Director of the Centre for the Rights of Man, University of Padua (Italy)

ABSTRACT: The people's Vienna scotched the theory - conveniently supported by the despotic Governments of the South and the economic powers of the North - according to which human rights are still, for the most part, an invention of the West

(WORLDWIDE PARLIAMENTARY CAMPAIGN FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY BY THE YEAR 200 - Radical party/International League for the abolition of the death penalty by the year 2000)

The same kind of split occurred between a civilized international society and a club of nations at the Human Rights Conference in Vienna, as it did at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) - more than one thousand from all over the world - met at the "World Forum" from 10 to 12 June, in the same building where the intergovermental Conference was being held. Between 14 and 25 June, that is, while the proceedings of the "official" Conference were underway, the number of NGOs, and consequently their capacity for exerting pressure, increased. Women's organizations were particularly active and put forward many projects.

It took these NGOs from a civilized international community just three days, taken up with plenary meetings and work groups, to draft a valid document full of concrete proposals. In the world of "associationism", which works for the good of the human race in both the global village and the U.N., it was not the opposition between North and South that was evident but the varying degrees of support given to the human rights cause, with numerous representatives from the South of the World working with great dedication. The people's Vienna, therefore, finally scotched the theory - which is conveniently supported by the despotic Governments of the South and the economic powers of the North - according to which human rights are still, for the most part, an invention of the West. This made it even more clear how large the gap is between "transnational solidarity" and "national interest" promoted by governments and diplomats. The final document produced by the intergovernmental Conference reflects this gap, in that i

t is as generic and devoid of recommendations that could be put into practice immediately, as the document produced by the UGO Forum is specific and filled with viable projects. Amongst other things, the latter recommends the appointment of a U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights and the setting up of an International Criminal Court, as well as the drafting of additional Protocls to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and to the International Convention against Discrimination regarding Women, which will give individuals the possibility of presenting to existing International Committees "communications" regarding the presumed violation of human rights on the part of actual states. Another important proposal consists in the democratization of the organs and decision-making processes of the U.N. The two documents do agree on one point to which they give different emphasis: upholding the twofold principle of universality, divisibility, interdependence and interrelation of all human rights

and interdependence between human rights, democracy and economic development.

In the intergovernmental document, the paragraphs devoted to the self-government of peoples, the rights of minors, the typology of the most vulnerable groups and to education, merit particular attention.

The right to self-government is unconditionally granted to colonialized peoples or those under foreign occupation. In all other cases, this right is watered down, so to speak, by the State's right to territorial integrity. Indigenous peoples are defined simply as "people", thus denying them the fundamental rights due to "indigenous peoples", in particular the right to self-government. There are no new developemnts whatsoever as regards the rights of ethnic minorities: the rights recognized remain those regarding individuals who belong to ethnic minorities, and there are no rights for ethnic minorities as such. There are no new provisions in the paragraph on education; however, important emphasis is given to the fact that "it is the duty of a State to ensure that education is aimed at furthering the respect for human rights" and also refers to the UNESCO's World Action Programme for Education in Human Rights and Democracy, launched in Montreal in March of this year.

The dozens of seminars and workshops that were held on different topics at the Austria Center by associations, study centres and universities, also played a significant part in the Vienna "event". The Centre for Human Rights at the University of Padua held one on the theme: "Human Rights, Workable States, Transnational Territories" and distributed reports on various studies carried out. The main problem discussed was that of a State's adopting to the provisions made by international laws on human rights in an era of global interdependence. A basic model was developed for this "workable state", comprising the following elements: national laws being subject to international human rights laws; recognition of the "supranationality" of the U.N. and its democratization; disarmament; multiethnic citizenship. The idea of a "transnational territory" was also discussed; in other words, the creation of a territorial political body for those areas in which a number of ethnic groups or mini-states coexist: these zones wo

uld be considered as a "human commonwealth".