In a resolution on Situaton in the Republic of Chechnya of the Russian Federation 5E/CN.4/2000/L.32 , approved by a roll-call vote of 27 in favour and 7 against, with 19 abstentions, the Commission welcomed the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation in Chechnya; called on all parties to the conflict to end immediately the use of force and to begin without delay the holding of a political dialogue and effective negotiations with the aim of achieving a peaceful solution to the crisis, which fully respected the territorial integrity and the Constitution of the Russian Federation; and supported the requests made by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and the Chairman-in-Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe for international involvement, and urged the Government of the Russian Federation to agree to the requests of those organizations to deploy staff in line with their mandates.

The Commission called upon the Government of the Russian Federation to establish urgently, according to recognized international standards, a national, broad-based and independent commission of inquiry to investigate promptly alleged violations of human rights and breaches of international humanitarian law committed in the Republic in order to establish the truth and identify those responsible, with a view to bringing them to justice and preventing impunity. It urged the Russian Government to cooperate with the special mechanisms of the Commission and, in particular, to give favourable consideration to the requests already presented to undertake visits in the region as a matter of priority; and it welcomed the invitation exptended by the Government of the Russian Federation to the High Commissioner for a return visit in two or three months; and requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to consult with the Government of the Russian Federation in order to ensure the implementation of the resolution and

to promote confidence-building measures based on respect for human rights and humanitarian law.

the roll-call vote was as follows:

in favour: Argentina, Botswana, Burundi, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, El Salvador, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Mauritius, Niger, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States and Zambia.

Against: China, Congo, Cuba, India, Madagascar, Russian Federation and Sri Lanka;

Abstentions: Bangladesh; Bhutan, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Senegal, Sudan, Swaziland, Tunisia and Venezuela.

The representative of the Russian Federation said the resolution gave a false picture of human-rights situation in Chechnya and ignored the impact of terrorism in Russia and other countries. The co-sponsors were trying to blame the Russian authorities and were purposefully forgetting the inhuman activities of the rebels such as terrorism and the bombing of innocent victims. Chechnya had been on the verge of becoming a criminal terrorist enclave where arbitrary human-rights violations prevailed. This was a daily reality in the republic of Chechnya carried out under the cover of islam.

The rebels had waged a war on the population of Chechnya and Russia. Respect for human rights was a priority for the Russian federation, and there was a National Commission investigating human rights violations in Chechnya. Whoever had committed crimes would be held accountable by Russian national law. Despite Russian openness, the authors of the resolution had chosen to make unfounded accusations against Russia, using double standards such as the allegations of the use of disproportional force. The Russian delegation questioned the moral rights of the authors to say that, as many of them just a year ago had supported the bombing of Federal Republic of Yugolsavia, thus engaging themselves in a disproportionate amount of force.

The Russian Delegation had shown its willingness to engage in constructive dialogue. Unfortunately this had not been duly appreciated by the authors of the resolution. It was an imbalanced resolution taking no account of the interests of Russia and ignoring principles of the United Nations Charter such as soverignity and territorial integrity of States. Now, the counter-terrorist action was coming to an end. The Russian delegation would vote against the resolution and called on Commission members to oppose it, since it had nothing to do with respect for human rights.

The representative of China said China studied the draft resolution on Chechnya. China felt the situation in Chechnya was a matter of internal concern for Russia. To fight terrorism and disorder, Russia had taken reasonable action. China firmly opposed any effort to exert pressure on the Russian Government through the tabling of a draft resolution. Second, the draft was a product of double standards. It was worth recalling that last year, NATO, led by the United States, had carried out heavy and indiscriminate bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for supposed humanitarian reasons, resulting in serious demage to civilians and property. The Chinese delegation would vote against draft resolution L.32.

The representative of Chile said the Cilean delegation would have hoped that this subject could be resolved differently and would have hoped for more flexibility by the parties involved. Chile did not intend to become involved in internal affairs of other states. However, it could not remain silent in view of terrible human-rights violations, and so would vote in favour of the resolution.

MIGUEL ALFONSO MARTINEZ of Cuba siad the Cuban delegation had studied the draft resolution on Chechnya and had decided it did not, in a balanced manner, reflect the events in the country concerned. It served to throw more fire on the pyre of the very specific political interests that were represented here. The countries that talked about proproportionality in the text were the very countries that participated in the bombing last year of Yugoslavia. This was a clear case of double standards, and Cuba would vote against the draft resolution.

The representative of Bangladesh said his country shared the humanitarian concerns with regard to Chechnya that had been stated by the sponsors of the draft resolution. The Bangladeshi delegation had read the draft carefully and had carried on negotiations with many other delegations, including that of the Russian Federation. To Bangladesh s mind, the best response of the Commission would be one in which the Russian Federation was participating. to act against the wishes of Russia would not advance anyone s interests. Bangladesh would thus abstain in a vote on L.32.

The representative of India said India deeply regretted the fact that the resolution on Chechnya had been adopted by a vote. On April 11, India had stated clearly that developments in the Northern Caucasus region of the Russian Federation were a manifestation of international terrorism and that efforts to combat it were the right and repsonsibility of the Russian Government, and that the repsonse of the Russian Government had been appropriate. India in that statement had recommended that the Commission not take any action that would further unbalance the situation in Chechnya. Yet this was such an action. the resolution was not balanced; it did not give sufficient weight to the menace of international terrorism and the threat it posed to human rights around the world. For that reason India had voted aginst the resolution.

The representative of Sri Lanka acknoledged that there were serious human-rights concerns in conflict situations, including in Chechnya. However, when a government was acting openly and attempting to resolve conflicts through institutional cooperation such as demonstrated by the Russian authorities, intrusive resolutions such as the one adopted were not the right way forward. the delegation of Sri Lanka had hence voted against the resolution and had hoped for a consensus resolution.

The representative of Indonesia said his country had abstained in the vote. It recognized Chechnya as an integral part of the Russian Federation, and considered that Russia had the right to deal with difficulties there. However, Indonesia regretted that a consensus could not be reached on the matter b the Commission.

1