Submitted by crinadmin on
Summary: In the discussions on the proposed Human
Rights Council (HRC), a number of issues
regarding the role, composition and working
methods of the proposed body are at stake.
This document offers an overview of some
major issues. For each issue, a summary is
provided of the initial reform proposal made by
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in his report.
In the discussions on the proposed Human Rights Council (HRC), a number
of issues regarding the role, composition and working methods of the
proposed body are at stake. This document offers an overview of some
major issues. For each issue, a summary is provided of the initial reform
proposal made by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in his report In Larger
Freedom (March 2005) and later elaborated on by Annan in an explanatory
note (April 2005). Also provided are summaries of each issue as more
recently construed by UN General Assembly President Jean Ping in his first
draft (June 2005) of the September 2005 UN summit outcome document. A
comment based generally on the reactions of Member States is also
included for each issue. For more information regarding the reform process,
please see the separate background note.
1. Status: What status should the HRC have within the UN system?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: The HRC would either be a principal organ of
the UN or a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly. In the former case,
it would be granted equal status with the Security Council and the
Economic and Social Council. This would require an amendment of the UN
Charter. In the latter case, the reform could be approved by two thirds
majority of the General Assembly.
Draft Outcome Document 1: The HRC would be introduced as a subsidiary
organ of the General Assembly with the potential of later being elevated to
Charter Body status.
Comment: In either case, the reform would be aimed at granting the body
greater authority within the UN system. It would be more difficult to
achieve sufficient consensus to establish the HRC as a new principal organ.
2. Size: What size shoud the HRC be?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: The membership of the HRC would be smaller
than that of the existing Commission on Human Rights to allow for more
focused debate and discussion.
Draft Outcome Document 1: The Council would be “comparable in size” to
the existing Commission.
Comment: Those States that endorse a smaller membership argue that
this would ensure efficiency of the Council. Many States feel, however, that
a smaller body would not be sufficiently representative of the UN Member
States and would therefore lack legitimacy.
3. Election: How should the members of the HRC be elected?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: The members would be directly elected by the
General Assembly by a two thirds majority with the hope that this would
make the body more accountable to and more representative of the full
membership of the UN. The Report makes no concrete proposals about the
length or rotation of terms, or whether members should be elected on a
regional basis, leaving these issues to UN Member States to decide.
Draft Outcome Document 1: The HRC would be elected by a two thirds
majority of the General Assembly “on the basis of equitable geographical
representation.”
Comment: This issue is closely linked to the quesiton of size. Those who
advocate that the size of the current Commission on Human Rights be
retained also tend to emphasize the importance of a geographically
balanced membership.
4. Membership Criteria: Should there be a set criteria for membership
on the HRC?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: The members of the HRC should “undertake to
abide by the highest human rights standards.”
Draft Outcome Document 1: No mention is made of this issue.
Comment: There is little support among States for set membership criteria,
but many seem to agree that those striving for membership should make
voluntary pledges to human rights protection prior to being elected. It has
also been argued that the development of a peer review mechanism (see
below) could resolve the issue of membership criteria.
5. Mandate: What should the mandate of the HRC be?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: The HRC would not only retain the functions and
responsibilities of the current Commission, but also revive the body’s ability
to address serious human rights situations. As its main task, the HRC
would periodically evalute the human rights conditions in all States through
a peer review process, which would be fair, transparent and workable. The
HRC would use the same criteria in assessing the performance of all States
and would take into account the full spectrum of human rights. As another
important function, the HRC would oversee and contribute to the
interpretation and development of human rights standards.
Draft Outcome Document 1: The HRC would deal with any matters related
to the promotion and protection of human rights and periodically review
the fulfillment of all human rights obligations of all States. The Council’s
work would be based on the premise that “all human rights are universal,
indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated, and must be treated in a fair
and equal manner.”
Comment: While many States appear to favor the idea of a peer review
mechanism, it is likely to be difficult to reach consensus about the details of
the implementation of such a system.
6. Sessions: When should the HRC be in session?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: The HRC would be a standing body, able to
meet regularly and at any time.
Draft Outcome Document 1: The HRC would be a standing body.
Comment: While some submit that the HRC should meet whenever
necessry, others suggest that the Council should have a specific number of
sessions per year, with the possibility of holding extra sessions under
special cricumstances.
7. Special Procedures: What role should special procedures play in the
work of the HRC?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: The HRC would “reconsider and refine” specific
procedures “according to its own terms of reference.”
Draft Outcome Document 1: The special procedures would be preserved.
Comment: Many States think that the special procedures represent one of
the strengths of the existing system and should be preserved.
8. Civil Society Participation: What role should civil society play in the
work of the HRC?
In Larger Freedom+ Note: A forum for human rights dialogue among
Member States, and involving civil society, should be retained. According to
the report the increasing prominence of NGOs has “elevated their
involvement in the human rights debate to the center stage” and further,
the role of NGOs is “crucial to providing policy inputs and views from the
fields to Member States.”
Draft Outcome Document 1: The arrangements made by ECOSOC for
consultations with NGOs under the UN Charter would continue to apply.
Comment: Many States have expressed support for maintaing an active
role for NGOs in the work of the HRC.
This note was prepared by the International Helsinki Federation for Human
Rights (IHF), June 2005