Suspend Russia From UN Human Rights Council? Yes/No?
Russia has been suspended from the United Nations Human Rights Council after invading Ukraine and, as far as I’m concerned, committing multiple war crimes in Ukraine. As you can tell from what I just said, none of this is surprising but I was surprised to see the number of countries that voted against the resolution or decided to abstain. Did your country vote in favor of the resolution to suspend Russia, or against it or did it abstain and, if you vote on it directly, how would you vote?
So what was the final vote and what is the criteria for suspending a country from the UN Human Rights Council? According to this article from the Guardian:
“At a meeting of the UN general assembly on Thursday, 93 members voted in favor of the diplomatic rebuke while 24 were against and 58 abstained.”
“This met the required threshold of a two-thirds majority of the assembly members that vote yes or no, with abstentions not counting in the calculation.”
This is what Ukraine’s ambassador to the United Nations had to say after the vote
“War criminals have no place in UN bodies aimed at protecting human rights,” Ukraine’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, tweeted in response. “Grateful to all member states which … chose the right side of history.”
Okay, how did this process of suspending Russia from the UN Human Rights Council get started?
“The US ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, had launched the effort to suspend Russia from the 47-member human rights council with the world still recoiling from images of mass graves and corpses strewn in the streets of Bucha following Russian soldiers’ retreat.”
Sergiy Kyslytsya, Ukraine’s UN ambassador, introducing the resolution before the 193 members of the general assembly, said Russia has committed “horrific human rights violations and abuses that would be equated to war crimes and crimes against humanity”.
Okay, I’m sure you’re wondering what Russia has to say about all of this:
Russia’s deputy ambassador, Gennady Kuzmin, urged members to vote against the resolution. “What we’re seeing today is an attempt by the United States to maintain its dominant position and total control,” he said. “We reject the untruthful allegations against us, based on staged events and widely circulated fakes.”
So the Ukrainian ambassador is literally seeing people in his country being killed by Russian soldiers and the Russian spokeperson saying that none of this is real – it’s all fake. This is his response:
Kyslytsya responded to Russia’s complaints about the proceeding, saying: “We have heard, many times, the same perverted logic of the aggressor trying to present itself as the victim.”
Okay, let’s talk about who voted against this resolution:
“Among countries voting against the resolution were China, an ally of Moscow that has declined to criticise the invasion, Iran, the former Soviet republic of Kazakhstan and communist Cuba, as well as Belarus, Syria and Russia itself.”
Members also have the option to abstain.
The 58 nations that abstained included Brazil, India, Mexico, Senegal and South Africa, with many urging diplomacy instead. TS Tirumurti, India’s ambassador, said: “When innocent human lives are at stake, diplomacy must prevail as the only viable option.”
That statement from India’s ambassador is absurd. There’s nothing happening here that takes diplomacy off the table. If Russia is committing war crimes then it should be removed from a body whose purpose is to act against war crimes.
Russian forces have been accused of multiple war crimes since the invasion of neighboring Ukraine on 24 February. They include indiscriminate bombing, rape, torture, and summary executions. Chuck Schumer, the US Senate majority leader, has accused Russia of committing “genocide”.
Okay, how common is it for members to be removed from the UN Human Rights Council?
“Russia is the first permanent member of the UN security council to have its membership revoked from any UN body.”
“It is also only the second country to have its membership rights stripped at the human rights council, which was established in 2006. The assembly suspended Libya in 2011 when upheaval in the north African country toppled its longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi.”
Okay, according to the UN’s rules, what are the circumstances under which a country can be suspended from the UN Human Rights Council?
The March 2006 resolution that established the rights council says the assembly may suspend membership rights of a country “that commits gross and systematic violations of human rights”.
Thursday’s resolution expressed “grave concern at the ongoing human rights and humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, particularly at the reports of violations and abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law by the Russian Federation, including gross and systematic violations and abuses of human rights”.
I think it’s pretty obvious that Russia meets the criteria required to be suspended from the UN Human Rights Council so there’s not much more that needs to be said.
The thing that bothers me is the countries that decided to vote against the resolution or decided to abstain. India has been publicly figuring out how it can take advantage of the war to get access to cheap Russian oil.
It will argue that’s the best option for India but of course, we also know that this will fund Russia’s war against Ukraine.
If you agree with me that India is doing the wrong thing, should India be penalized or sanctioned for being a country that is supporting Russia?
Now, I want to clarify that I have no idea whether the Indian people support this decision so my view is only targeted at the Indian government and not the Indian people.
I’ve created a listing on the One Direct Democracy platform so that we can develop ideas about What should the criteria be for suspending nations from the UNHCR? You can add your own ideas or vote and comment on ideas from other people.
You can also create your own listings for people to vote on. It’s a simple way to get used to using the One Direct Democracy system.
The reality is that we have reached a point in time in our evolution where Representative Democracy no longer serves the will of the people.
That’s why I created One Direct Democracy. It’s a movement for upgrading the global democratic system by taking the power away from politicians and putting it in the hands of the people by using direct democracy.
I’ve created the technology, a framework for direct democracy and a plan for how to make it happen. We don’t have to convince any politicians or powerful people to do anything to make this happen. We have the power to do it on our own. We just have to decide to do it.
Direct Democracy is the purest form of democracy.
Representative Democracy is an outdated blunt instrument.
Links to related content
