A case against joining the UN Human Rights Council

Nelson Mandela once explained that Canadian jurist John Humphrey was "the father of the modern human rights system." Although Humphrey is best known as the principal drafter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted by the UN General Assembly on Dec. 10, 1948), to me, he was known as Professor Humphrey when I was his student at McGill University Law School. According to McGill University, Humphrey believed "There is a fundamental link between human rights and peace There will be peace on earth when the rights of all are respected." Humphrey, Lester B. Pearson, and Irwin Cotler are but a few noteworthy Canadians who have devoted their careers to the struggle for human rights and universal justice, laying the foundation for Canada’s respected name on the international stage. Indeed, Canada is widely admired for its foreign policy and principled stance on some of the most pressing human rights concerns facing the global community today. In a 2021 Ipsos poll of citizens from 28 countries, Canada was rated as the country that will have the most positive influence on world affairs in the next decade. Two months ago, Canada announced its intention to run for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), stating that it cannot stand idle on the sidelines and that it must “roll up its sleeves and get involved.” Despite this honourable intention, I cannot help but ask: why? Whilst I stand firmly with the goal of advancing human rights and holding the world’s worst human rights abusers to account, I cannot help but question why our nation is willing to sully its reputation by lending its good name to this deeply undemocratic and hostile body? Nadav Steinman is a Canadian and Israeli lawyer and is chair of the board of the International Legal Forum. Photograph courtesy of Nadav Steinman The UNHRC was formed in 2006 to tackle human rights abuses around the world, replacing the UN Human Rights Commission, which was criticized for its obsession with Israel and make-up of its membership, which included at one point in 2003 Libya—then still ruled by Muammar Gaddafi—as chair. Today, the UNHRC’s membership includes dictatorships, tyrants, despots, and genocide abusers like China, Cuba, Qatar, and Algeria, while the council’s pathological obsession with Israel has only intensified. Absurdly, Israel has been condemned by the UNHRC almost more than the rest of the world combined, while the council also reserves a spot on its agenda to condemn the Jewish state—the sole country-specific item—whereas human rights issues in the entire rest of the world are shoved into one solitary agenda item. Even just this week, UNHRC Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 Francesca Albanese released a 10,700 word report singularly slamming Israel for purported human rights abuses; however, not once even mentioning Palestinian terror. This is the same UN official who, in 2014, accused “the Jewish lobby” of controlling the United States and, according to some translations of a speech in Arabic which The Hill Times has been unable to independently verify, telling Hamas, a Canadian-listed terror group, that it has “the right to resist.” (Albanese has since said the resurfacing of her 2014 comments on social media were taken out of context and “wrongly mischaracterized as antisemitic.”) Humphrey spoke about bringing peace when the rights of all people are respected, yet the UNHRC makes a mockery of universality, and its actions create a systemic mockery of the declaration he drafted. The UNHRC ignores the human rights violations of the some of the world’s worst offenders, yet devotes the majority of its agenda to obsessively hounding Israel, while perversely green-lighting Palestinian terror. In May this year, the UNHRC elected Iran to chair its Social Forum, notwithstanding the Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the world’s worst and most egregious human rights abusers. Now Canada wants to roll up its sleeves in this dirty sandbox. Why? How about Canada takes an alternative approach. Canada could demonstrate its leadership and utilize the foundational words of my esteemed professor to ensure that the rights of all are respected by declaring that it retracts it application and refuses to join the UNHRC until that body turns its attention to respect for human rights for all—not just an incessant and relentless pursuit of Israel. Canada can, and must, take a stand and serve as the moral compass to the world, by affirming its commitments to human rights. However, that stand should not take place inside the undemocratic UNHRC, but outside it, demanding first that the council lives up to the principles of impartiality and equality set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and once again unwaveringly stand up for the victims of human rights abuse, not their abusers. Nadav Steinman is a Canadian and Israeli lawyer, and chair of the board of the International Legal Forum—an Israeli-based NGO and global network of lawyers combating antisemitism. You can follow him on Twitter at: @Ned_Law. The Hill Times

A case against joining the UN Human Rights Council

Canada must serve as the world's moral compass by affirming its commitments to human rights. However, that stand should take place outside the UNHRC, demanding that the council live up to the principles of impartiality and equality.

Haiti’s ruling council is falling apart

I live with Parkinson’s. I’m telling Ottawa: we need funding now

Feds must reject advance requests for MAID

Investing in innovation: the future of animal-free toxicity testing in Canada

Peru and Canada: a strong and expanding bilateral relationship

Tackling humanitarian disaster takes guts, not words

Only Biden can stop the war

Just wars that become unjust

Beyond a ceasefire, Canada’s role in ensuring accountability

On Israel-Gaza, Canada must rise to the humanity of the moment

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

A case against joining the UN Human Rights Council

Canada must serve as the world's moral compass by affirming its commitments to human rights. However, that stand should take place outside the UNHRC, demanding that the council live up to the principles of impartiality and equality.

Get The Foreign Policy Newsletter