UN: Outcomes of the Review of the Human Rights Council

Submitted by crinadmin on Mon, 16/05/2011 - 03:24

Summary: On 25 March, the Human Rights Council adopted a text on the review of the work and functioning of the Council. The agreed text has been passed to the General Assembly, the Council's parent body, to be endorsed and is currently being discussed in New York. This report highlights the key outcomes of the review and what it means for NGOs.

For a more detailed look at the review process and the discussions that have taken place over the last six months, visit our HRC Review 2011 page.

Menu:

Background to review
Review Outcomes / Implications for NGOs
- Universal Periodic Review
- Special Procedures
- Advisory Committee
- Methods and Rules of Procedure
NGO response to review progress
What happens now!
Further Information

Background to review

When the Human Rights Council (HRC) replaced the Commission in March 2006 (resolution 60 / 251), the General Assembly decided that a review of the Council's work and functioning shall take place every five years. The initial review began last year.

The Review outcomes / Implications for NGOs

After many months of discussions and negotiations, the Council adopted a text on the review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council.

Read the final text (outcome document)
Read the full report of the review process (including the views of individual States)

The text is limited in terms of the number of changes that have taken place. Some changes that made it into the final text, include:

1. Universal Periodic Review: (What is the UPR?)

The second cycle of the review will begin in June 2012
The period between reviews has been extended from 4 to 4.5 years
States will be reviewed in the same order as for the first cycle

NOTE: NGOs will subsequently be able to plan their approach in advance as they will know exactly when a particular country is due to be reviewed. Knowing the schedule in advance will also help NGOs to incorporate the UPR into their overall advocacy plans.

The focus of the 2nd cycle will be on the implementation of the accepted recommendations and the developments of the human rights situation in the State

NOTE: Look at the recommendations accepted by States and see what action has been taken to implement them, if any. (CRIN has extracted all the children's rights recommendations)

A separate section will be attributed to the national human rights institution of the State under review in the stakeholder compilation report.

NOTE: With NHRIs being afforded extra exposure, liaise with the NHRI in your country to ensure key issues are raised.

The length of the main Working Group review will be extended beyond 3 hours (to be agreed at 17th HRC session).
The speakers’ list will be revised to ensure that all States who sign up will be able to speak.

NOTE: NGOs now have the opportunity to approach and lobby all UN Member States to raise issues and make recommendations in the review. Look and see which States focus on which issues - see page 27 of CRIN's report.

Further Information:

- Read CRIN's "Guide to using the UPR" - Based on a comprehensive survey of organisations experiences in using the UPR.

- Read CRIN's "Status of Children's Rights in the UPR" - An extensive research and analysis of children's rights in the UPR, including a list of which issues States raise in the recommendations, a list of NGOs and coalitions engaging with the UPR, and a full analysis of which particular rights feature most promiently, and are most neglected.

- Read CRIN's "Children's rights extract reports" - Includes references to children's rights in the reports by the State under Review, the UN bodies, and NGOs / wider civil society. Also details the list of accepted and rejected children's rights recommendations.

2. Special Procedures: (What are these?)

The selection process for special procedure mandate holders will be adjusted, requiring nominated candidates to submit a motivation letter.

3. Advisory Committee (What is this?)

To improve the interaction between the Council and tbe Advisory Committee, the first Committee meeting will take place immediately before the March HRC session, while the second will be held in August.

4. Methods of Work and Rules of Procedure:

The Council shall explore the feasibility of the use of information technology, such as videoconferencing or video messaging, in order to enhance access and participation for all stakeholders

NOTE: National NGOs have less opportunity to attend the UPR sessions in Geneva than International NGOs, and the potential introduction of videoconferencing would be significant for the broader human rights community. CRIN will be following developments in this area.

NGO response to the process

NGOs have engaged closely throughout the process, attending both formal and informal meetings, but were left disappointed by the progress made.

International Service for Human Rights commented:

"The process was marked by a reluctance on the part of States from both ends of the political spectrum to work towards compromise positions. As a result, the potentially most fruitful proposals, including the creation of a mechanism to address urgent and chronic human rights situations, were shelved".

On 18 March, a General Debate under Item 6 took place during the Council's 16th session, with a focus on the UPR. Several NGOs took to the floor to express their disappointment at the outcome of the review process, in particular the lack of progress made in reforming the UPR.

Read the statement by Geneva for Human Rights

Read the full dialogue of the debate.

What happens now!

UN Member States agreed to adopt the text in the Human Rights Council, despite diappointment on all sides. States then suggested the General Assembly endorse the text.

The text is currently being discussed at the General Assembly in New York, with NGOs making futher contributions.

CRIN is following the process and will report on the final conclusions.