Hoy me ha tocado presentar el informe anual del Comité de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales ante la Asamblea General (tercera comisión) de la ONU en Nueva York. se trata de un gran honor y una gran oportunidad.
Luego han intervenido 6 países para hacer comentarios y preguntas: Portugal, Polonia, la Unión Europea, España, Nigeria y Sudáfrica.
La intervención ha tenido 5 ideas centrales: el impacto de la crisis económica y financiera en los Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales (DESC); el impacto de los conflictos; los DESC y los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible; la puesta al día de la carga de trabajo que traíamos de años atrás; y el inicio del trabajo sobre las comunicaciones individuales en el marco del Protocolo Facultativo.
Os adjunto algunas notas en inglés:
First – during our dialogues with State Parties, the Committee has been
continuingly confronted with the impact
of the economic and financial crisis on the enjoyment of economic, social
and cultural rights. Issues which arise in this context are of major importance
not only for the affected right-holders but also for the interpretation and
understanding of the Covenant itself. In the first attempt to address them, the
Committee sent in 2012 a letter to all State Parties concerning the
requirements that must be met by austerity measures to stay in conformity with
the Covenant. The Committee will still need to elaborate on a more general
question of the relationship of the continuing decrease of State resources and how
this affects State Party compliance with two basic principles of the Covenant: the
obligations of State Parties to use the maximum of available resources to
implement economic, social and cultural rights and the principle of
non-retrogression. The Committee should also provide guidance in this respect.
Second– the direct and indirect consequences of internal and international conflicts on the enjoyment of economic,
social and cultural rights have been striking during the examination of the
reports of State Parties. Needless to say that there is an urgent need to go
more in-depth conceptually and in practical terms regarding the impact of the protection of economic, social and cultural rights on the
prevention and resolution of conflicts. This issue must be better
contextualized in terms of e.g. access to water, to food, to health care or to
cultural heritage. Few would need to be persuaded
that the recent unprecedented in their scale, mixed migratory flows, arise in the context of a deprivation of
economic, social and cultural rights of entire populations and communities. The
Committee needs to use its capacities to analyze such issues and provide
guidance based on the Covenant.
Third – in the Committee, we hope that economic,
social and cultural rights will lie at the heart of the Sustainable Development
Goals implementation strategy. They may provide important guidelines for
planning of roadmaps for the implementation of the SDGs tailored to the needs
of specific countries. It also may equip the reviews at the international and
national levels with evaluation criteria based on internationally accepted
standards, as well as with guidance with regard to accountability for the
implementation of SDGs. The Committee has expressed its position in this regard
in its statement on the post-2015 agenda, on the Right to Development and by
joining the joint statement of Chairpersons concerning SDGs, issued earlier
this year. A continuing contribution by the Committee to the implementation
process seems to be indispensable.
Fourth – all the developments indicated so far constitute important challenges
to the Committee which should, of course, be placed against the background of
the Committee’s capabilities to carry out its mandate under the Covenant. We have continually improved
our methods of work and we have already reported to the General Assembly about
the steps taken in this regard. The Committee has applied the rule of two
meetings for periodic reports and three meetings for initial reports. In this
case, the two meetings rule however caused on some occasions hardships for both
state parties delegations and Committee members and this was often at the
expense of the quality of the dialogue. These measures together with the
additional meeting time granted to the Committee in the follow-up to the aforementioned
GA resolution have helped the Committee to make a significant progress in
reducing the backlog of the State Parties reports awaiting consideration.
Fifth - the Optional Protocol has
begun to be a living instrument of the protection of economic, social and
cultural rights. Since the Committee last addressed the General Assembly a year ago, four new
States became parties to the Optional Protocol, namely France, Italy,
Luxembourg and San Marino. In total, the Protocol presently has 21 States
parties.
Our Committee invites all States parties of the Covenant to ratify the Optional Protocol
as swiftly as possible. In this regard, our Committee hopes to count on the
valuable support of the States of “Group of Friends of the Optional Protocol”,
non-governmental organizations and civil society involved in the promotion of
the Optional Protocol.
With regards to the communications received by our Committee, I am pleased
to inform you that in its 55th session, the Committee adopted its
first decision (Views) on the merits concerning a communication and found a
violation of article 11 (on the right to housing), read in conjunction with
article 2, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. In its recently concluded 56th
session, the Committee examined two other communications and declared them
inadmissible. Since the Optional Protocol entered into force, the Committee has
registered 8 communications, 5 of which are currently pending. The Committee
will continue to examine these communications in its next sessions.
The activities under the Optional Protocol increasingly require extra
time and effort from our Committee. For this reason, as well as the recognition
of the great responsibility entrusted upon it by States parties, in its 54th
session, our Committee decided to increase the composition of the Working group
on communications to 6 members. In addition to the hours devoted by the
Committee’s Plenary to examine communications under the Optional Protocol, the
Working Group met on 8 occasions outside the Plenary last year to discuss
issues related to the communications received, and to the Committee’s working
methods.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario