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
·缅甸联邦缅族与非缅族历史恩怨宿仇
·掸邦掸族断臂将军召吞英
·缅甸种族冲突能政治解决吗?
·缅甸是世界数二数三贪腐穷困国
·缅甸是世界数二数三贪腐穷困国
·缅甸的和平曙光
·93岁缅甸作家达贡达雅呼吁国内和平
·何谓和平?何谓停火?如何和谈?
·昂山素姬 Reith 第一讲:自由
·昂山素姬道高一尺,将军们魔高一丈
·昂山素姬边妥协边缓进
·缅甸三方对话才能全面和解
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第三讲
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 自由第四讲
·缅甸众族并肩共和蓝图
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第五讲
·缅族需改唯我独尊心态
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第六讲
·抛弃彬龙协议将激发缅甸各族自决
·联邦众族团结委员会覆函缅甸联邦政府
·缅甸宗教自由吗?
·昂山素姬对中国缅甸伊江建坝的意见书
·昂山素姬 BBC Reith 第七讲
·缅甸掸邦众族关心狱中68岁领袖昆吞武
·缅甸要片面或全盘和解?
·昂山素姬BBC Reith 第八讲
·缅甸新政府似无意改革或和解
·缅甸乱世出英雄?
·安息吧!赛森尊好战友!好兄弟!
·缅甸要真正联邦制或大缅族独裁制?
·缅甸克钦邦克钦族反对中国支持缅甸政府
·缅甸释放政治犯才能加速民主进程
·近代中国缅甸恩怨
·缅甸政府对昂山素姬与非缅族众原住民的策略
·勿忘缅甸半世纪内战难民与狱中仟捌政治犯
·昂山素姬与丹麦师生谈领袖谈民主运动
·钦族老革命谈昂山素姬与缅甸政府
·国际缅甸民族院奠基会反对民盟参加政府补选
·对昂山素姬与民盟参加政府补选面面观
·非缅族众原住民委员会ENC欢迎民盟NLD重新注册
·缅甸民主力量FDB对民盟注册与补选发表声明
·昂山素姬允诺兼顾民主与各族平等
·旅加缅甸9团体支持民盟注册与补选
·缅甸改革风吹草低见牛羊?
·缅共呼吁人民对中美勿一边倒
·美国回亚洲开辟新冷战
·美国回亚洲开辟新冷战
·缅甸左拥中国右抱美国
·缅甸左拥中国右抱美国
·非缅族众政党向美国国务卿请愿
·韩永贵与昂山素姬的杠杆作用
·恢复四大功能就永離癌症
·恢复四大功能就永離癌症
·温家宝在世界未来能源峰会上的讲话
·勿背叛国父昂山理念!
·勿背叛国父昂山理念!
·赛万赛谈缅甸2012年初局势
·温教授谈缅甸独立后与现在
·中国改革须走出“转型陷阱”
·恢复四大功能就永離癌症
·非缅族政党对第二彬龙会议的看法
·昂山素姬在克钦邦重提彬龙精神
·缅甸华族2012年生活守则
·缅甸联邦人民要各族平等、民主共和!
·缅甸彭家声的果敢军也愿和解
·缅甸学运领袖对登盛国会发言的反应
·缅甸联邦有望持久和平吗?
·2012年三八妇女节感言
·赛万赛点评登盛总统的和平三步走
·Khin Ohnmar 剥缅甸伪平民政府洋葱
·昂山素姬外泄的竞选录音
·缅甸人民大谈民主
·广州人物周刊拜访昂山素姬
·昂山素姬竞选缅文原稿
·土司公主3月2日的神圣呼吁
·缅甸官方大谈为国为民反贪反橡皮图章
·缅甸补选点滴趣闻
·昂山素姬为何坚信登盛总统诚意改革
·昂山素姬民盟胜了不骄傲也不辱人
·少食+多菜少荤+快乐+早睡早起 =长寿
·未来吃什么?
·腦退化症
·缅甸国内外形势说变就变?
·缅甸掸族领袖如何看昂山素姬和登盛政府
·独裁者守望台对“新缅甸”的评价
·赛万赛对缅甸局势是否太乐观?
·掸公主 Sao Noan Oo 对英国有话说
·佤邦联合军保家卫邦不怕空袭
·匈牙利布达佩斯一日游
·捷克布拉格一日游
·缅军与克钦军交火不断 中国参与斡旋
·赠神州红尘众生的锵锵劝世良言
·忆10年前云南8日游
·最美教师张丽莉与日日向善的中国人民
·最美司机48岁吴斌
·普世價值的中國先知——方励之
·谈白岩松与昂山素姬为民请命
·悼六四硬汉李旺阳被“自杀”
·温教授貌强谈若开宗教种族暴乱
·谈缅甸古今大小民族主义
·1962年缅甸学生七七惨案
[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