There was a disruption by pro-Palestinian activists at the ceremony marking the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Parliament in Vienna. Among other things, the group threw leaflets from the gallery into the meeting room.
The activists unfurled banners and chanted slogans such as “Stop the genocide” and “You are complicit” before being escorted out of the hall. Previously, they had thrown leaflets from the gallery into the meeting room, where the ceremony for the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was taking place. Jewish group in solidarity with Palestinians The group, which is called “Not in Our Name”, is based on a movement that was founded in the USA, Dalia Sarig-Fellner, activist of the Jewish group “Not in Our Name Vienna” told Puls24. The action only briefly disrupted the ceremony, but National Council President Wolfgang Sobotka (ÖVP) still found clear words: “You should be ashamed. What the Hamas terror regime has done is a serious violation of human rights, a law of war that is being abused,” said Sobotka. “It is doubtful whether it will be passed today.” The event then continued without any further interruptions. One of the keynote speakers was Elisabeth Hoffberger-Pippan, research associate at the Peace Research Institute Frankfurt. She said that given the polarization of society, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights could probably no longer be adopted today: “It is doubtful whether a similarly comprehensive document could still be adopted today.” A look at the declaration adopted at the time makes it clear that many rights that are now taken for granted were not yet included at the time. Justice Minister Alma Zadic (Greens) also doubted whether this would be possible today. But human rights are a living document that is constantly being developed – for example by the European Court of Human Rights. Emeritus international law professor Wolfgang Benedek described the issue of migration as a “test for human rights” – namely “with regard to the question of whether we are really ready are to live them”. A restriction is dangerous – “because you can ask yourself who is the next group for whom you think this would be beneficial”. The European and international law expert Walter Obwexer (University of Innsbruck) saw this somewhat differently. A distinction must be made between migration into the labor market and the right to asylum.
source site-12