and encourage full cooperation and engagement with the Council, other human rights bodies and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Ms Lar, told the conference that government would soon convene a stakeholders meeting, to discuss what the country will submit to the UPR. The Civil Society report had been turned in already, beating the deadline for its submission. But participants agreed that further information should be submitted as part of civil society report and that the further report should consider and include all aspects, the initial report did not consider. Participants observed that such further report should be prepared and submitted on time, and copies sent to the three member of the panel and as well to the other 47 member nations, who will be at the UPR hearing. It was of particular concern to members, that there was no wide consultation before the civil society report was submitted, but the assurance that the additional report, will take into account, all area left out, was welcomed by participants, who saw it as a way of correcting any defect the report may have, if any. The National Human Rights Commission report, participants, observed should be followed with keen interest, so that all aspect of the country’s human rights record are accurately presented. But the government report, participants observed, posses even a greater challenge to the civil society, in view of the fact that government report is most debated at the UPR meeting. Participants agreed that effort should be made to ensure that government does not write a report, assessing itself in good light, in areas, that it obviously has bad record. For instance, the condition of prison inmates, the awaiting trial phenomenon, police brutality, failure of government to even implement most of its people oriented programmes and failure to constitutional guarantee social and economic rights are some of the areas that should be reflected in the report. Reference was made to Chapter 2 of the 1999 constitution, which makes economic and social rights, non justiciable and also the failure of government to domesticate most of international instruments, it had signed, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). And in 2007, the first ever United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities came into being. While Nigerian delegation to the convention sign the treaty on behalf of Nigerian government, persons with disabilities have not heard about it, as the Nigerian government is yet to be ratify same, let alone domesticate same. Similarly, there are so many conventions the Nigerian government has signed or ratified and have just not bothered to domesticate. Perhaps, these are areas additional civil society report should focus and the civil society should also ensure that government in its report, accepts that it has not done much in these areas. What was particularly of concern is the need for there to be inter-governmental collaboration in the writing of the report and the involvement of the civil society, who are better equipped and have done much in the areas of accessing the country’s human rights situation and could speak on same with authority. In view of the promise of then Ms Lar, perhaps, we should wait and see how sincere government will be in involving the civil society in writing the country’s report.