Cumaraswamy was criticized by the U.S delegation at the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva last week for voicing concerns about a federal court decision denying due process to detainees held at Guantanamo, and criticizing Attorney General John Ashcroft’s characterization of that decision as an important victory in the war against terrorism. In his written reports to the U.N. body Cumaraswamy recently had also criticized President Bush’s order to establish military commissions to try terrorism suspects and a U.S. federal court’s ruling allowing the President to detain Americans without charge.

The Special Rapporteur is charged, among other things, with investigating instances of alleged abuses committed by, or against, lawyers and judges and then reporting his findings to the human rights commission. In this role, Cumaraswamy investigated numerous abuses including attacks against defense lawyers in Northern Ireland and intimidation of judges and lawyers in Zimbabwe, Colombia and other countries.

During debate over a resolution to extend the Special Rapporteur’s mandate an additional three years, the U.S. delegation - headed by Ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick - objected to language stating that the commission “appreciated” the work Cumaraswamy had done. Language benignly stating “appreciation” for the work of Special Rapporteurs is a customary way to say thank you to these investigators, who do not get paid for their service.

But U.S. officials told commission members that in Cumaraswamy’s case they could not “appreciate” his work. In fact, they said they were not even comfortable with language saying they “appreciated the effort” Cumaraswamy made in the job because he had raised concerns about U.S. actions.

“The U.S. government’s position is unacceptable,” said Mike Posner, the Executive Director of the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights. “By attacking Cumaraswamy the U.S. is not making a point of law, or pressing home a human rights concern - it is simply putting U.N. investigators on notice that the U.S. will not tolerate criticism, no matter how warranted it may be.”

U.S. criticism of Cumarswamy came at the close of the rights commission’s annual six week session. The United States has criticized Libya, Cuba and other members of the commission for pursuing seats on the commission so they can exercise that position to shield themselves from criticism for their human rights abuses.

Last week, criticizing certain countries which had pursued "no action motions" to kill resolutions aimed at their poor human rights records, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said, "The United States applauds countries that allow the exploration of their record and considers such courageous actions a step in honouring their pledge as a UN member-state and members of the international community." Yet U.S. criticism of Cumaraswamy seems designed to exempt the United States from such exploration.

“No country welcomes criticism of its human rights performance, but the Commission was created precisely to foster debate about these sensitive issues worldwide. If the UN system is to succeed, its human rights investigators like Param Cumaraswamy need the broad and active support of the US and other rights-oriented governments" added Posner. "Sadly, last week the US failed to provide such support to Mr. Cumaraswamy, a man who has fulfilled his mandate in a principled, professional manner over the last nine years."