GENEVA. On 11 June 2008 the recommendations of the UN-Human Rights Council (HRC) to the government of the Netherlands were adopted by consensus during the plenary session of the HRC. The recommendations are based on the human rights exam (Universal Periodic Review) taken by The Netherlands on 15 April 2008. In the plenary session NGOs had the right to speak for the first time in the UPR-process. Through the participation of two members of the Dutch UPR-coalition we finally had ‘our say’.

The human rights exam of The Netherlands was among others based on a Dutch NGO-report that is supported by seventeen NGOs. Together they form the UPR-coalition. See for this report, the State-report and other relevant documents under ‘sources’.

The final stage of the Dutch UPR started with a short presentation by the Dutch Human Rights Ambassador, Mr. Hamburger, of the comments of the Dutch government on the recommendations by the HRC. Moreover, Mr. Hamburger stressed the value of NGO-participation for the UPR. This statement was welcomed by the UPR-coalition since, just as in the State-reviews, the space for NGO-participation was further reduced by member States during the plenary session, for example by interrupting NGOs excessively by raising points of order while their speaking-time was already very short. The Human Rights Ambassador reminded the member States of the useful parallel event in which he and State Secretary of Justice Albayrak participated in April to discuss the human rights situation in the Netherlands and the UPR-process with NGOs. The meeting was organized by Justice and Peace, the NJCM and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and took place directly after the review of the Netherlands.

After the statement of the Human Rights Ambassador it was time for member States to pose their questions or make comments on the reaction of the Dutch government to their recommendations. However, they seemed to have no further questions, even though they were very critical during the exam last April. Ms. Friederycke Haijer (Justice and Peace Netherlands) who was present at the plenary session says: ‘… it looks like no western country is getting critical questions during the plenary session. […] , while for non-western countries the time of 20 minutes seems to short for everyone who wants to speak.’

Finally it was the turn for Civil Society to speak. Every NGO had two minutes for its statements. The first to speak about the Netherlands was the International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL), second was Aim for human rights (Mrs. Martha Meijer, on behalf of the UPR-coalition), and finally the International Commission of Jurists.

Mrs. Martha Meijer (Aim for human rights) spoke on behalf of the UPR-coalition and put, among other things, the following issues under the attention of the HRC and the Dutch government:

• The Netherlands should develop a strategy for domestic human rights policy, just like it has developed one for the ministry of Foreign Affairs.
• The Netherlands should speed up the ratification of important human rights instruments, such as the Convention against Disappearances, the Convention on the Rights of Migrants, the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment .
• The Netherlands should found a National Human Rights Institution according to the Paris Principles.
• The Netherlands should comply with the recommendations made by the UN Treaty Bodies.
• Human rights education should be promoted in all schools, for children should be made aware of the principles of universal human rights and tolerance as early as possible.

Mr. Lukas Machon (ICJ) drew attention to the following issues:

• Counter-terrorism law which allows for pre-trial detention of up to two years, as well as the admission of secret evidence. This law is in breach of the right to fair trial and may amount to a breach of the right to liberty.
• The Netherlands is often late in submitting reports to treaty bodies, and usually only submits reports on the European territory of the State.

In four years the Netherlands will be reviewed again. But will the process go on? Before the adoption of the draft decision, Mr. Hamburger concluded the review by recalling the promise which the State Secretary of Justice made in April, knowing: that improving human rights is a continuous process and that therefore the Dutch government will report in a mid-term review on the latest developments concerning the implementation of the UPR-recommendations.

The UPR-coalition has expressed its wish to contribute to the mid-term review and is looking forward to the implementation of the recommendations.

The government of the Netherlands could choose which recommendations she would adopt and which not. See for details in this regard in the documents under ‘sources’.

SOURCES

• The plenary session of 11 June on web cast
• Previous article on the UPR on this website
• Link naar ‘Paris Principles’