For immediate release – UN Human Rights Council, subcommittee on irony production, Phoebe Hasselblad, Chairperson Pro Tem
While irony generation is nothing new at the United Nations, the UN Human Rights Council is pleased to announce that this year we are already on track to not only meet our ambitious annual goals, but to outstrip all previous records. We are breaking irony trends in terms of membership, and activities.
With this year’s membership selections alone, we set our course for previously uncharted irony production, adding highly-ironic members such as China, Cuba, Libya, and Pakistan. In and of itself, this helped us offset the traditionally low-irony states of the UK and the US, resulting in a boost in the average Irony Measurement Unit (IMU) production per nation of 8.34 percent.
Member states’ Irony productivity rates are color-coded in this representation:
*Angola, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Ecuador, France, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, Hungary, Japan, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, Thailand, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay, Zambia
Not Really Trying
Not Sure This Is A Real Country
Our new goals achieve maximum irony output by directing attention away from legitimate human rights concerns such as the exploitation of women and children, and ending persecution of Christians in the Southern Sudan and China, instead concentrating on issues that are sure to be ineffectual and unimportant.
*For instance, the Advisory Committee at its fifth session will review the revised draft set of principles and guidelines for the elimination of discrimination against persons affected by leprosy and their family members with a view to submitting it to the Council for its consideration at its fifteenth session.
*Also, the Human Rights Council adopted without a vote, a resolution on the United Nations declaration on human rights education and training, which decided to establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group to meet for a maximum of 5 working days prior to the 16th session of the Council (in March 2011) to negotiate, finalise and submit to the Council the draft declaration on the basis of the draft submitted by the Advisory Committee.
By calling the working-group open-ended while limiting it to 5 working days, we realized an extra irony output of 7.3 IMUs. Just the notion, however, that the highly ironic member states would help produce a draft resolution to be voted on by the council doubled that already-high number.
*Also, the Human Rights Council requested the Advisory Committee to prepare a draft declaration on human rights education and training entitled “United Nations declaration on human rights education and training”.
(Some member nations suggested that the title should be more ironic, but it was pointed out that first, a more ironic name might be confusing and second, it really IS ironic, since the declaration won’t actually accomplish anything.)
*To this end the Council also requested the Advisory Committee to seek the views and inputs of Member States, relevant international and regional organizations, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, national human rights institutions as well as civil society organizations, including non-governmental organizations, on the possible elements of the content of the declaration (para. 1 (a) of resolution 6/10).
(The idea that member states, especially those in the quite ironic – maximum irony ranges, would provide the inputs for a human rights declaration put us over the top for this year’s irony production quota!)
Below is the Human Rights Education and Training Questionnaire addressed to Governments, (which has set us on a path to nearly double our annual irony production quota:)
*1. Is the right to human rights education and training considered as such in your national system?
2. If yes, which is the legal basis?
???? International law
???? National legislation
???? Administrative practice
[If answer to question 1 is positive]
3a. Which practical modalities have been set in place in terms of implementing the right to human rights education and training?
[If answer to question 1 is negative]
3b. In the absence of an explicit recognition of the right to human rights education and training, what is done in the area of human rights education and training?
4. In the framework of human rights education and training, what are the:
c) Good practices?
d) Prospects for the future?
5. Comments and suggestions on possible new elements for a future declaration on human rights education and training.
Our technicians in the Irony Research and Development Laboratory are particularly proud of this questionnaire, as they should be. They discovered that, by focusing questions on the so-called right to human rights training, instead of on human rights themselves, we would benefit from an 80% increase in irony.
Above and beyond that 80% bonus, question 3a, which focuses on “practical modalities” yielded another 15% increase in irony, due to the fact that none of the nations participating in the survey understood the term, but responded to the question anyway, often generating answers that were highly-efficient irony-producers.
The UN Human Rights Council looks forward to even greater adventures in irony in the near future. Thank you for your support.
* The questionnaire and bureaucratic language were taken from the UN Human Rights Council’s website.
– Congratulations and good luck to Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and other Republicans focusing budget-cutting efforts on wasteful UN programs that, more often than not, are contrary to US interestests.