Russia is again in the role of a loser

Next Monday, the UN Human Rights Committee would have considered the fifth periodic report of the Russian Federation under the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. But he won't consider it -

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was ratified by the Soviet Union in 1973, and inherited by the Russian Federation as the legal successor of the USSR. Among Russia's international obligations in the field of human rights, the Pact is a fundamental document. It includes a list of fundamental rights and freedoms such as freedom from torture and ill-treatment, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, right to private life, etc.

In order to monitor the implementation by member states of the Covenant of their obligations, there is the UN Human Rights Committee. Once every five years, it collects reports from states on the status of compliance with the Covenant during the reporting periods. Reports are considered at special sessions, and the Committee makes recommendations based on the results.

States put considerable effort into preparing their reports and take the Committee's recommendations seriously. Why? Criticism of the international community and public indication of non-compliance with its own gentlemanly obligations do not suit any state. The obligations were accepted voluntarily, and it would be shameful not to comply with them. No country wants to lose face in the eyes of its partners in the international community. And it’s especially shameful when people publicly point fingers at you, a great power, and shake their heads reproachfully.

How not to lose face? Human rights can be respected. You can convincingly lie that you comply with them. In the latter, Russia, as well as many other countries, has become quite adept. This is usually prevented by human rights activists who provide alternative reports to the Committee's experts. These reports highlight the actual state of affairs, identify problems omitted in government reports, and point out inaccuracies and incorrectness of official information.

On July 15-16 of this year, the Committee was supposed to consider the almost two-delayed fifth periodic report of the Russian Federation. Russian human rights activists were eagerly awaiting this review. They, as usual, prepared a voluminous alternative report, commenting on Russia’s compliance, or rather, Russia’s non-compliance with the main articles of the Pact.

An alternative report was compiled by a coalition of non-governmental organizations, which included the human rights center "Memorial", the Moscow Helsinki Group, the Center for Assistance to International Protection, the Nizhny Novgorod Committee against Torture, the Information and Analytical Center "SOVA", the Interregional group "Human Rights Network", the Center for the Development of Democracy and Rights Human Rights, Independent Expert Legal Council, Glasnost Defense Foundation and the “For Human Rights” movement. The Moscow Helsinki Group coordinated the work and prepared the final version of the report.

In early June, this report was sent to the Committee’s experts, who, according to our information, carefully studied it and rated it quite highly in terms of filling in the gaps in the official report presented by the Russian government.

On July 11, representatives of several human rights organizations that compiled the report should have already arrived in Geneva to meet with experts, give a briefing to the Committee, etc. But no one went anywhere. Because consideration of the Russian report will not take place. Naturally, it was not the Committee that canceled it, but the Russian government itself, which, exactly three working days before the hearings on Russia, orally (!) unexpectedly notified the Committee secretariat that it had not had time to prepare. And, accordingly, he asks for a postponement until the fall: until the next October session of the Committee. I immediately remember three pictures from the textbook “Native Speech”: “We Didn’t Expect”, “They Arrived” and “Deuce Again”.

Unable to present their own report... Didn't do their homework... They're afraid of getting a "failure"... Russian human rights activists are used to a lot of things and don't have the highest opinion of their government, but such a lack of professionalism and outright sloppiness amazed even them. And from the point of view of the rules of diplomacy and the norms of a gentleman's club, the situation is completely unprecedented. Of course, it happened that states (as a rule, those where human rights were not at all good - Uzbekistan, for example) asked the Committee to postpone consideration of their reports. But their requests were submitted a couple of months before the hearing, and not three working days. These three days are apparently our Russian specialty. As you know, we have our own path, and the norms of international community life do not apply to us.

But the amazement of Russian human rights activists is nothing compared to the shock that the UN Human Rights Committee itself experienced. Its main task is to conduct a constructive dialogue with partner states under the Pact. And what kind of constructive dialogue can we talk about when three days before entering the negotiation platform, this platform is closed - because a particular state is unfamiliar with the rules of behavior in a decent society!

According to the Secretary of the Committee, its chairman immediately sent a letter to the Russian mission in Geneva in which he asked not to postpone the hearings. The Russian government ignored the request. It must be said that the “Russian path” was not liked in Geneva so much that the committee is now going to review its procedures in order to henceforth be able to refuse the state to postpone hearings if a request for this is not made in advance.

Everyone can decide for themselves what plunged Russia into a diplomatic scandal - Byzantine cunning, interdepartmental confusion or a desire to once again wipe its feet on the international community. One thing is clear: in an attempt to avoid deserved criticism from the Committee, our country has placed itself in a position “below all criticism.”