政党社团之声
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    缅甸风云
[主页]->[政党社团之声]->[缅甸风云]->[Busdachin’s Speech on “Self-Determination Right in International Law”]
BURMA-缅甸风云
·缅甸的华人悲歌
·缅侨恳求中国在安理会勿再投否决票
·全缅学生民主先锋谈缅甸危机
·缅甸律师委员会对甘巴里《缅甸报告》的看法
·缅甸民族委员会NCUB欢迎安理会声明
·缅甸当前急务纵横观
·感谢德国人民支持缅甸和平正义斗争
·缅甸动乱,丹瑞大将有话说
·缅甸众土族国际公开大学AEIOU急需捐款
·缅甸丹瑞大帝狞笑睥睨自豪
·老战友 Prof. Win 的心底话
·毒品枭雄昆沙盖棺论定
·老战友还有话说
·缅甸众土族最欢迎昂山素姬声明
·韩永贵在捷克国会的缅甸问题讲话
·众合法土族政党支持联合国代表代发的昂山素姬声明
·缅甸和平民主阵线10月18日声明
·人权特使会成为甘巴里第二吗?
·与韩永贵漫谈丹瑞昂山素姬走向
·赛万赛笑缅甸军政府杀一儆百
·对掸邦昆沙的另类盖棺论定
·缅甸丹瑞大帝笑评东盟宪章
·缅甸大帝与总理谈东盟来龙去脉
·缅甸众土族委员会拜访印度观察家研究基金会
·缅甸众土族委员会答印度记者问
·苦修我不入地狱谁入地狱的缅甸高僧
·巴瓯民族解放组织支持昂山素姬声明
·缅甸丹瑞大帝2007年12月3日语录
·缅甸民族委员会欢呼美国HR3890号制裁决议
·缅甸问题根源是彬龙精神不见了
·克伦族谴责缅甸种族灭绝内战
·缅甸丹瑞大帝笑骂民主
·缅甸学运领袖波昂觉永垂不朽!
·缅甸联邦土族与少数民族问题
·缅甸各族欢呼联合国原住民权利宣言
·缅甸若开邦人民致函联合国
·纪念缅甸独立节60周年
·缅甸掸族公主痛斥军政府
·缅甸土族哭祭60周年独立节
·古来稀大哥的前列腺毛病
·缅甸僧伽与人民,是鱼水关系
·缅甸僧伽们入世行动了
·钦族阵线谈印度与缅甸军政府
·缅甸民族委员会08年元月24日声明
·缅甸掸族拟加入众土族委员会ENC
·缅甸掸族领袖赛万赛答缅甸文摘问
·由红色高棉想到缅甸军政府
·缅甸掸族的61周年掸邦节
·克伦族掸族领袖游说欧盟6年15次
·平等、民主、发展——救缅甸!
·与赛万赛谈2008年初缅甸局势
·缅甸联邦民族委员会对曼侠被杀害之声明
·人倒下,但曼侠英魂永远活着!
·缅甸革命师生痛失曼侠学兄
·曼侠名列缅甸军政府刺杀单
·谈缅甸国民大会、公投、普选
·美国教授讲缅甸的过去现在未来
·反对缅甸5月公投与2010年普选?
·国际缅甸僧伽总会拜访海牙UNPO
·正视缅甸宪法公投与大选
·缅甸问题以和为贵、利民为本
·缅甸独裁政府——你不打,他不倒!
·缅甸联邦民族委员会有关“宪法公投”声明
·国民党马与民进党谢的选后感言
·温教授评缅甸公投与大选
·NCUB的缅甸反法西斯63周年声明
·达赖喇嘛发表“对全球华人的呼吁”
·“黃金甲--詩篇”
·寒竹点评 “达赖言论”
·缅甸另两大力量对宪法公决的声明
·缅甸在野另七党派反对宪法公决
·给斯宾诺莎的信
·缅甸在野众党派对停战集团的呼吁
·请国际监察员来缅甸察督全民公投
·缅甸钦族委员会第二周年大会声明
·分离运动与自决权问题
·缅甸僧伽新年祈祷民主快来
·Burmese Monks Pray for Democracy
·达赖、缅藏、僧伽喇嘛、背后黑手
·UNPO第九届大会将在欧洲议会召开
·缅甸僧伽昭告人民书
·缅甸国内外僧伽民众4月26日反宪法公投
·缅甸工联FTUB向国际控诉
·缅甸联邦民族委员会五一劳动节声明
·中国学者谈缅甸民主前景
·缅甸僧伽对国际救济的紧急呼吁
·送缅甸将军们上国际刑事法庭
·Deliver the Junta of Burma to the International Criminal Court
·缅甸新宪法、军政府、反对势力
·缅甸反对党派不承认伪宪法与公投结果
·熊飞骏:马英九胜选的十大启示
·民意转求真正缅甸联邦制——不闹独立了
·缅甸众民族团结阵线12党不承认伪公投伪结果
·缅甸风灾,丹瑞大将有话说
·缅甸妇联要扭送丹瑞集团到国际刑事法庭
·缅甸反对力量、军政府、国际刑事法庭
·缅甸军政府要吃掉停战集团了
·缅甸军政府逼迫停战集团缴械参选
·缅人与团体到国际刑事法庭状告缅甸将军们
·缅甸人民恳求联合国:驱逐非法军政府!
·缅甸掸邦第四特区不任军政府宰割!
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
Busdachin’s Speech on “Self-Determination Right in International Law”

( Mr. Marino Busdachin:

   appointed as Executive Director in 2003, unanimously elected as UNPO General Secretary in 2005, served as UN representative in Geneva, New York and Vienna 1995-2000, member of the Extra-ordinary Executive Board of the Transnational Radical Party 2000-2002, currently a member of the General Council of TRP. founded the NGO “Non c’e’ Pace Senza Giustizia” in Italy 1994-1999, as well as founding and serving as President of No Peace Without Justice USA 1995-2000, campaigned for the establishment of the International Criminal Court, represented Civil Society at the Rome Conference founding ICC. Worked to establish the ad hoc tribunals on war crimes in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and campaign on the death penalty in the United Nations from USA in 1993, led the TRP to recognition by the UN as an NGO of the first category, led and coordinated the TRP in the former Yugoslavia 1991-1993 and in the Soviet Union 1989-1993, campaigned for civil rights in Italy in the 1980s, elected in 1974 as a member of the Federal Council of the Radical Party, between 1978-1982 elected member of the City Council of Trieste, where he attended Law University ) .

   By the International Symposium: "The Right to Self-determination in International Law" held in The Hague during 29 September – 1 October 2006,General Secretary of the UNPO, Marino Busdachin, emphasised the need for action, in addition to word and sentiment. Mr. Busdachin brought a number of practical proposals to the Symposium, all aimed at addressing the disparity between those rights enshrined in international law and the reality faced by unrepresented peoples everywhere.

General-Secretary Mr. Busdachin's speech in detail is as follow:

   The subject of this conference seems to be especially important for the international community. It is fulfilling a major gap in the last years on analysing and debating the major question of the right to self-determination and its place in the context of the wider purposes of International Law.

   Major conferences and studies in the 1990s found undoubtedly that the right to self-determination is conferred on peoples by international law itself and not by states. And, following, that its exercise must be given content in an International Law system of guarantees.

   Nevertheless this argument is poorly considered in practice and the principles not implemented.

   Territorial integrity and self-determination, two major principles enshrined in the UN Charter and as in documents such as the Helsinki Final Act in 1975, are still and constantly in conflict.

   In the post-9/11 environment, the situation has deteriorated.

   Of the over 60 armed conflicts within states active around the world a large part of them have, directly or indirectly, the issue of the denial of the right to self-determination as a key to the divergence.

   Too many peoples and communities are denied basic cultural, civil and political rights. Cultural repression, the denial of the rights of peoples, political oppression and marginalization, and lack of democracy are causes of major insecurity.

   Too frequently the right to self-determination is viewed naively as a rigid choice between all or nothing, between recognising and independent state or total denial of a cultural and political identity.

   Our work should be addressed to the broadest grey zone between the two extremes.

   Jean Monnet, the driving force behind the creation of the European Union never ceased to remark that “when you have a problem you cannot solve, enlarge the context.”

   This is exactly what happened in the process of rebuilding Europe after the World War II, more than fifty years ago.

   In the present world and in the current international context, deeply and heavily marked by interdependency between states or association of states, the right to self-determination, as with the principle of sovereignty and border sanctity, needs to be put under discussion, reconsidered and differently evaluated.

   The world’s nearly 200 countries contain some 5,000 ethnic groups. Two thirds have substantial minorities and indigenous peoples; ethnic and religious groups; as well as occupied countries or oppressed peoples. Often at least 10% of the population of countries consist of these groups and oppressed peoples.

   In a global world, territorial intrastate conflicts increasingly challenge international peace, security, and the promotion of democracy.

   It deprives millions of peoples of their basic human rights.

   In this new world the principle of, and the right to, self-determination acquires a new dimension within the interactive corpus of democracy, development and peace.

   The Human rights exegesis has to adapt to these contemporary challenges, e.g. by considering an adjusted approach to the concept of self-determination in a more broad sense. An “ongoing process of choice in order to achieve, in different specific situations, guarantees of cultural security, form of self-governance and autonomy, economic self-reliance, effective participation at the international level, lands rights and the ability to care for the natural environment, spiritual freedom and the various forms that ensure the free _expression and protection of collective identity in dignity as a fundamental people’s rights.” [reference?]

   It is an absolute necessity to reaffirm that it is not the right to self-determination that ignites and fuels conflicts, but on the contrary, that it is the very denial of this right, which is firmly enshrined in international law and human rights law, which increases the global turmoil and the general disastrous mess.

   For over 20 years the UN system has produced a serious study and reliable debate on self-determination. It has become evident that the work is conceptually inadequate to address these new forms of self-determination.

   We need to act, in order to produce a reformulation or broadening of the idea that the process of self-determination would and could contribute to conflict prevention and resolution.

   If not the right to self- determination will remain just a trap. As it has been for too many years and in too many dire situations.

   In this way, the officially adopted Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples, and I underline that it has never become an universally accepted document, should start a process and should become an important segment of an international system of guarantees of international law.

   This happened with the establishment of the International Criminal Court, which is working on crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes operating on the key on the principle of complementarity and having international jurisdiction. It was established after the UN Diplomatic Conference in Rome in 1998 and is ratified today by over 100 countries around the world as an International Treaty.

   Distinguished panellist, dear friends,

   According to UN figures, there are more than 300 million indigenous people in the world, disseminated among some 6.000 indigenous communities. They are generally discriminated against and treated as second-class citizens, live in the poorest conditions, outcast from decent education, devoid of political rights on matters that affects them.

   In more appropriate terms, they are simply denied to be themselves.

   The quest for justice and equal rights is growing, and growing yet again.

   There has been some progress in international standard-setting and monitoring of respect for minority and indigenous rights, but substantially, much work remains to be done.

   The equal guarantee to enjoy all human rights represents a key element in international human rights law, but still details and specifics of substance are missing or clearly insufficient. And this is as true for individual rights as group rights.

   An urgent call for the establishment of judicial procedures for matching the standards is needed.

   At present time, many peoples live under alien domination or domestic oppression. Stateless nations, ethnic groups split between different States and a very long list of violent ethnic conflicts ravages the world and crowd international agendas.

[下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场