UN Watch this week released a major study of Louise Arbour’s performance as UN rights chief over the past four years, refuting inflated claims made by both her critics and defenders, and giving the Canadian jurist mixed reviews on how she took on violators. The report also offers concrete recommendations for her replacement, Navanethem Pillay of South Africa, urging her to adopt a stronger approach in confronting UN heavyweights like China, Russia and Egypt.
Critics and defenders of Arbour’s record seem to agree on one thing: a principal measure of her efficacy and success as High Commissioner is the degree to which she properly criticized countries that violate human rights. Bearing neither the power of the purse nor of the sword, the UN’s top human rights official must make use of her unique bully pulpit to name and shame violators, throwing a spotlight on their abuses.
How Arbour carried out this mission is thoroughly analyzed in UN Watch’s 48-page report, “The Right to Name and Shame,†released today at the inaugural meeting of the UN Human Rights Council’s expert advisors. The first part examines every one of her official UN statements issued in 2007 and 2008, precisely measuring Arbour’s criticisms of countries. Detailed tables show the 40 countries that Arbour criticized, with comparative analysis; the 153 countries that she did not criticize; and an examination of the 2008-2009 membership of the UN Human Rights Council — the countries that new High Commissioner Pillay will have to deal with. The final part of the report provides in-depth analysis of Arbour’s approach toward selected regions.
/cijainfo
@CIJAinfo