Views expressed by Member and observer States of the Council on the review outcome

948. During the adoption of the outcome of the review of Malta, 7 delegations made statements.

949. Djibouti noted with appreciation the measures taken by Malta to improve the Criminal Code in order to enhance access to justice and the realisation of rights of the child. It commended Malta on the acceptance of the recommendations regarding the detention of migrants, which demonstrated the willingness of the Government to address the challenges in this area. Djibouti encouraged Malta to continue its efforts undertaken in this area. It reiterated its appeal to the international community to support Malta so the Government has various means to ensure the rights of migrants.

950. Libya noted with appreciation the efforts that had been taken by Malta to advance human rights as well as strengthen legislation in this area. It commended the Government on the measures that had been taken in order to bring its legislation in line with the international human rights instruments. Libya also commended Malta on ratifying majority of the international human rights treaties.

951. The Republic of Moldova commended Malta on its actions aiming at promoting and protecting human rights. It noted with appreciation Malta’s acceptance of the recommendations put forward by the Republic of Moldova in the area of combating human trafficking. The Republic of Moldova noted positively the amendments to the Criminal Code, envisaging compensation for victims of human trafficking.

952. Togo noted with satisfaction the willingness of the Government to promote and protect human rights despite the numerous challenges existing at national and international level. It commended Malta on its policies regarding the protection of the rights of migrants. Togo encouraged Malta to pursue actions aiming to rescue migrants who attempt to cross the Mediterranean Sea. It noted with appreciation that Malta had accepted a large number of recommendations that was put forward in the working group in 2013.

953. Algeria noted with satisfaction the acceptance by Malta two recommendations to combat all forms of discrimination and to ensure further the enjoyment of the rights of migrants. It expressed confidence that measures that had been already undertaken or had been planned would have a positive impact on the promotion and promotion of human rights.

954. The Council of Europe evoked the recommendations made to Malta by various monitoring bodies of the Council of Europe. Among the issues raised in those recommendations, it highlighted 3 priority areas: rights of irregular migrants and asylum seekers; problems related to xenophobia, discrimination and lack of integration of immigrants; and problems related to the access to courts. The Council of Europe commended Malta on measures that had been taken in order to address the issues raised by those monitoring bodies. It also noted with satisfaction the measures that had been taken to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence.

955. Cuba highlighted progress made by Malta in several sectors, including the protection of the rights of persons with disability. At the same time, Malta had faced challenges in the field of human rights as noted in the national report. Cuba noted with satisfaction that Malta accepted 3 recommendations put forward by Cuba; took measures to fully ensure the rights of migrants and to combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance as well as attached greater importance in the fulfilment of social and economic rights.

3. General comments made by other relevant stakeholders

956. During the adoption of the outcome of the review of Malta, 4 other stakeholders made statements.

957. Action Canada for Population and Development was concerned about women’s access to reproductive health care services and in particular to the legal provisions regulating the right to terminate a pregnancy. It stated that women could not access a legal termination under any circumstances and were subject to criminal charges if they did so. The Action Canada for Population and Development stated that Malta refused to acknowledge the positive obligations under CEDAW to guarantee women equal access to health services and access to safe and legal abortion. The national sexual rights policy and strategy had not contained provisions on the access of women to legal abortion. It urged the Government to recognise access to abortion as a critical human rights issue and to review its legislation regarding abortion and, as a minimum, to amend existing laws to ensure that women are not criminalised for undergoing an abortion.

958. Amnesty International noted that Malta accepted a recommendation to continue its cooperation with neighbouring countries regarding rescue operations at sea and expressed its commitment to continue to abide by its international obligations and to cooperate with neighbouring countries. Amnesty International urged Malta to guarantee access, in all cases, to asylum and protection from removal to a country where there is a real risk of persecution or other serious human rights abuses. Malta must also commit to never resorting to push-backs or collective expulsions. It also urged Malta to ensure full accountability and transparency with regard to the incident of October 2013 when a shipwreck occurred in Malta’s search and rescue zone causing the death of hundreds of asylum-seekers.

959. Recontre Africane pour la defense de droits de l’homme (RADDHO) positively noted that Malta had implemented recommendations of the previous UPR and consulted with the civil society and other stakeholders in this process. It, however, remained concerned by the inhumane treatment of African asylum seekers and migrants, particularly regarding the detention policy of migrants who seek protection under international norms. It urged the Government to fully ensure that the rights of asylum seekers and migrants are protected. The detention conditions must be improved and the duration of the detention of the asylum seekers must be minimized. It called on the Government to exert its utmost efforts in creating conducive environment for asylum seekers and migrants in its territory. RADDHO invited the Government to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and the Members of their Families, and to intensify its efforts to curtail the development of racism and xenophobia in the country.

960. Human Rights Watch noted positively the steps undertaken by Malta since the previous UPR to improve its reception system for asylum seekers. However, it noted with regret that Malta continued to subject migrants and asylum seekers arriving by boat to automatic detention. In line with the 2013 judgement of the European Court of Human rights and a number of recommendations put forward during the UPR, Malta must end its practice of automatic detention and improve safeguards and conditions of detainees. Human Rights Watch also stated that Malta should revise its age determination policies to give unaccompanied migrant children the benefit of the doubt, treating them as a child and releasing them from detention until found not be children.

961. The President stated that based on the information provided out of 134 recommendations received Malta accepted 73 and noted the rest of the recommendations.

962. In concluding, the delegation expressed appreciation and gratitude to all those who collaborated with the delegation throughout the past months and to all those delegations and NGOs who sought to enlighten the Government further with their constructive recommendations.

Israel

963. The review of Israel was held on 29 October 2013 in conformity with all the relevant provisions contained in relevant Council resolutions and decisions, and was based on the following documents:

(a) The national report submitted by Israel in accordance with the annex to Council resolution 5/1, paragraph 15 (a) (A/HRC/WG.6/17/ISR/1);

(b) The compilation prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (b) (A/HRC/WG.6/15/ISR/2, A/HRC/WG.6/17/ISR/2 and Corr. 1);

(c) The summary prepared by OHCHR in accordance with paragraph 15 (c) (A/HRC/WG.6/15/ISR/3 and Corr.1 and A/HRC/WG.6/17/ISR/3).

964. At its 53^rd meeting, on 27 March 2014, the Council considered and adopted the outcome of the review of Israel (see section C below).

965. The outcome of the review of Israel comprises the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (A/HRC/25/15), the views of Israel concerning the recommendations and/or conclusions, as well as its voluntary commitments and replies presented before the adoption of the outcome by the plenary to questions or issues that were not sufficiently addressed during the interactive dialogue in the Working Group (see also A/HRC/25/15/Add.1).

1. Views expressed by the State under review on the recommendations and/or conclusions as well as on its voluntary commitments and on the outcome

966. Pursuant to Israel’s letter of 24 March 2014 and on its behalf, the President of the Human Rights Council stated that, as previously announced, Israel was not in a position to send a delegation to Geneva for the session of the Human Rights Council, due to an on-going labour strike in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

967. The President indicated that Israel had submitted an addendum to the Working Group report, which was circulated to the Council in accordance with the usual procedure, and which clarified the position of Israel in light of the recommendations received during their review by the Working Group. The President also drew the attention of the Council to additional information contained within an annex to the addendum to the working group report, which is also available on the universal periodic review website.

968. On behalf of Israel, the President read the following statement, as contained in Israel’s letter of 24 March 2014 addressed to him by Col. Dr. Eran Lerman, Deputy for Foreign Policy and International Affairs:

“The State of Israel has carefully reviewed the 237 recommendations received during our second cycle Universal Periodic Review (UPR) held on 29 October 2013, which were summarized in the report of the Working Group on the UPR (A/HRC/25/15), and was happy to submit to you our document regarding the State of Israel’s Universal Periodic Review – Second Cycle.

As you know, the State of Israel is deeply committed to the UPR. Following the Working Group’s report, relevant government ministries, as well as civil society organizations, were consulted in the process of drafting the replies to each of the observations and recommendations received. As a result of these consultations, we were pleased to report that Israel had been able to support 105 recommendations, either in whole or in part.

Unfortunately, due to an on-going labour strike in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, our representatives will not be able to participate in the scheduled dialogue with the Council and to present our views on conclusions and/or recommendations, voluntary commitments and replies. We apologize for the inconvenience and wish to take this opportunity to renew the assurance of our highest consideration.”

969. The Human Rights Council President concluded that of the total number of 244 recommendations received during the Working Group, Israel had identified in the Addendum document 54 recommendations that fully enjoyed the support of Israel. All other recommendations were thus noted.

970. During the adoption of the outcome of the review of Israel, 9 delegations made statements.

971. Pakistan took note of Israel’s UPR outcome report. It regretted that Israel has not implemented recommendations made during the first cycle. Pakistan expressed concern at the rejection of recommendations, including those which contained the term of state of Palestine. It called upon Israel to fulfil its obligations under international law, including human rights and international humanitarian law, and implement all United Nations Security Council, General Assembly and Human Rights Council resolutions. It also called upon Israel to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of the Palestinian people in the occupied Palestinian territories. Pakistan urged Israel to implement all recommendations.

972. The Syrian Arab Republic presented recommendations regarding applying United Nations resolutions relevant to the Occupied Arab Territories on the hope that the Council with its different mechanisms could contribute to the implementation of those resolutions, or reduce impact of the occupation. Syria stated that the language of the Israeli occupation did not reflect serious interest to engage with the Council and the responses proved lack of will to implement them. Accordingly, Syria recognised that it is not concerned with the report. It supported the point of order made previously by Pakistan.

973. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland welcomed Israel’s participation in the UPR process. It regretted Israel was unable to be present but indicated that it did not characterise absence due to a strike as non-cooperation. It welcomed some positive steps since Israel’s last UPR but remained deeply concerned about the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It encouraged Israel to adopt the recommendations made during the UPR, including ending the use of solitary confinement for children in military detention.

974. The United States of America stated that Israel was justifiably proud of its democratic traditions and values. It encouraged Israel to implement the recommendations it had made, which pertained to women’s rights, equitable allocation of resources to Arab Israeli and Bedouin communities, an efficient refugee status processing and detention adjudication for asylum seekers and migrants. It was concerned that some states had issued recommendations that fell outside the scope and mandate of the Council and the UPR process and should only be addressed by the Israeli and Palestinian parties jointly as a part of the process of direct bilateral negotiations.

975. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela expressed disappointment for the lack of will and disposition by Israel to avoid the numerous and systematic human rights violations it commits. It urged Israel, inter alia, to respect the right to self-determination of the State of Palestine, end its illegal occupation, detain colonization with illegal settlements, end the inhuman blockade in Gaza, and put an end to the illegal detention and torture of Palestinians, and the criminal military attacks in which thousands of innocents have died. It urged Israel to show its real commitment with human rights by complying with the recommendations from the community of nations.

976. Canada stated that as a stable democracy with a robust system of rule of law, despite the bias that is often expressed against it by the Council, Israel has a great deal to contribute to discussions, of which itself and those under its jurisdiction are the preliminary beneficiaries. It welcomed Israel’s commitment to implement accepted recommendations, including those proposed by Canada, which pertain to efforts to ensure non-discrimination particularly in the areas of access to justice, property rights and housing rights, additional measures to improve the status of women and to improve the promotion and protection of the rights of persons with disabilities.

977. Cuba regretted Israel’s excuse not to participate in the adoption of its UPR. It stated that the illegal occupation of Palestinian and Arab territories amounts to the biggest human rights violations that should be addressed by the Council in the context of Israel’s UPR. It regretted that Israel had not considered the majority of recommendations made by Cuba, specifically those oriented towards, inter alia, ending the occupation of all Arab and Palestinian Territories, including the Syrian Golan; guaranteeing full access of the Palestinian population to all basic services; and ending military attacks against the civilian population. It urged Israel to comply with international humanitarian law norms.

978. Egypt deplored Israel’s absence. It noted Israel’s rejection of recommendations relevant to ending the occupation of Palestine and other Arab Territories. It reiterated recommendations, including on : policies that continue to violate human rights including on the status of Al-Aqsa Mosque; the occupation of Arab Territories; the right of the Palestinian People to self-determination; the settlements in the Arab territories; the violation of religious sites; political prisoners and access by representatives of humanitarian agencies to them; the attacks against Gaza and the blockade; the lack of implementation of the ICJ advisory opinion concerning the separation Wall and the abusive practices against the Palestinian citizens.

979. Montenegro welcomed the universal periodic review outcome of Israel and commended the presentation on its views on conclusions and recommendations made during the review. It noted that the UPR represents an excellent opportunity for countries to make progress on a number of important human rights issues and it strongly encouraged Israel to continue to engage positively with the universal periodic review process. It wished Israel every success in addressing the challenges in the field of promotion and protection of human rights, and their efforts towards the full implementation of the accepted recommendations.

3. General comments made by other relevant stakeholders

980. During the adoption of the outcome of the review of Israel, 8 other stakeholders made statements.

981. Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust stated that while this mechanism was called universal it was not true that the Council applied the same rules to Israel as to any other State. The Council’s permanent agenda included Israel-bashing at every session. It was no secret that the biggest fans of the UPR were States with the worse human rights records. Regardless of their record, states emerged from the UPR with a polite knock of the gavel, without resolution or rapporteur appointed. The Council was about to adopt five resolutions condemning only Israel, and nothing on several Council members. That was discrimination.

982. The International Commission of Jurists called on Israel to implement recommendations to abide by international humanitarian and international human rights law. It urged Israel to end its unlawful settlement policy, dismantle existing settlements and ensure that there are no new settlements. Israel should take effective measures to prevent “price-tagging” and other crimes committed against Palestinians. It called on Israel to dismantle the separation wall on Palestinian land. Recommendations for abolishing relevant laws and policies on administrative detention should be fully implemented. Israel must ensure that the internment of those subject to administrative detention is reviewed by independent and impartial courts.

983. International Federation for Human Rights Leagues (FIDH) deplored Israel's position that human rights conventions to which Israel is a party to, did not apply in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Israel should act on recommendations regarding the activities of business enterprises in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, involved in violations of international laws. Israel failed to investigate and prosecute the on-going pillage of Palestinian natural resources and appropriation of Palestinian territories. FIDH welcomed Israeli's acceptance of Austria's recommendation on ensuring a free environment for human rights defenders.

984. Human Rights Watch stated that Israeli authorities did not held accountable security members forces responsible for apparently unlawful killings of Palestinian civilians, and failed to enforce the law against Israeli settlers in Occupied Territories who had harmed Palestinians and their properties. In 2013, Israeli authorities illegally demolished the homes of more than 1,100 Palestinians in the West Bank. Israel continued to build illegal settlement housing units and other infrastructure. Israeli authorities continued to arbitrarily detain Palestinians, including administrative detention. Bedouin citizens of Israel who lived in “unrecognized” villages suffered discriminatory home demolitions. Israeli authorities should release asylum seekers from detention and fairly examine their claims.

985. Al-Haq, Law in the Service of Man stated that the recent killing by Israeli soldiers of a Palestinian child was the eight incident in four weeks in which the Israeli military forces used excessive force against Palestinian population. While Israel had approved 184 new settlement housing units in Beit Hanina town, house demolition and settlement expansion had more than doubled in the last 8 months. Israel refused support to recommendations calling for the respect of international human rights law in the Occupied Territories, to cooperate with United Nations mechanisms, to end practices of discrimination and racial discrimination, and to ensure that Palestinian children were not subject of discriminatory treatment in military prisons.

986. Amnesty International (AI) was concerned that Israel’s national report omitted any reference to the situation of human rights in the OPT, despite the international community’s agreement that human rights treaties signed by Israel and the Fourth Geneva Convention apply to the OPT, including the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. AI indicated that Israel should seriously engage with all recommendations relating to Israel’s conduct in the OPT, as well as those relevant to the territory of Israel itself. AI looked forward, together with Israeli civil society actors, to monitoring the implementation of the recommendations once the outcome is adopted.

987. International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists commended the working group for its work as well as Israel for its decision to participate in the UPR process and retain its cooperation with the Council. It noted however, that beside the population living in the OPT, there are more than seven million citizens in Israel, all of whom deserve that the UPR process will be concerned with the promotion of their human rights. It hoped that in the future, the Council’s platform will be better used for the promotion of human rights of all persons under Israel’s jurisdiction, as is occurring in the UPR process of other States.

988. UN Watch hoped that the strike by Israel’s foreign service would soon end so that Israel could continue to engage with the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms. It called on Israel to pay attention to valuable comments and recommendations contained in its report, such as on improving the status of women, eliminating discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and fighting against manifestations of religious intolerance. According to UN Watch, the Council’s selective and politicized treatment of Israel was reflected in paras. 6 and 7 of the report and in having before it five separate resolutions condemning Israel.

989. Having all statements been delivered, the President proposed that the Human Rights Council adopt the decision relating to the universal periodic review outcome document of Israel.

990. At the 43rd meeting, on 21 March 2014, the Human Rights Council held a general debate on agenda item 6, during which the following made statements:

(a) Representatives of States Members of the Human Rights Council: China, Czech Republic, Estonia, Ethiopia (also on behalf of the Group of African States), Greece³⁹ (on behalf of European Union, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, Republic of Moldova and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia), Ireland, Morocco (also on behalf of Armenia, Bahrain, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Finland, Gabon, Germany, Guinea, Ireland, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Madagascar, Maldives, Mauritius, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Poland, Qatar, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Sudan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Yemen and the State of Palestine), Romania, Sierra Leone, United States of America, Uruguay³⁹ (also on behalf of Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Maldives, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), Yemen³⁹ (on behalf of the Group of Arab States);

(b) Representatives of observer States: Libya, Poland, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic;

(c) Observer for an intergovernmental organization: International Organization of la Francophonie;

(c) Observers for national human rights institutions: Australian Human Rights Commission (by video message), Irish Human Rights Commission;

(d) Observers for non-governmental organizations: Amnesty International, CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Colombian Commission of Jurists, International Commission of Jurists, Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice delle Salesiane di Don Bosco (also on behalf of Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Catholic International Education Office, Company of the Daughters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good Shepherd, Dominicans for Justice and Peace - Order of Preachers, Edmund Rice International Limited, Fondazione Marista per la Solidarietà Internazionale ONLUS, Franciscans International, Good Neighbors International, International Catholic Child Bureau, International Volunteerism Organization for Women, Education and Development – VIDES and Mouvement International d'Apostolate des Milieux Sociaux Independants), Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, Rencontre Africaine pour la defense des droits de l'homme, UPR Info (also on behalf of Article 19 - International Centre Against Censorship, CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation, International Federation for Human Rights Leagues (FIDH), International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR), International Volunteerism Organization for Women, Education and Development – VIDES, Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice delle Salesiane di Don Bosco, Reporters Sans Frontiers International - Reporters Without Borders International and Save the Children International), Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik.

991. At the same meeting, statements in exercise of the right of reply were made by the representatives of China, Nepal, Saudi Arabia and the Syrian Arab Republic.

992. At the same meeting, statements in exercise of a second right of reply were made by the representatives of Saudi Arabia and the Syrian Arab Republic.