Dear editor,
I was disappointed to read your editorial dated 12 March 2008 ("Too
limited a mandate") but I am tempted to respond as your paper has
great respect and carries independent views. Your criticism refers to
the narrow mandate, my meetings and a misquoted comment.
The mandate that I have been entrusted by the United Nations is
limited to the issue of freedom of religion or belief. These are UN
mandates that have been in existence for many years and their terms of
reference are given by the international community. UN Special
Rapporteurs are required to remain within their mandates during
official country visits; it is not appropriate for them to take any
pleas, including from the media, to go beyond their terms of reference
or to pursue other concerns that they may otherwise espouse.
UN Special Rapporteurs are also required to engage with all sides,
including Government officials, victims, perpetrators, NGOs and other
members of civil society that have any relevance to their mandate. It
would be absurd for any UN Special Rapporteur to refuse meeting people
on the grounds of criticism from fellow citizens or for that matter to
expand their mandate because of their national or religious
background. We work in a truly professional way and must remain
independent in our reporting. It is therefore crucial that while on
mission we stay within our mandate and at the same time try to meet
all players.
In this regard, as my report will reveal, I am meeting a wide spectrum
of interlocutors and indeed a large number of NGOs in Gujarat who were
fully aware of my official meetings, including with the Chief Minister
there. It is ironical that the victims who met me in Gujarat were able
to comprehend the nature of my visit while zealous Pakistanis seem to
be unable to do the same. Surely, the liberal and rightist in Pakistan
cannot assume to themselves the role of guardians of all Muslims in
the world and dictate to UN Special Rapporteurs who they should meet
and how they should interpret their mandate. As a journalist, you will
appreciate that a well written report requires discussions with all
sides in order to get the full picture. This is precisely what is also
required of UN Special Rapporteurs.
Your claim that I had made comments on poll participation in Kashmir
is misinformed. Throughout my visit I have made no comment on the
general human rights situation in India except on my mandate. There
was immense interest about the recent developments in Pakistan and in
this regard there was great demand from the media for interviews and
comments. I turned down all requests for individual interviews on
Pakistan and repeatedly excused myself from giving any comprehensive
statements on these issues. Even on the insistence of the press I
tried to be very succinct in my responses without having to snub them.
I did not make the comments on poll participation in Kashmir as
reported by some sections of the press. On the contrary, when asked
whether Kashmiris should take part in the next elections as Pakistanis
recently did, I simply responded that it was everybody's own decision
and that it was a right of the people to decide whether to vote or not
to vote. I repeated this position publicly on several occasions while
I was still in Kashmir.
I hope that public opinion in Pakistan would allow an individual to
perform his or her role in the international community in an impartial
manner. Furthermore, the independence of the United Nations mandate
holders is vital for the functioning of the whole system of Special
Rapporteurs. I have followed the recent press reports about my visit,
including the ones appearing in Pakistan. I do not wish to offend
anybody who has criticized me. At the same time I will in no way be
pressurized and I will continue to carry out my obligations in an
independent and impartial manner.
Asma Jahangir
United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief
I was disappointed to read your editorial dated 12 March 2008 ("Too
limited a mandate") but I am tempted to respond as your paper has
great respect and carries independent views. Your criticism refers to
the narrow mandate, my meetings and a misquoted comment.
The mandate that I have been entrusted by the United Nations is
limited to the issue of freedom of religion or belief. These are UN
mandates that have been in existence for many years and their terms of
reference are given by the international community. UN Special
Rapporteurs are required to remain within their mandates during
official country visits; it is not appropriate for them to take any
pleas, including from the media, to go beyond their terms of reference
or to pursue other concerns that they may otherwise espouse.
UN Special Rapporteurs are also required to engage with all sides,
including Government officials, victims, perpetrators, NGOs and other
members of civil society that have any relevance to their mandate. It
would be absurd for any UN Special Rapporteur to refuse meeting people
on the grounds of criticism from fellow citizens or for that matter to
expand their mandate because of their national or religious
background. We work in a truly professional way and must remain
independent in our reporting. It is therefore crucial that while on
mission we stay within our mandate and at the same time try to meet
all players.
In this regard, as my report will reveal, I am meeting a wide spectrum
of interlocutors and indeed a large number of NGOs in Gujarat who were
fully aware of my official meetings, including with the Chief Minister
there. It is ironical that the victims who met me in Gujarat were able
to comprehend the nature of my visit while zealous Pakistanis seem to
be unable to do the same. Surely, the liberal and rightist in Pakistan
cannot assume to themselves the role of guardians of all Muslims in
the world and dictate to UN Special Rapporteurs who they should meet
and how they should interpret their mandate. As a journalist, you will
appreciate that a well written report requires discussions with all
sides in order to get the full picture. This is precisely what is also
required of UN Special Rapporteurs.
Your claim that I had made comments on poll participation in Kashmir
is misinformed. Throughout my visit I have made no comment on the
general human rights situation in India except on my mandate. There
was immense interest about the recent developments in Pakistan and in
this regard there was great demand from the media for interviews and
comments. I turned down all requests for individual interviews on
Pakistan and repeatedly excused myself from giving any comprehensive
statements on these issues. Even on the insistence of the press I
tried to be very succinct in my responses without having to snub them.
I did not make the comments on poll participation in Kashmir as
reported by some sections of the press. On the contrary, when asked
whether Kashmiris should take part in the next elections as Pakistanis
recently did, I simply responded that it was everybody's own decision
and that it was a right of the people to decide whether to vote or not
to vote. I repeated this position publicly on several occasions while
I was still in Kashmir.
I hope that public opinion in Pakistan would allow an individual to
perform his or her role in the international community in an impartial
manner. Furthermore, the independence of the United Nations mandate
holders is vital for the functioning of the whole system of Special
Rapporteurs. I have followed the recent press reports about my visit,
including the ones appearing in Pakistan. I do not wish to offend
anybody who has criticized me. At the same time I will in no way be
pressurized and I will continue to carry out my obligations in an
independent and impartial manner.
Asma Jahangir
United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief
No comments:
Post a Comment