A/HRC/6/17
page 7
18. In 2006, the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination,
xenophobia and related intolerance expressed concern that Islam and Muslim religious
observance continued in various parts of the world to be erroneously identified with terrorism
(E/CN.4/2006/17, paras. 2 and 23).
19. In his 2006 report (E/CN.4/2006/78, para. 44), the Special Rapporteur on the situation of
human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people expressed his concern at the fact
that, in some countries, the State had sometimes confronted social struggles, claims and protest
of the indigenous organizations with the implementation of terrorist law. He urged that those
laws should not be used to criminalize social protest and the struggles of indigenous peoples.
20. The Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate
standard of living reported of cases of evictions and demolition as a form of punishment of
residents who allegedly supported terrorist groups (E/CN.4/2004/48, para. 37).
21. In her report on her mission to the Russian Federation (E/CN.4/2006/61/Add. 2,
paras. 70-80) the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences,
addressed the economic, social and cultural rights of Chechnyan women in the context of
military operations described by the Government as counter-terrorism measures.
2. Other entities in the United Nations system
22. In its advisory opinion of July 2004, the International Court of Justice concluded that Israel
was in breach of its obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights due to the construction of a wall along and partly inside the Occupied Palestinian
Territory, described by Israel as a counter-terrorism measure.3 The Court found the International
Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights applicable in relation to the conduct of Israel
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and identified a number of economic, social and cultural
rights enshrined in the Covenant and affected by the construction of the wall, namely, the right to
work (arts. 6 and 7); protection and assistance accorded to the family and to children and young
persons (art. 10); the right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing
and housing, and the right “to be free from hunger” (art. 11); the right to health (art. 12); and the
right to education (arts. 13 and 14).4
23. The Court concluded that the restrictions on the enjoyment by the Palestinians living in the
territory occupied by Israel of their economic, social and cultural rights, resulting from the
construction of the wall by Israel failed to meet a condition laid down by article 4 of the
Covenant, that their implementation must be “solely for the purpose of promoting the general
welfare in a democratic society”. According to the Court, the wall, along the route chosen, and
its associated regime were a grave infringement of a number of rights of the Palestinians residing
in the territory occupied by Israel, and the infringements resulting from that route could not be
3
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories,
Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. 2004 Reports, 136, para. 116.
4
Ibid., paras. 112, 130 and 134.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents