
Français		Home		Contact Us		Help		Search		canada.gc.ca		Canada International

Home > Media Room

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada

Canadian Offices Abroad

Services for Canadian Travellers

Services for Business

Canada in the World

About the Department

SPEECHES

2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips

<html> <head> <meta name="Generator" content="Corel WordPerfect 8"> <title>MR. AXWORTHY - ADRESS TO THE NGO GLOBAL FORUM ON THE FIVE-YEAR REVIEW OF THE VIENNA WORLD CONFERENCE ON HUMAN RIGHTS - OTTAWA, ONTARIO</title> </head> <body text="#000000" link="#0000ff" vlink="#551a8b" alink="#ff0000" bgcolor="#c0c0c0"> 98/47 CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS BY THE HONOURABLE LLOYD AXWORTHY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO THE NGO GLOBAL FORUM ON THE FIVE-YEAR REVIEW OF THE VIENNA WORLD CONFERENCE ON HUMAN RIGHTS OTTAWA, Ontario June 23, 1998 This document is also available on the Department's Internet site: http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca It is a pleasure to welcome you to Ottawa in this year that marks two milestones in human rights: the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and the five-year review of the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, and the resulting Vienna Declaration and Program of Action (VDPA). These two documents provide a road map for progress in human rights. Today I would like to share with you my views of how we can make rapid progress in following that map on the journey toward full implementation. One key to moving ahead quickly is seizing new opportunities for partnership. I would also like to outline for you some initiatives that Canada is undertaking as its contribution to the five-year review. At the time of the World Conference, many worried that Vienna would divide rather than unite. They spoke of a clash of cultures, of Asian values and Western ideological imperialism, of fears that Vienna would dilute, not strengthen, human rights standards. They were wrong. The negotiations were difficult, but the result was a strong document that advanced the cause of human rights. The Vienna Declaration represents the state of the art. The World Conference confirmed basic tenets, starting from the universality of human rights. But it also pushed the agenda forward in crucial areas including: the mainstreaming of women's rights; the interdependence and indivisibility of all human rights; disability as a human rights issue; and economic, social and cultural rights. In many ways, though, the real sea change at Vienna was in process, not substance. The massive, intense and well- co-ordinated involvement of non-governmental organizations [NGOs] was one of the great accomplishments of the World Conference. It meant that governments could no longer sit alone as the self-appointed protectors of human rights. And, most importantly, it meant that the voice of victims of human rights violations was clearly heard. The partnerships forged at Vienna between civil society and like-minded governments were early examples of a new international dynamic. The collapse of the old bipolar world order, globalization, the information technology revolution -- all these have changed the face of international relations beyond recognition. The ability of any one nation or group of nations to set the agenda is steadily dwindling. At the same time, the power of civil society to effect change is growing. To have real impact in this new dispensation means using new methods. It means relying more on soft power. This is the power to co-opt, not coerce; the power that comes when "coalitions of the willing" form around shared goals and mobilize support across the international community. To be effective in the new international environment requires bold shifts in our thinking and in our tool kit. It requires a new diplomacy. Perhaps the best example to date of this new diplomacy was the international campaign to ban landmines. Why? Because it showed the power behind a new kind of coalition. Like-minded governments and civil society formed a partnership of equals, united around a common set of core principles. Making maximum use of modern communications technology, we mobilized public opinion worldwide to support a total ban on anti-personnel mines. Public support convinced many governments that were hesitating to sign on to the ban. The result was a convention developed with unprecedented speed and success. Many elements contributed to this success, but its foundation was partnership. There can be no doubt that by acting together, governments and NGOs achieved far more than could ever have been accomplished by either one acting alone. The landmines campaign was unprecedented, but I do not believe that it will prove to be unique. The scope for similar partnership and synergy on a range of pressing international problems is clear, particularly in the field of human rights. Last week in Rome I attended the opening of the diplomatic conference on an International Criminal Court. Properly constituted, the Court would be a key institution of the new diplomacy, deterring or punishing some of the most serious human rights abuses. By isolating and stigmatizing those who commit war crimes or genocide, and removing them from the community, it would help to end cycles of impunity and retribution. Canada has taken a strong lead within a group of like-minded countries that are pressing for an independent, effective Court. As in the landmines campaign, we have worked to establish a clear bottom line -- a set of fundamental principles that would make for a court worth having. And we have worked to ensure that civil society is part of the process. Canada has funded participation by NGOs at the Rome conference; two NGO representatives are members of the Canadian delegation. While the scope of the campaign has been more limited than that on landmines, NGOs are having notable success in bringing the Court to public attention and in making the case for public support. I am convinced that using a similar approach based on partnership, real progress is possible in turning the spirit of Vienna into a reality of our time. To do this means looking more closely at the valuable lessons we have already learned about creating effective partnerships. As a starting point, I believe any partnership must be based on having a common cause. This may seem self-evident. But it is important to draw a distinction between cases where governments and NGOs differ on the best approach to take -- which need not be a serious impediment -- and cases where there are fundamental differences over the objective. A second principle is that those who have most stake in the outcome should be closely involved. The most compelling voices during the landmines campaign were those of landmine survivors. The most powerful advocates against child labour are the children who have suffered through it. This is why Canada is committed to capacity building in the field of human rights to ensure that there are structures through which the vulnerable and the disenfranchised can find empowerment and express their voice. For example, we supported a conference in Victoria, British Columbia, entitled "Out from the Shadows," which brought together young victims of commercial sexual exploitation. Last week, at a meeting on the same topic at the UN, I announced that Canada will provide $150 000 to fund joint projects with NGOs in six Latin American countries to help rehabilitate these young people and reintegrate them into society. A third principle is that the strength of partnerships is found in their diversity. The agendas of the partners should be complementary, but they need not be identical. I am the first to admit that it is healthy for NGOs to challenge governments. The dynamic tension that results is often the key to finding creative but practical solutions. In other words, it is not only acceptable, but often productive, when we disagree. Another aspect of strength in diversity is a sound division of labour. Each partner in a coalition brings different capacities and working methods. While no NGO can bind a nation to a set of legal obligations, no government is as efficient as NGOs at mobilizing public opinion and action. We must each play to our strengths if we are to maximize our impact. Lastly, effective communication is crucial, both internally and externally. Partners in a coalition must be able to exchange views efficiently so that they can respond rapidly to challenges and obstacles in a co-ordinated way. Externally, the coalition must be able to use communications and the media to mobilize grassroots support. With the spread of democracy in recent years, governments are more than ever before responsive to public opinion. Together, coalition partners can ensure that the message gets through at all levels, from heads of government to the grassroots. These then would be, as I see it, the four basic elements of an effective government-NGO partnership on human rights: common interest, inclusive participation, strength in diversity and effective communications. Fine in theory, but what does it mean in practice? As a start, it means that the voice of civil society has to be heard. That is why the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is supporting this conference: we believe that to be meaningful, any review of VDPA implementation must reflect the views of NGOs. We are relying on your deliberations here to provide a strong voice for the thousands of human rights activists around the world who otherwise might not be heard. An effective review of Vienna must have two main thrusts. First is a review of the international human rights system to determine whether it can be reinforced and, if so, how. There have been major strides on this front in the last five years, notably the creation of the post of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The recent mainstreaming reforms undertaken by the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, will ensure that human rights considerations will permeate all parts of the UN system. Much remains to be done, however, and work on strengthening the UN human rights system will be particularly intensive in the coming months. By putting forward concrete proposals and identifying priority areas for action, this Forum can have a real impact on the changes under way within the UN. Canada is working to support this process on several fronts: by taking an active part in reform efforts at the UN; by helping to bring civil society into the review process at events like this one; and by means of bilateral dialogues. Our direct dialogues with China, Cuba and Indonesia are designed to draw them more fully into the international human rights system. The second key component of the five-year review should be an assessment of whether states are living up to the commitments they made in Vienna. I regret to say that by and large, this is not happening. Some states, including Canada, have submitted reports to the UN, but the great majority have not. Nor has there been any widespread effort by civil society to review where countries have failed to meet their commitments. I hope this Forum is the opportunity for you to highlight key areas where greater efforts are required by governments, and that it provides a springboard for continued efforts to focus attention on these areas when you return home. Today it is my pleasure and my privilege to officially launch what I believe will be an important tool in pursuing this second component of VDPA follow-up: the first annual global human rights report based on UN sources. For the Record -- 1997: The United Nations Human Rights System has been developed by Human Rights Internet with support and collaboration from the Government of Canada. This is the first time reports from across the UN human rights system have been consolidated in a single source. The reports prepared by the UN are an important measure of whether countries are complying with their international human rights commitments, including those made in the VDPA. Drawing on these reports, For the Record -- 1997 will no doubt prove an invaluable tool for human rights activists. It will make it easier to monitor governments' overall performance on human rights and allow for more accurate and focussed criticism of government actions. I encourage you to examine the report during the conference and to use it to the fullest in the coming years. A secondary objective of the report is to make the work of the UN human rights mechanisms and treaty bodies better known. To ensure the broadest possible distribution of the text, it is being made available in three formats: in bound volumes, on CD-ROM and through an Internet site. My congratulations to Laurie Wiseberg, Jan Bauer and the other members of the project team for their Herculean labour in preparing the report. For the Record -- 1997 is one example of what government and NGOs can accomplish when they work in partnership on human rights issues. I hope that there will be many more such examples in the years to come. If we are to keep the spirit of Vienna alive we need to find ways to work together -- not just to influence the agenda, but to redefine it. The first step in doing this is to develop tough, hard-hitting recommendations that have a real impact on the UN's review of the VDPA. I look forward to working with you in partnership to make the Vienna Declaration and the Universal Declaration not just expressions of principle, but true guides for action. Thank you. </body> </html>

2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips



Last Updated: 2006-10-30	Top of Page	Important Notices