[Nightowl]

Resolution 2006/24, Singapore

Resolution Concerning Human Rights in Cuba

Committee: Human Rights & Refugees
Submitted by: Singapore

The General Assembly of The United Nations,

Reaffirming that all members of the UN have an obligation to protect the human rights and fundamental freedom of its people,

Noting with deep concern The Cuban government have so far failed to act in this respect,

Noting Cuba's membership in several organisations, including the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

Emphasising This Commitee's obligation to promote Human Rights,

Keeping in mind Member state's should help to improve the economic situation in Cuba if they wish to support Human Rights and economic wellbeing.,

1. Calls on the Cuban Government to respect Human Rights and Freedom of its people;
   
2. Expresses its hope that the Cuban government will take note of this resolution, and will take steps to improve human rights in Cuba;
   
3. Urges the Cuban Government to release the prisoners in Cuba being held solely for their religious or social views;
   
4. Recommends Cuba cooperate fully with the Human Rights Commission;
   
5. Encourages The Cuban Government to allow inspectors into Cuba

[aiman]

The US supports this

[Agent Smith]

No, the US wishes to amend it to support full-scale invasion.

The Bhutan, on the other hand, sees this Resolution and the intentions behind it as wholly contrary to the principle of non-intervention, which isn't actually a word, in the internal affairs of member states. If we ARE suddenly going to place the Declaration of Human Rights above said right to self-government rather than, as has usually been the case, the other way round, then there are plenty of countries that require far more urgent prodding than Cuba, and to single out one country is neither honest, fair nor conducive to good international relations.

[Nefarious]

Russia strongly opposes this resolution, meddling in the internal affairs of Cuba is not the responsibility of the UN and there are much more pressing issues at hand and many other states who have far worse human rights violations. How the US can complain about Cuba whilst maintaining Camp X-ray and the like is a mystery. Indeed Singapore’s new standard contract for migrant domestic workers involves several human rights violations, should the UN concern itself with that too?

[Agent Smith]

The Bhutan is in full agreement with Russia. If there is to be a sudden interest taken in Human Rights by the UN, then it should be universal, with no country exempt from investigation. Unless the US is willing to agree to this, which possibility is on the far side of remote, the Bhutan will have no option but to vote against the Resolution. And by the looks of things Russia is going to veto it anyway.

[Nefarious]

(Original post by Agent Smith)
And by the looks of things Russia is going to veto it anyway.

Yep

[Teehar]

Lebanon agrees with Bhutan and Russia. Meddling in internal affairs is not the job of the UN, especially when this is not universally applied.

[Knogle]

Wait - Singapore submitting a resolution on human rights?

Maybe you haven't seen this: http://hrw.org/doc/?t=asia&c=singap.

[Nutter]

(Original post by Knogle)
Wait - Singapore submitting a resolution on human rights?

Maybe you haven't seen this: http://hrw.org/doc/?t=asia&c=singap.

Touché.

Australia will comment further after consulting our Federal Government and DFAT on this matter.

[Nightowl]

This isn't meddling in the internal affairs. If human rights were strictly an internal affair there would be no need for a human rights council because every time they did something everyone would just say "internal affair" and stop it. This resolution is legal under Chapter XII Article 76 of the UN Charter. Indeed if that was the case we wouldn't have been able to legally impose sanctions on Belaus, which we did, send a peacekeeping force to Sudan, which we did, in fact nothing short of a resolution after a war is declared would be able to pass.

A resolution to cover all countries would simply not be workable. We passed that in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, a resolution trying to cover all of every countries human rights would be vague, laughable. Singapore is not trying to single out Cuba in any respect, but it is an issue and one that needs to be worked on all countries agree with that thats why Resolution condemning Cuba's human rights record was passed in 2004. This resolution instead of condemning Cuba and moving on opens the door for more cooperation between Cuba and the UN Human Rights Council.

Indeed Singapore’s new standard contract for migrant domestic workers involves several human rights violations, should the UN concern itself with that too?

The Singaporean government is talking with Human Rights Watch, and we are investigating several possibilities including ammending the Employment Act and Workmen’s Compensation Act, further enforcing the Employment Agencies Act, and signing up to the Migrant Workers Convention. In short, we're working on it. Alot more than Cuba is doing at the moment, and alot more than what Russia is doing with the abuses in Chechnya and Ingushetia

[Nightowl]

(Original post by Knogle)
Wait - Singapore submitting a resolution on human rights?

Maybe you haven't seen this: http://hrw.org/doc/?t=asia&c=singap.

Yes I have seen it, thought it was better to submit it as Singapore than keep it cooked up while the MUN dies a boring death.

[Nutter]

(Original post by Article 1 of Chapter 1 of the UN Charter)
The Purposes of the United Nations are:

3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and

4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.

(Original post by Preamble of the UN Charter)
Point 2: To reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and...

We therefore feel that this resolution is valid in terms of its general intention., but we have yet to analyse its contents.

[Nefarious]

(Original post by Nightowl)
The Singaporean government is talking with Human Rights Watch, and we are investigating several possibilities including ammending the Employment Act and Workmen’s Compensation Act, further enforcing the Employment Agencies Act, and signing up to the Migrant Workers Convention. In short, we're working on it. Alot more than Cuba is doing at the moment, and alot more than what Russia is doing with the abuses in Chechnya and Ingushetia

Russia is dealing with the terrorists in Chechnya. Please leave them out of this, If you want a resolution on Chechnya please write one. (So Russia can veto that one too ) Cuba has made some reforms and whilst it is far from the model of a liberal democracy Russia can't see any reason to single it out for special treatment.

[Champagne Breakfast]

China is strongly opposed to this resolution. We are broadly in agreement with the Bhutanese and Russian Representatives, and greatly look forward to the American ambassador's response.

[Nightowl]

[quote=Nefarious]Russia is dealing with the terrorists in Chechnya. Please leave them out of this.[quote]

And what relevence do Domestic Migrant workers in Singapore have to do with Cuba?

[Agent Smith]

The relevance is that Singapore's own behaviour calls into question its right to point the finger at Cuba. As stated above, this Resolution is only fair and legitimate if applied equally to all member states. That would be in accordance with the overarching principles of the UN. Singling out individual countries, except in extreme circumstances, which these are not, is not.

[Nightowl]

(Original post by Agent Smith)
The relevance is that Singapore's own behaviour calls into question its right to point the finger at Cuba. As stated above, this Resolution is only fair and legitimate if applied equally to all member states. That would be in accordance with the overarching principles of the UN. Singling out individual countries, except in extreme circumstances, which these are not, is not.

And as Singapore said we are working on it. Still isn't a reason to ignore the abuses in Cuba. It is deemed valid clearly because we passed a similar resolution two years ago condemning the abuses. I don't see why the UN would vote to condemn the abuses in Cuba, but then deem a resolution condemning the abuses but opening doors to the Cuban government for improvement as illegal.

[santogold]

Human Rights is an important issue to Finland, and Finland doesn't believe this resolution interferes with internal affairs.

Finland supports this resolution!

[Agent Smith]

(Original post by Nightowl)
And as Singapore said we are working on it. Still isn't a reason to ignore the abuses in Cuba. It is deemed valid clearly because we passed a similar resolution two years ago condemning the abuses. I don't see why the UN would vote to condemn the abuses in Cuba, but then deem a resolution condemning the abuses but opening doors to the Cuban government for improvement as illegal.

The Bhutan wasn't on the Security Council two years ago, that's what changed. And our opinion is that both resolutions, the past one and this one, were illegitimate and contrary to the principles of the UN.

[OOC]This is the first such motion the TSR MUN has had on the subject, isn't it? As long as we stick to our countries' stances, there is nothing preventing us from reaching a different conclusion to the real world; that's rather the point.[/OOC]

[Montrose]

Spain strongly supports this resolution, and in the meantime urges Cuba to look at their Human Rights record, and finds it hard to believe that other country's are saying "no" to releasing people held on religious beliefs, based on the notion "well America are not perfect so until they are we vote no". This is not the resolution to be further a vendetta against the Americans, but rather to be supporting our Cuban brothers and sisters.