(MENAFN- The Conversation) Australia to a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council. It will serve on the council from 2018 to 2020.
The announcement overnight formalised an : Australia and were the only two countries seeking election to the two available seats for the Western Europe and Others group. Most of the other newly- elected council members similarly ran uncontested.
However, all campaigning countries required the support of a to ensure their election. Australia received 176 votes and Spain 180 - both survived grilling by an .
How did Australia present itself as a candidate?
Foreign Minister Julie Bishop led Australia's campaign, which had a particular focus on freedoms, free speech, and equality. The of Australia's bid were:
Australia presented itself as a candidate for the council position. Bishop cited Australia's as well as its in international affairs.
Such active and practical involvement can be seen in Australia's advocacy for the , as in the case of . Furthering global advocacy for death penalty abolition is one of Australia's as a new council member.
Australia's involvement in multiple UN treaties and its of the were also cited as evidence of its worthiness for election.
Australia's bid and opportunities for human rights advocacy
However, Australia's campaign opened it to further scrutiny of its . in Australia and overseas have been lobbying to ensure that Australia's practices are well publicised and subject to oversight and critique.
In , Bishop sought to pre-empt such criticism, claiming . Bishop pledged to be 'honest and open' about Australia's human rights record during the campaign.
Yet the campaign's pledges failed to acknowledge Australia's human rights abuses. As such, Australia remains open to accusations of .
Australia's is more chequered than it would claim. The UN has condemned Australia for its and .
Bishop frequently praised Australia for its success in building a and valuing the diverse background of migrant settlers. Yet asylum seekers arriving by boat .
Further reading:
Another key area of human rights controversy is the current postal plebiscite to survey public opinion on . Australia's council bid promised the . But , the plebiscite campaign LGBTQI people to harmful fear campaigning and social exclusion.
It is incongruous for a claimed champion of human rights to put the rights of a minority group to a , potentially in an effort to prevent that group from gaining marriage equality.
Australia strikes a similarly dissonant note in relation to its treatment of Indigenous people. A of the council bid was the recognition of Indigenous Australians in the Constitution. However, a constitutional convention the form of 'recognition' the government-sponsored Recognise campaign had promoted.
The Recognise campaign has , and the future of the proposed referendum is unclear. The Australian government is yet to embrace the Referendum Council's for treaty, truth-telling and a First Nations Voice.
Further reading:
France's withdrawal was a loss to the election campaign
Given Australia's record, as a third candidate for the two available seats was unfortunate. The lack of competition reduced pressure on Australia to extend its human rights commitments.
The weight of international disapproval of Australia's practice in relation to refugees, in particular, could well have weakened the bid had France stayed in the race.
No doubt this was also true for Spain. The recent exposed Spain's problematic record in relation to self-determination and political rights for minority groups.
Further reading:
In interesting company
The UN's orientation is to promote inclusion rather than marginalisation of member countries on international bodies. The UN is committed to , and seeks to enforce these through universal involvement in its processes.
It is undoubtedly difficult to countenance human rights participating in human rights processes. But it is at least arguable that their involvement promotes the progressive realisation of human rights more effectively than their marginalisation would.
However, in some cases, it may be that a country's membership should be postponed until it can show improvement in a deplorable record. Leading up to the election, campaigned against promoting the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the council due to its grave human rights violations.
Meanwhile, the US warned it if the council continued to elect countries responsible for gross abuses.
Australia is not in this category. It aspires to be an exemplary member of the council. And its election should act as impetus for progressive gains in its human rights performance.
The value of Australia's election for human rights
will take the opportunity to draw attention to any gaps between Australia's international legal obligations and its domestic practices.
Bishop was right to highlight the value of Australia becoming the to join the council. Strong diplomatic and trade relationships will hopefully enable Australia to influence human rights development in its region. It is the without a regional human rights treaty or institution.
An important focus in this context will be Australia's advocacy for the . Allied to that concern for the , perhaps Australia might also consider lobbying other countries – notably the US – for that prioritise human life and wellbeing.
Australia could substantially increase the legitimacy of such efforts, though, by working to build adequate domestic . Without federal human rights legislation, Australia cannot demonstrate the social and legal value of building human rights protections into law.
Australia's election also calls for a renewal of political commitment to the value of international human rights review processes. Recent years have seen expressions of , and that undermine Australia's strong record of commitment to international human rights treaties.
Nowhere was this troubling attitude toward human rights protection more clear than to tarnish the reputation and work of former Human Rights Commission president .
Such mixed messages sit poorly with Australia's continued efforts to review the practices of other countries – particularly now that it has an official role on the Human Rights Council.
Further reading:
Australia has claimed leadership in the areas of gender equality, good governance, freedom of expression, the rights of Indigenous people, and strong national human rights institutions.
Imperfect performance in these areas indicates key targets for immediate focus – for example through human-rights-informed approaches to , and concern for limitations on the views about politically sensitive matters.
will be required on the for Australia to claim success on that key pillar of its council campaign. The federal government could look to in Victoria as evidence that such a conversation can be inclusive and productive.
Importantly, Australia must also be held accountable in the key area its bid sought to avoid: the treatment of and . Its election provides an ideal opportunity for Australia to show leadership and commitment to durable to refugee flows.
MENAFN1610201701990000ID1095956268