February 23, 2010
Italy Criticized at Universal Periodic Review
Various aspects of Italy's human rights record came under fire during Italy's recent Universal Periodic Review session, held on February 9 in Geneva, Switzerland.
The Universal Periodic Review is a mechanism established by the United Nations General Assembly in 2006 designed to be a means by which States' human rights records are evaluated by the 47 members of the Human Rights Council through its Universal Periodic Working Group. All UN Member States, however, are invited to take part in the discussion with the States under review. Additionally, groups of three States, known as “troikas,” serve as rapporteurs of the review sessions, eventually preparing “outcome reports” that provide a summary of the discussion held during the sessions. The outcome reports include the questions, comments, and recommendations made by States to the country under review and the responses by the reviewed State. In addition to the evaluations by Member States, international and non-governmental organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are invited to submit shadow reports challenging the record of those countries under review and to offer recommendations to ameliorate abuses that allegedly exist in them. The recommendations are summarized in a report prepared by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights prior to a State’s Universal Periodic Review session. Unfortunately, the recommendations often have serious implications for domestic social and economic policies.
The Commissioner’s Report on Italy offered a wide range of recommendations from non-governmental organizations to end various alleged abuses, including, but not limited to the following:
· Amnesty International (AI) recommended that Italy require by law that oil companies headquartered or domiciled in Italy undertake human rights due diligence measures in respect of all their overseas operations and ensure that people whose human rights are harmed by these companies can access effective remedy in Italy;
· Comitato per la promozione e protezione dei diritti umani (CPPDU) recommended that Italy start a transparent, participatory, and inclusive process, including consultations with civil society, in order to establish an independent national human rights institution;
· The Open Society Justice Initiative and the Unione Forense per la Tutela dei Diritti dell’Uomo (OSJI/UFTDU) recommended that Italy respect and implement decisions of international and regional human rights monitoring bodies;
· The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association recommended that Italy ensure that the outputs of media is pluralistic and non-discriminatory in respect of issues of sexual orientation and gender identity and that speech motivated by homophobia and phobia against transsexuals does not remain unpunished;
· The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children (GIECPC) reported that corporal punishment was unlawful in schools, the penal system, and alternative care settings. However, GEICPC observed that a 1996 Supreme Court judgment, which ruled that corporal punishment was not a legitimate method of discipline in home, has not been enshrined in legislation. GIECPC recommended that Italy introduce legislation clearly prohibiting all corporal punishment in childrearing;
· ILGA Europe and others stated that the Italian legal system did not recognize same-sex marriage or any other form of same-sex partnership, which resulted in discrimination in a number of areas, such as family reunification. In addition, ILGA Europe and others recommended that Italy take all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to respect fully and legally recognize each person’s “self-defined gender identity;”
· According to ILGA Europe and others, recent Italian legislation requires that marches, parades and other events with a religious aspect or that could be against public morals, do not pass near certain buildings. This includes governmental buildings and churches or other important religious buildings. Local authorities have the autonomy to define which buildings are relevant in the context of this legislation. ILGA objected that this legislation represents a significant obstacle to the possibility of having Gay Pride marches and similar events, as demonstrated by the ban of the 2009 Pride march in Rome;
It remains to be seen, of course, if Italy implements some or all of the recommendations offered by the various non-governmental organizations before its next Universal Periodic Review session. Regardless, as a result of the Universal Periodic Review and the various United Nations treaty body review sessions, the sovereign right of States to direct domestic social and economic policies is increasingly under attack, both by non-governmental organizations with various human rights agendas and international organizations such as the United Nations that support them.
A JOINT PROGRAM OF
