Human rights group urges UN to recognise Taiwanese journalists

A leading Brussels-based human rights NGO has joined a growing chorus of calls for the UN to restore accreditation facilities to Taiwanese journalists.

Every year since 2004, the World HealthOrganisation (WHO) has refused to accredit Taiwanese mediarepresentatives seeking to cover the annual meeting of the WorldHealth Assembly (WHA).

The Brussels-based organisation Human RightsWithout Frontiers International has written to UN secretary generalBan Ki-Moon appealing for the ban to be revoked.

In a letter to the official, the NGO’sdirector Willy Fautre says that “the obstacles obviously come fromfor political reasons but the UN should not be bullied by one ofits member states”.

On 19-24 May, the WHA will meet in to discussa safer future: global public health security in the 21stcentury.

The WHA is the supreme decision-making body ofthe WHO.

Several MEPs, including ALDE leader GrahamWatson and parliament’s vice president Edward McMillan-Scott, havedenounced both the media ban and China’s human rights record.

“I urge you to make sure that Taiwanesejournalists will be granted full access to the WHA conference,”Fautre writes in the letter.

“China is persistently trying to extend itscensorship beyond its territorial borders and to silence any voiceabroad criticizing its human rights policy.”

Meanwhile, TerryDavis, secretary general of the Council of Europe, says a “genuinedemocracy is impossible without freedom of expression”.

Speaking on Saturday –world press freedom day – he said that “some governments maybelieve that they are protecting the public interest when they tryto silence media which they consider to be irresponsible or givingtoo much space to a political force which they consider to be unfitto govern, but such arbitrary actions are undemocratic.

“They are alsocontrary to article 10 of the European convention on human rights,which makes it clear that the right to freedom of expressionincludes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impartinformation and ideas without interference from public authoritiesand regardless of frontiers. It is true that this freedom can berestricted under the convention, but only if it is prescribed bylaw.

“There is no room and there should be no tolerancefor disproportionate and arbitrary interpretations aimed atsilencing the voices of dissent and criticism.”

• Previous article
• Next article