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
·Burma Needs 2nd Anti-Fascist Movement
·Dr.Sein Win's Discourse on TV Conference
·缅甸群英会:盛温博士、萨尼博士、温教授
·RIPPLES Made by Premier Sein Win, Dr. Zarni & Prof. Win
·非正式国家人民代表组织”UNPO
·Unrepresentative Nations and Peoples Organization UNPO
·缅甸众邦众族六月份动态
·Activities of Ethnic Parties and People of BURMA in June
·UNPO 第七届代表大会
·UNPO VII Condemns Burma's Fascist Junta
·缅甸军政府的累累法西斯罪行
·The Fascist Crimes of Burma's Junta
·UNPO Resolution on EU’s Arms Embargo against China
·UNPO要求欧盟对华禁售武器
·缅甸流亡政府NCGUB 7月26日声明
·NCGUB Press Release on July 26,2005
·第七次非缅族社区发展会议的声明
·Statement of the 7th Ethnic Community Development Seminar
·克伦族联盟KNU的各族平等斗争
·KNU's Struggle for Democracy & Equality of ALL Nationalities
·可敬的柏林日本妇女小组
·Respectable Japanese Women Initiative Berlin
·About KNU’s Aims, Policy and Programme
·克伦族联盟KNU的目标、政策与纲领
·Appeal to UN Security Council
·呼吁联合国安理会保护缅甸人民
·悼念恩师林丽华
·缅甸事件已呈请联合国安理会干涉
·A CALL FOR UN SECURITY COUNCIL TO ACT IN BURMA
·缅甸华族致函中国驻联合国安理会常任代表团
·Burma's Chinese Appeal to PR China's Permanent Mission to UN Security
·缅甸克钦邦停战组织之内讧
·No More Peace for Burma's Peace Groups
·缅甸华族致函英国:呼吁联合国安理会干预缅甸
·Burma's Chinese Call England for the UN Security Council to Act in Burma
·SDU敦促安理会干涉威胁和平的缅甸
·SDU’ s STATEMENT On “Threat To The Peace: A Call For The UN Security Council To Act in Burma”
·安理会、军政府、民主力量、众民族力量、缅甸华族
·Burmese case at the UNSC: A Silver Lining
·来世不要这地狱!
·NEVER SUCH HELL IN NEXT LIFE!
·缅甸政党纷纷声援"报告书" (续)
·Endorsements from Burma's Democracy & Ethnic Forces (continue)
·欧盟的缅甸战略
·An EU strategy for Burma ?
·Annihilate Burma’s Poverty & Inequality
·消灭缅甸的贫穷与不平等
·美国国防专家看中缅关系
·Beckoning Burma
·缅甸搬迁军政总部与核能基地
·Burma Nuke Plant: Plains to Hills
·貌强:缅甸民主社团上书荷兰外交部
·貌强 :BDC-NL Appeals Dutch Government for Burma Issue
·寻找中国的同情与支持
·貌强: Seek China's Support
·缅甸国内外情势的阴阳转化
·貌强: Burma's Situation and Taiji's Yin & Yang
·布什会见缅甸掸族巾帼英雄蔷冬
·貌强:Bush met Charm Tong, The Shan Heroine of Burma
·貌强:A Burmese Confesses to Oppressed Ethnic People & My Comment
·貌强:一缅族向众原住民忏悔与我的答评
·Win教授、洋学者、貌强座谈缅甸问题
·貌强:Prof. Win's An Attempt on Jigsaw Puzzle
·貌强:缅甸将军们为保权而一意孤行
·貌强: SDU & USA Condemn Burmese Junta’s Sentence on 8 Shan Leaders
·缅甸迁都:惧美?内战?风水?禳灾?
·貌强:Capital Moves to Pyinmana, WHY?
·世界对缅甸的看法
·貌强:How The World Views Burma’s Junta ?
·貌强:Master In Civil War & Disintegrating
·貌强:缅甸内战与分化高手
·貌强:Discussion on Contemporary Situation in Shan State with Sai Wansai of SDU
·貌强:与赛万赛谈掸邦现状
·貌强:Shan State Army Is Against Racial Hatred & Union Disintegration
·貌强: 众停战组织反对种族仇恨与联邦分裂
·貌强:Burmese Echos to UNSC Briefing On Burma
·貌强:安理会的缅甸简报与反响
·貌强:缅甸制宪国民大会又续开了!
·貌强:Burma Re-opens National Convention
·貌强:缅甸联邦宪法起草委员会FCGCC告人民书
·貌强:Press Release by Federal Constitution Drafting & Coordinating Committee-Union of Burma (FCDCC)
·貌强:缅甸新社会民主党DPNS与记者谈话
·貌强:Burmese DPNS ’s Press Conference
·Shan-EU: Time for ASEAN and UN to act in tandem
·赛万赛与貌强谈: 缅甸年终现状
·貌强:缅甸众土族委员会ENC欢迎东盟的呼吁
·貌强:ENC Statement 6/2005 =Welcome ASEAN’s EFFORD
·貌强:Sai Wansai & Maung Chan Talk about Burma’s Situation
·缅甸制宪大会与停战集团、和平集团、抗争力量
·貌强: The Struggle Between the Junta and Its broad Opponents
·貌强:缅甸的“无声杀戮场”
·貌强:Burma's Silent Killing Fields
·貌强: 中国边民遭缅军射杀
·貌强:Poor Border Chinese Shot Dead by Burma Army
·貌强:“人民”“人民”,缅甸将军假汝名而独裁!
·貌强:The Fascist Generals using “ people’s name ” to oppress people
·貌强 :第七届旅欧缅甸人民论坛
·貌强:The 7th. Burmese Forum In Europe
·貌强:棒喝缅甸将军们要以史为鉴
·貌强:Military Dictatorship vs. Colonialism
·貌强:翻开2006年新一页!
[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