EoV Before the vote on the amendment of OP8B. Statement by Sweden on behalf of the Nordic countries.
Sweden, on behalf of the Nordic countries, strongly opposes the proposal to amend operative paragraph 8b.
Allow me first to reiterate a very basic point:
This is a resolution about extrajudicial, arbitrary or summary executions. We are talking here about intentional and unlawful killings – murder really – with the involvement, impunity or inaction of the State.
Now, this is an important point to make, because it is often claimed that this is a vote on a, so called, “controversial issue”. No – this is a vote (very simply) on the right to life and whether we want to protect it for everyone. Even those that belong to a vulnerable group.
The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions has repeatedly reported that certain groups of individuals are more likely than others to become victims of extrajudicial executions. They are also more likely to be victims of impunity. These many different groups have been specifically mentioned in the resolution for over twenty years.
The list in OP8b is very long, and includes, for example, persons belonging to national, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, refugees, internally displaced persons, migrants, street children, members of Indigenous communities, lawyers, journalists and demonstrators. And yes, the list also includes unlawful executions that are committed because of someone’s real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
This is not a matter of values or opinions. On every single example in OP8b the evidence is clear as day. And in the case of SOGI, the data shows that unlawful killings on this basis are recorded in all regions of the world, and that homophobic and transphobic violence has a high incidence of death. One source of data is the Trans Murder Monitoring report, which over the past 15 years have recorded more than 4600 killings of transgender persons worldwide. So this happens, regardless of how quote-unquote ‘controversial’ we think the term is.
But let me also be clear about what paragraph 8b does not say.
It does not say that the group of individuals included in the list are more deserving of protection than others.
It does not say that any new rights for persons belonging to these groups need to be created.
It does not make any judgement or commentary on broader social or cultural debates.
No, Op8b is purely about the duty of States to protect all individuals from being unlawfully killed, without discrimination or distinction of any kind.
The full listing in this paragraph mirrors reality on the ground, and the pretexts used by the perpetrators. Lives of all these people need protection. It would give a dangerous signal to persons belonging to all the vulnerable groups mentioned in the resolution, if this committee decided that some of them no longer deserve attention, despite their lives being under threat.
Likewise, we believe it is important that States, as part of their duty to protect all individuals from unlawful killings, have an evidence-based understanding of who the victims are most likely to be.
The Nordic countries will therefore vote against the amendment, and we respectfully urge others to do the same. By voting NO we can collectively assert that the right to life applies to everyone, without exceptions.
Thank you Chair.