Continuing the Fight for Tibet at the UN in Geneva
The Boston University International Human Rights Clinic (“IHRC”) Tibet Team is heading to Geneva! For the past five years, the IHRC Tibet Team has taken a trip every spring to further their advocacy work for Tibetan human rights and self-determination. Each iteration of the IHRC Tibet Team has taken a trip to accomplish a set of specific goals tailored to the current short- and long-term aims of its longtime collaborator, the Tibet Justice Center (“TJC”). This year, the team will be travelling to the United Nations (“UN”) in Geneva to assist TJC in 1) advocating directly with independent human rights experts and 2) further developing a framework for Tibetan self-determination.
The independent human rights experts with whom IHRC and TJC hope to meet are known as Special Rapporteurs (“SRs”). These SR positions were created by mandates from within the Human Rights Council (“HRC”), and are independent from the political mechanisms of the UN. With support from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (“OHCHR”), SRs are tasked with assembling comprehensive reports on contemporary human rights issues. Along with their reports, the SRs provide recommendations to relevant stakeholders on how to improve on sometimes dire human rights situations. The process is essential to the UN model of human rights machinery as it serves to educate both countries they pertain to, as well as other countries within the UN. Instances of systematic or particularly egregious human rights violations can be reduced in part through this “naming and shaming” technique. With 44 thematic and 12 country mandates, SRs cover almost every aspect of human rights including cultural, civil, economic, social, and political rights.
While SRs conduct research on their own, outside assistance constitutes a major cog in this human rights mechanism. With relatively few SRs tasked with covering human rights emergencies and abuses across the globe, the participation of civil society is integral to the process. Accordingly, composing letters to SRs in conjunction with TJC is a prime directive of the IHRC Tibet Team. For the past several years, letters have been sent to strategically-chosen SRs, providing information on specific human rights abuses suffered by Tibetans under Chinese leadership, and making formal requests for action. These letters chronicle abuses suffered by Tibetans since the 1950 occupation of Tibet by Chinese military forces, and strive to highlight the most immediate and onerous threats to Tibetans. A basic “ask” of many submissions is that China consent to SR country visits for independent investigation and verification of reported human rights abuses. Only two SRs have completed visits to China since 2015, and no invitations have been extended since 2010. Requesting such visits is far from fruitless, however, as building up a collection of denials or perpetually-pending requests serves to demonstrate to the international community both the Chinese government’s disregard for UN instruments, and its commitment to covering up ongoing human rights violations.
Addressing human rights issues as soon as they arise is vital for keeping the UN and the world at large abreast of the situation in Tibet. Additionally, while IHRC prepares to assist TJC’s dialogue with SRs in Geneva, it also continues to examine in parallel the question of how to frame Tibet’s claim for self-determination. The human rights violations plaguing Tibet stem ultimately from a denial of their right to self-determination; realization of this right is therefore the ultimate long-term goal.
The first step towards exercising the right to self-determination is to demonstrate that Tibet historically operated as an independent state prior to China’s occupation. The Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States provides the most-accepted framework detailing the requirements to establish an independent state: 1) a permanent population, 2) a defined territory, 3) government, and 4) the capacity to enter into relations with other states. While there is debate on what metrics determine how these requirements are met, experts such as Professor Michael Van Walt Van Praag present substantial evidence demonstrating how Tibet satisfies each criteria. With prior independence established, the team could then turn to framing self-determination in both international humanitarian and human rights law.
In humanitarian law, the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations states unequivocally that “[p]eoples under colonial domination, alien subjugation and those under exploitation have the right to self-determination.” Accordingly, China’s occupation is connected to Tibet’s claim of self-determination; Tibet maintains the right but is unable to exercise it due to China’s occupation. International humanitarian law always considers occupation to be temporary, and sovereignty is retained during that time by the occupied nation.
In human rights law, self-determination is enshrined in the UN charter itself, as well as Article 1 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (“ICESCR”). Common language in both covenants state that “[a]ll people have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status…” Unfortunately, most recent cases where self-determination has been recognized revolve around traditional colonial dynamics, involving largely European states and colonies far removed geographically. The IHRC Tibet Team therefore works to research situations similar to Tibet where these outdated colonial definitions are transcended, and develop a more appropriate modern legal framework. Additionally, while “all people” may appear all-inclusive, the definition of “a people” in human rights law is unresolved. The UNESCO definition provides a useful starting point, and corresponds to the Tibetan experience, which boasts the requirements of a common history, common racial or ethnic identity, cultural homogeneity, linguistic unity, common religion or ideological affinity, territorial connectedness, and common economic attributes.
The IHRC Tibet Team looks forward to advocating with TJC and its partners in Geneva, and working collaboratively to develop further strategy. The cessation of human rights abuses carried out against Tibetans, and the realization of their inherent right to self-determination, the denial of which gives rise to these atrocities, continues to be a powerful motivator for all involved.
