2nd Training Course on “Using International Mechanisms for Human Rights - Scope and Limitations for Indian NGO’s".
Item
- Title
-
2nd Training Course on
“Using International Mechanisms for
Human Rights - Scope and Limitations
for Indian NGO’s".
- extracted text
-
ii
ii
RESOURCE KIT
n
1
H
ii
ii
h r
H
"!<
'"i*J
2nd Training Course on
“Using International Mechanisms for
Human Rights - Scope and Limitations
for Indian NGO’s".
17 and 18 September 2011
: i-
KROSS, Bangalore
I
I
I
I
Organised by
I
SICHREM
SOUTH INDIA CELL FOR HUMAN
RIGHTS EDUCATION & MONITORING
I
I
I
c>
I
I
Y WJ SICHREM
I/F, Anjanappa Complex, 35 Hennur Main Road,
Lingarajapuram, St.Thomas Town Post,
Bangalore - 560084, Karnataka
Phone: 080-25473922 / 25804072-73
Fax: 080-25492856
Email :msichrem@gmail .com, contact@sichrem.org
Blog: http: //sichrem. wordpress. com
Website: www.sichrem.org
I
I
RESOURCE KIT CONTENTS
Title
About SICHREM______________________________________
About the Course_____________ ______________________ ___
OHCHR______________________________________________
Human Rights Treaty Bodies________________________ _
Human Rights Council________________________
Special Procedures_______ A_________________________ _
Universal Periodic Review(UPR)__________________________
Information on Individual Complaints under Treaty Bodies
Model Complaint_______________________________________
Complaint Guidelines______________________
Annex II Samples of Meta-Data Sheets on Identified indicators
SR Statement on HRD:________________________
_____
SR Statement on Toxic Waste:____________________________
WGHR report on UPR consultative workshop, April 2011
WGHR report on implementation of recommendations:
WGHR submission to HRC:________________ ____________
Programme for 1 Sth Session of UN HRC:_________________
No
A
1
_2
3
4
5
6
7
S
9
10
J_1
12
13
14
15
Page Numbers
A
B-C
I- 10
II- 53
54-73
74 -103
104-128
129- 137
'
138-139
140-141
142-152
153-156 _
157________
158-164
165-167
168-170
171
For Additional and More Information.
1.
Working with the
UN HR Programme
by the OHCHR
(2008) available at
www.ohchr.org.
8. Mission Reports on India
a. Right to Food (2005 / Ziegler) E/ CN. 4/ 2006 /44/ Add.2
b. Freedom of Religion or Belief (2008 / Asma Jahangir) /VHRC/10/8/Add.3
c. Health (2007 / Hunt) A/HRC/7/1 l/Add.4
9. April 2008 UPR documents: http://www.wghr.org/pdfZ2.%20UPR.pdf
2. The UN HR System - How
to make it work for you
(2008) by UN NGO Liaison
Service
(NG LS)http://www.unnhls.org.
10. WGHR submission to HRC:
h ttp://ww,w.w,ghr.org/pdf/WGHR%20 written %20submission %20HRC%20%20Mav%20201 l.pdf
11. WGHR report on implementation of recommendations:
http://www.wghr.org/pdf/WGHR-charf-status-implenientation-18-recommendations.pd f
3. Special Procedures: Facts
and Figures 2009 www.ohchr.org.
12. WGHR report on UPR consultative workshop, April 2011
http://www.wghr.org/pdf/Report%20on%20UPR%20Workshop.pdf
4. Fact sheet No 29 on
Human Rights Defenders
13. UN Special Procedures Facts & Figures 2010:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/special/docs/Facts Figures2010.pdf
5. GA resolution A / 60 / 2^1^ 14. SR Statement on HRD: http://wghr.org/unspecialrapporteur.html
on the Council.
15. SR Statement on Toxic Waste:
http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewslD=9880&LangID=E
6. UPR - http:// www.ohchr.
org/ EN/HR Bodies/UPR
16. Programme for 18th Session of UN HRC:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/l8session/PoW18HRC.pdf Af
7. UPR April 2008 India - 3
compilations UPR / OHCHR
-> A/HRC/WG.6/1/IND/2
27.3.2008 (Govt., NGOs,
OHCHR)A/HRC/8/26 and
Add 1 & 2. (Outcome June
| 2008)
SICHREM
‘Making Human Rights a Household Concept’
SICHREM-South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring was established in 1995, as an answer
to the growing insensitivity to the supremacy of the rule of law. The founders reckoned that the best
remedy for building a responsible civil society would be through a process of education, sensitization and
intervention.
SICHREM’s vision is to create a fearless society where the rights of the last and the least will be respected
without any kind of bias and hopes to make human rights a household concept by adopting a proactive
stance on the restoration of rights and by advocating a rights-based value system. SICHREM believes that
the domain of human rights extends‘to all realms of the society to embrace social, cultural, economic, civil
and political rights. Thus, it consciously takes a pro-poor, gender-sensitive and pro-child stance.
Coinciding with the declaration of UN Decade for Human Rights Education, SICHREM launched its human
rights education program in 1995, since then has initiated innovative projects and activities to address the
issues of dignity and rights of the marginalized communities.
Objective:
■
Human rights education for students, activists, NGO’s staff, government officers ftlarger public.
■
Monitoring status of human rights in South India continuously and document the same.
■
Undertake advocacy for the victims of human rights violation and obtain justice for them.
■
Campaign and lobby in regional, national and international policy matters on human rights.
■
Campaign for reforms in law and implementation of UN Conventions and treaties on human rights.
Maintains a documentation center and disseminates information info and other supports services to
human rights groups and activists, students and several public.
■
Conducts fact-finding on incidents of human rights and take follow-up action.
■
Support the struggle for justice and the right to livelihood by people’s organisation and of
underprivileged section.
■
Networking with rights groups and activists and explore areas of mutual support and common
activities.
Core Activities:
■ Human Rights Training
■ Monitoring of Human Rights violations
■ District Human Rights Centers
■ Human Rights Legal Clinics
■ Human Rights Helpline
■ Human Right Educations in Schools
■ National Programme on Preventing Torture in India
■ The Right to Education(RTE)
■ The Aflatoon Program
■ The Documentation Centre
■ Advocacy, Campaign and Lobbying
■ Networking
IFSICHREM
South India Cell for Human Rights Education & Monitoring (SICHREM)
35,1st Floor, Anjanappa Complex, Hennur Main Road, Lingarajapuram,
St.Thomas Town Post, Bangalore - 560084, Karnataka
Ph: 080-25473922 / 25804072-73Fax: 080-25492856
Email:contact@sichrem.org, www.sichrem. orq Blog: http://sichrem.wordpress.com
n
About the Trainer: Dr. Rajkumar is the former Secretary-General of Pax Romana
(INGO), and has been a Visiting Staff to the Mahidol University, Thailand for teaching
MA (Human Rights). He served as an Independent Expert to the UN. He has served
as the Advisor and Consultant to Forum Asia, Pax Romana and People's Watch. He
was a member of the Working Group on Human Rights in India and the UN and
presently associated with People's Tribunal on Torture as Juror. He is Involved with a
number of programmes of People's Watch and the Institute of Human Rights
Education(IHRE) as a Facilitator, especially on Human Rights Education. Human
Rights Defenders, Fisherfolk, etc. He provides assistance to organisations such as
NCDHR, IDSN, etc. on Dalit rights, etc.
■ 4-...
trWi ■
yv SICHREM
If
y.'.
fay’
* * *
About SICHREM: SICHREM has a track record of offering quality and pioneering
training programmes for the past 15 years. From 2005, realizing the need for
spreading knowledge of human rights and on feeling the need for monitoring all
human rights related to civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and the
engagement with the State, SICHREM began to partner with qualified and
experienced institutions, and expert resource persons, to offer training programs in
human rights. The training programs organised by SICHREM attract demand from
various organisations and institutions. The participants in their feedback state that the
trainings helped them in upscaling their knowledge and skills on human rights and
also transforming their attitudes. Encouraged by this positive experience, SICHREM
continues in its efforts to facilitate short-term training courses in human rights.
SICHREM is also involved in monitoring the status of human rights, advocacy,
campaign, legal aid for victims and human rights education.
For more info visit:
Blog: http://sichrem.wordpress.com/
Website: www.sichrem.org
SICHREM
South India Cell for Human Rights Education and Monitoring (SICHREM)
l/F, Anjanappa Complex, 35 Hennur Mam Road, Lingarajapuram,
St.Thomas Town Post, Bangalore - 560084, Karnataka
Phone: 080-25473922/25804072-73, Mobile: 9449816942
E-mail: contact@sichrem.org / msichrem@gmail.com
d
Blog - http://sichrem.wordpress.com Website: www.sichrem.org
O
Training in "Using
International
Mechanism for Human
Rights- Scope and
Limitations for Indian
NG Os "
17-18 September 2011: Bangalore
South Indian Cell for Human Rights
Education and Monitoring (SICHREM)
South India Cell for Human Bights Education and Monitoring - SICHREM
Announcing the 2nd Training Course: "Using
International Mechanisms for Human Rights
Scope and Limitations for Indian NGO's".
17th -IS1'1 September 2011 | Bangalore |
| Trainer: Dr. Rajkumar |
The protection and promotion of human rights is a core task of the UN. Over the past
half century the UN has been active in drafting and adopting human rights standards
and norms, and a considerable number of institutions, procedures and mechanisms
have been (and continue to be) created in the field of human rights. This training
program is an introduction to the United Nations (UN) human rights system and
specifically on the use of international mechanisms.
This course will provide an overview and introduction to the UN human rights system
It will introduce the core UN human rights standards and discuss their universality It
will present the UN treaty bodies which monitor compliance with human rights treaties,
the Human Rights Council and its mandate, and the subsidiary bodies. It will highlight
the role of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and discuss the place of specific
group's rights in the UN system, the mainstreaming of human rights in UN specialized
agencies, programmes and the role of civil society in the UN Human rights framework.
The course is intended to provide participants with the necessary skills to understand
the UN human rights system and the standards and institutions, procedures and
mechanisms, the role of human rights in the wider UN system, and on the potential
and limits of the United Nations in protecting and promoting human rights. Participants
will learn how law. policy and diplomacy come together and have shaped the UN
human rights system, and how the system can be explained in theory and the
functions in practice Most importantly the limitation for Indian NGO’s will be
considered.
Who should apply:
The course is aimed at university students of international relations, international law,
politics and other areas, as well as NGO staff members, staff of national and
international organizations and any others who want to gain an in-depth knowledge of
the UN human rights systems Participants should have a good command of English
The number of participants is limited to 30 SICHREM aims to ensure equal gender
and geographical distribution among the participants and also reserves the right to
invite some participants to the program
Course content:
Brief Historical Note on Origins
r
Overview of International Human Rights Instruments - What are they? (Round-up)
r-
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights - International Mechanisms
The UN Human Rights Architecture
Focus on the Human Rights Council (HRC) and
its mechanisms
Applications
Mechanisms derived from specific treaties
z'
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
z'
Other International mechanisms - overview
<
Specific groups and mechanisms
r
Linkages to Domestic mechanisms
Methodology:
The trainer instructor will provide information in the form of presentations and with material
and "mini-lectures" and will guide participants through the required skills. During the course
the staff from S1CHREM will be available to participants in Q&A sessions for sharing
experiences All participants will receive a Certificate of Participation.
Costs:
The course fee is Rs. 3000/- for resident participants and Rs 1600/- for non-resident
participants Unfortunately, there are no scholarships available for this course The
accommodation is available only from 17'’ Morning to the Evening of 18 September 2011
Venue
Karnataka Regional Organisation For Social Service (KROSS),
No 58/6, 2nd Cross, Da Costa Layout, Wheeler Road Extension, Bangalore: 560 084.
Phone: 91 80 25496812 /13, Email:krossdir@gmail.com
Directions: (Map will be sent later)
How to apply:
Please complete the application form and send it to R MANOHAR. Head of Programs, with a
valid signature and a stamp from your organization, in support of your application and jhe
Demand C’
' Cheque drawn in favour of ’SICHREM’ payable at Bangalore Application
deadline: ’
st 2r
Mi
p
HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
'r
Mandate of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
C
I'hc High. C’cmmiNSioncr is
mandated by t'.cncr.ii «
Assembly resolution
48/14 1 to:
■ Promote and protect uli
human rights for ulf
Make rcc o m m c n d a t i o n s
to the competent bodies
ol the United Nations
system (or improving
the promotion anti
protection of all human
rights;
Promote and protect the
right to development;
Provide technical
assistance for human
rights activities:
- Coordinate United
Nations human rights
education and public
information
programmes;
Play an active role in
removing obstacles to
the realization of human
rights;
:• Play an active role in
preventing the
continuation of human
rights violations;
•> Engage in dialogue with
Governments with the
aim of securing respect
for all human rights;
i Enhance international
cooperation;
5 Coordinate human rights
promotion and
protection activities
throughout the United
Nations system; and
* Rationalize, adapt,
strengthen and
streamline the United
Nations human rights
machinery.
C. OHCHR work and activities
OHCHR seeks the implementation of human rights standards in the daily lives of all people
everywhere. Working towards this goal, it collaborates with Governments, parliaments,
judicial authorities, police and prison officials, NHRIs, NGOs and a broad range of other
civil society actors, in addition to United Nations partners, to build awareness of and
respect for human rights. OHCHR empowers individuals to claim their rights and assists
States in upholding their human rights obligations.
Local, national and international human rights NGOs are a vital part of the international
human rights movement and an essential partner for OHCHR. They alert the world to
human rights violations. They defend victims, promote rights through education, and
campaign for improvements and advancements. The relationship between OHCHR and
civil society is a dynamic and collaborative one, which infuses all parts of OHCHR.
OHCHR areas of work span the full spectrum of human rights. Each activity is interrelated
and complementary, and forms an integral part of its mission.
Its thematic work identifies and targets gaps in the existing human rights system, leading
protection and research and addressing contemporary issues, such as climate change and
gender-based violence, from within a human rights framework.
1
(5
Working \\ irh die L'nited Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbookfor Civil Society
i*
Human rights treaty body
Founding treaty
Subcommittee on Prevention
of Torture, established in
2006
Optional Protocol to the
Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or
Punishment (OPCAT) (which
establishes national and
international monitoring
mechanisms), adopted in
Optional protocol(s)
to founding treaty
V
k
2002
5
Committee on the Rights of
the Child, established in
1991
Convention on the Rights of
the Child (CRC), adopted in
1989
.'i
Optional Protocol to the
Convention on the Rights of
the Child on the involvement
of children in armed conflict,
adopted in 2000
It
k-
»r
Optional Protocol to the
Convention on the Rights of
the Child on the sale of
children, child prostitution
and child pornography,
adopted in 2000
Committee on the Protection
of the Rights of All Migrant
Workers and Members of
Their Families, established in
No optional protocol
2004
International Convention on
the Protection of the Rights
of All Migrant Workers and
Members of Their Families
(ICRMW), adopted in 1990
Committee on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities,
established in 2008
Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities,
adopted in 2006
Optional Protocol to the
Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities
(which allows for individual
complaints), adopted in 2006
Committee on Enforced
Disappearances (by
September 2008, not yet
established)
International Convention for
the Protection of All Persons
from Enforced
Disappearance, adopted in
2006 (by September 2008,
not yet in force)
No optional protocol
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
OHCHR information on the human rights treaty- bodies
Aloic information about international human rights treaties and the human rights treaty
bodice is available on the* OHCHR website and in the following OHCHR fact sheets:
No. 10 (Rev. 1): The Rights of the Child
No. 12: The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
No. 15 (Rev.l): Civil and Political Rights: The Human Rights Committee
o No. 16 (Rev.l): The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
No. 17: The Committee against Torture
No. 22: Discrimination against Women: The Convention and the Committee
No. 24 (Rev.l): The International Convention on Migrant Workers and its
Committee
. No. 50: Hie United Nations Human Rights Treaty System: An introduction to
the core human rights treaties and the treaty bodies, and
No. (Rev.l): Complaint Procedures.
Please visil the OHCHR website for a currcni list of OHCHR fact sheets.
JSr
Io ieain more about State party reporting, see the Report on the working methods of the
human rights treaty bodies relating to the State party reporting process (HRI/MC/2008/4).
The human rights treaty bodies perform a number of functions to monitor how States
parties implement treaties. Although they coordinate their activities, their procedures and
practices differ. Some of the key differences relevant to the work of civil society are set out
in the annex at the end of this chapter.
<3
1. State party reporting obligations
Once a State has ratified or acceded to a treaty, in addition to its obligation to implement
the substantive provisions of the treaty, it assumes the obligation to submit periodic
reports to the relevant committee concerning the measures taken towards implementation.
The reports must set out the legal, administrative, judicial and other measures that the
State has adopted to implement the treaty provisions and provide information on the
difficulties it has encountered. These reports are ultimately examined by the relevant
committee in the presence of a delegation representing the State.
An initial report is usually required one to two years after the entry into force of the treaty
in the State concerned. The periodicity of subsequent reports varies from two to five years
depending on the treaty provisions and the decisions taken by the committees. Several
c-
L-
i
I
I
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programine
A Handbook for Civil Society
t
«
<
committees accept combined reports, meaning that a State party may submit two or more
of its periodic reports due to a given committee in one combined report. Most treaty bodies
identify when the next report is due in their concluding observations
States parties are encouraged to see the preparation of their reports for the treaty bodies
not only as the fulfilment of an international obligation, but also as an opportunity to
assess the state of human rights protection within their countries for the purpose of policy
planning
t
%
t
I
2. Consideration of States parties' reports by the treaty bodies
f
In advance of the session at which a committee will consider a State party's report(s), the
committee prepares a list of issues and questions, which is transmitted to the State party.
A State party will usually submit its responses to this list in writing; these answers are
posted on the OHCHR website.
t
t
I
*
The written responses to lists of issues supplement the State party’s report and are
especially important when there has been a long delay between the submission of the
periodic report and its examination.
The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Committee on the Rights of the Child each
convene a one-week, pre-sessional working group to prepare lists of issues and questions
with respect to the reports of the States parties that they will consider in the immediate
future. The Human Rights Committee assigns this to its country report task forces,15
which meet during the session preceding the one at which the given State’s report will be
examined.
Most committees appoint one of their members as country rapporteur to take the lead in
drawing up the list of issues for a specific country.
In addition to the State party’s report, human rights treaty bodies may receive information
on the implementation of treaty provisions from United Nations agencies, funds and
programmes and other intergovernmental organizations, national human rights institutions
■ (NHRIs), as well as from civil society, particularly NGOs (both national and international),
professional associations and academic institutions.
*' C.ouiHrx rcpoii i.i-'k loixcs
< >1 .1 countn r;ip|x>ilcui and lour lo >ix other iiKinbcis ol the
ComniiUuc noimnaud In ik (Juirpcrson.
I
07
r
A
■
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
• "T
- - v71 j y
(jj/^btates parties are invited to,the committee’s session to present their reports, to respond to
committee members' questions, and to provide the committee with additional information,
in the light of all the information available, the committee examines the report together
with Government representatives. The aim is to engage in a constructive dialogue in order
to assist a State in its efforts to implement a treaty as fully and effectively as possible.
Treaty bodies are not judicial bodies; they monitor treaty implementation and provide
encouragement and advice to States.
Regularly updated information on upcoming human rights treaty body
sessions and the States scheduled to appear at those sessions is available on
the human rights treaty bodies section of the OHCHR website.
Based on their dialogue with a State, and any other information they have received, human
rights treaty bodies adopt what are generally known as concluding observations,10 which
refer to both positive aspects of a State’s implementation of a treaty and areas where the
treaty body recommends the State to take further action. It is important for the State party
to report back to the committee in subsequent periodic reports on the steps taken to
implement these recommendations, as well as the treaty's provisions.
In order to assist States in implementing their recommendations, the human rights treaty
bodies have begun to introduce procedures to ensure effective follow-up to their concluding
observations. Some committees request, in their concluding observations, that States
report back to the country or follow-up rapporteur within an agreed time frame on the
measures taken in response to specific recommendations or “priority concerns”. The
rapporteur then reports back to the committee.
Some members of treaty bodies have undertaken visits to countries, at the invitation of the
State party, in order to follow up on the report and the implementation of concluding
observations.
16 Also referred i< > ;is
inc luding comiiK-nis" In sninc coinmiUccs in accordance wiih die wording ol
their trcjlies
4? I
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
' he general comments and general recommendations adopted by the
human rights treaty bodies are compiled annually. To access them and
information on upcoming days of discussion visit the : . ..•..t-; ngio
.
section of the OHCHR website.
8. Days of general discussion/thematic debates
3
A number of human rights treaty bodies hold days of general discussion on a particular
theme or issue of concern. These thematic discussions are usually open to external
participants, such as United Nations partners, delegations from States parties and civil
society actors, particularly NGOs, academic institutions, professional associations and
individual experts. Their outcome may assist the human rights treaty body in the drafting
of a new general comment. It can also help States and other stakeholders understand the
treaty’s requirements.
9. Annual meeting of chairpersons of human rights treaty bodies and
inter-committee meeting
The Annual Meeting of Chairpersons of the human rights treaty bodies takes place in
Geneva and provides a forum for members of the human rights treaty bodies to discuss
their work and consider ways to make the treaty body system as a whole more effective.
Issues addressed at these meetings have included the streamlining and overall
improvement of human rights reporting procedures, harmonization of the committees’
methods of work, follow-up to world conferences and financial issues. Informal
consultations with States parties as well as United Nations partners and NGOs have also
been a feature of the meeting of chairpersons.
Inter-committee meetings include the chairpersons of each of the human rights treaty
bodies and two additional members from each committee. The larger committee
representation at inter-committee meetings allows for more detailed discussion of
recommendations on issues relating to working methods and other issues than is possible
at the annual meetings of chairpersons.
For current information on the annual meeting of chairpersons of human rights
treaty bodies and inter-committee meeting visit OHCHR’s website.
HUMAN RIGHTS TREA1Y BODIES
10. Treaty body reform
The procedures and working methods of the human rights treaty bodies have been under
discussion as part of the system-wide reform that the United Nations has undertaken in
recent yearsY Human right's treaty body reform has to date focused on the coordination
and harmonization of working methods, including the adoption of “best practices” and the
streamlining of State party reporting requirements through the use of a common core
document and targeted treaty-specific reports.20
Additionally, the human rights treaty bodies are working to establish effective cooperation
between themselves and the Human Rights Council, in particular with regard to the new
universal periodic review, and to develop modalities for enhanced interaction with special
procedures mandate-holders/- In the light of the proliferation of human rights treaty
bodies and procedures, more structural reforms have also been discussed, including, as
proposed in 2005 by me then High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Louise Arbour,
the creation of a unified standing treaty body.
<?
1,1 In his 2002 rupoii. "MivngllKning the I nitcd Nations, an agenda for further change" (A. S7 AS? and
Corr 1 >. the then I oiled Nations secret ary-Genera I. Mr. Kofi Annan, called on the human rights
treaty bodies to craft a more (ooidinatcd approach to their acli\ ilics. In March 2U0S. in his rcpoii "In
larger hucdoni: io\\jrcl> (.kxelopmeni, '.ccurily and human rights for all", the Secretary-General
requested that
harmonized guidelines on reporting to all treaty bodies should be finalized and
implemented so that these bodies can function as a unified system" (A/59 2005. para. 147).
"“.See ' Harmonized guideline on reporting under the international human rights treaties, including
guidelines on a common core document and treaty-specific targeted doc uments'’ (HR1/MC/2005. 3).
■* See "F.lfcclive iinplcincntation ol international instruments on human rights, inc luding reporting
obligation-' under inte-rnalional instruments on human rights' (A.62. 224).
YU!
- •''
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
f
C. H(n\ to access and work with the human rights treaty bodies
Working with human rights treaty bodies has proved to be a very effective way for civil
society to contribute to the implementation of human rights and the development of
concrete human rights guidelines. Nationally, civil society plays a critical role through
monitoring, promotional and follow-up activities relevant to the work of treaty bodies. The
work of the human rights treaty bodies has benefited from the active participation of civil
society actors in the various stages of the reporting cycle and in processes such as
petitions, inquiries and early warning.
NGOs have traditionally been the main civil society actorsengaging with the human rights
treaty bodies, in particular at treaty body sessions. Other civil society actors, such as
individual experts and human rights defenders, representatives of academic and research
institutions, and members of professional groups, also frequently contribute to the treaty
reporting process. Their involvement, in particular with regard to submitting information to
a committee or attending a session, is often facilitated by NGOs familiar with and active in
the reporting system of the human rights treaty bodies.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Convention on the Protection
of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and the Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities expressly envisage a role for “other competent
bodies” in the work of their respective treaty bodies, which in the case of the first two has
been interpreted to mean NGOs. Furthermore, the Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights and the Committee on the Rights of the Child have adopted guidelines
regarding civil society participation in their work (in these cases focused specifically on
NGOs).22
f
f
r
?
p
p
3
3
i
I
The modalities for the interaction of civil society actors vary from one human rights treaty
body to another They are set out in the annex to this chapter.
1. Promoting the adoption of new international instruments and the
ratification of or accession to existing treaties
Civil society can play an important role in the development and adoption of new
international instruments. By advocating for the development of a new treaty and
promoting its adoption by States, civil society actors can help to bolster international
norms and the protection of human rights.
NCi() paiik ipuiion iii ilk .kiuiitcs ul the (kiniiiiiucc on Kconomic. Social and Cultural Rights
( E C.!2 2000 (») and the Guidelines tor the partn.ipution of partners (NGOs and individual experts)
in the pre-scssional working group of die C.onunitlcc on the Rights ol the Child (C.R(< C/90, annex
VIII).
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY Bv
The role of civil society in developing new international human
rights standards
Convention on the
Rights of Persons with
Disabilities and its
Optional Protocol
negotiations of the texts
and are now active in
promoting their ratification
bv States.
hi December 2006. the
General Assembly adopted
rhe Convention on the
Rights of Persons with
Disabilities and its Optional
Protocol. Civil society, in
particular persons w ith
disabilities and their
representative
organizations, played a vital
role at every stage in the
lead-up to the adoption of
these instruments.
Rcpresentatix es of civil
society participated in the
fhc Convention on the
Rights of Persons with
Disabilities was negotiated
from 2002 to 2006, making
it the fastest negotiated
human rights treaty. On the
occasion of its adoption, the
then High Commissioner,
Ms. Louise Arbour, noted
the unprecedented
collaboration between
States, the United Nations,
eix il society and NHRIs in
the drafting of this new
treaty, stating:
/ u:anl to. pay tribute to
the disabilities community
that proi ided the
1111 ma ueri i tg i / npet us Ju r
this momentous occasion.
Their role mas a
transformative one. More
so than by any declaration
or statement, the
disabili./ ies movement
proved able—in evety sense
of the word—to fight
inertia, indifference and
often open resistance, in
order to achieve, by the
force of the law. their
legitimate aspiration for
equality and justice.
i
s
W orking with the United Nations Htunan Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from
Enforced Disappearance
Civil society acu>rs, in (
particular associations of
rhe families of victims ot
e n f<) reed disa ppea ra n ce.
were active participants in
the sessions of the
Working Group of the
former Commission on
Human Rights which
drafted the Convention.
Ms. Marla Ocampo de
Vasquez, w hose daughter
was a victim of enforced
disappearance in
Argentina, had been
advocating an end to the
practice of enforced
disappearance and for the
adoption of an
international instrument
addressing this issue for 30
years, representing the
American Federation of
Associations for Relatives
of the
Detained-Disappeared
(FEDEFAM) at Working
Group sessions. At the
inaugural session ot the
Human Rights Council, on
22 lune 2006. before the
adoption of the
Convention, Ms. de
Vasqucz said:
In May 19771joined the
fledging movement of the
Mothers of the Plaza de
Mayo.. Together tvith those
fellotr women I began a
learning process. I began to
realize lhat 1 was not only
searching for my own
daughter and son-in-law,
but for all the disappeared
sons and daughters of
Argentina, and of Latin
America, and today for all
the "Desaparecidos ’’
around the world.
I would like you to know
that after the occurrence of
the detention and
disappearance of a loved
one, we came to the
painful conclusion that
there were no answers to be
found. \o recourse existed,
nor was the habeas corpus
a 771 orjitdie ia ry protect io n
order valid. It was then in
our despair that we
reached out to (he
i11temational community
but only to discover that no
suitable instruments
existed there. 'That is why
we are here once again,
Mr. President, rec[uestlrig
you and the distinguished
delegates of the Human
Rights Council to finally
approve the Convention.
We have travelled a long
road with both
achievements and
disillusionments but today
we turn to all ofyou in
order that in our world __
there be no more victims of
the crime against
humanity of enforced
disappea ra rices.
If a State has not yet ratified or acceded to a treaty or an optional protocol, national civil
society actors can encourage the Government to do so by coordinating their efforts with
NHRIs and the national media and/or by raising public awareness of the issue.
To see the ratification status of human rights treaties and optional protocols
visit OHCHR’s website.
i
i
«
¥
?
I
1
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
2. Monitoring the reporting obligations of States parties
States parties are not always able—for different reasons—to meet their reporting
obligations. Civil society may work to encourage Governments to meet reporting deadlines,
and can raise public awareness about a State's obligation to submit a report at a given
time. Civil society actors can also provide States with complementary information on treaty
implementation gathered in the course of their activities, and work in partnership with
States towards treaty implementation.
If a State party has not submitted a report for an excessive period of time and has not
responded to a committee’s requests for a report, human rights treaty bodies may consider
the situation in the country at one of its sessions in the absence of a report from the State
party This procedure is known as the review procedure.
Civil society actors, along with United Nations partner organizations, can contribute
information towards the review procedure. On the basis of this information and the
dialogue with the State party, the committee will issue its concluding observations,
including recommendations.
3. Submitting written information
Throughout the reporting cycle, committees welcome additional information on all areas
covered by their respective treaties in order to effectively monitor implementation in States.
The most effective way for civil society actors to submit additional information is through a
written report. The most useful reports are often those produced through the cooperation
and coordination of many civil society actors. Civil society actors are thus encouraged to
submit jointly written information on a given country.
The modalities for submitting information vary from one human rights treaty body to
another. Generally, civil society actors should submit information and material following
the submission of the State party report to a treaty body and before its consideration.
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on the
Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the Committee on the Rights of the
Child welcome written information from national and international NGOs, as well as from
other civil society actors (in particular individual experts, academic institutions,
professional associations and parliamentarians) at their pre-sessional working gm ; r '
the preparation of lists of issues. The Committee on the Rights of the Child requires written
information to be submitted two months before its pre-sessional working group. Civil
society actors, including academic institutions and professional associations, can also
submit written information to the country report task forces of the Committee against
Torture and the Human Rights Committee.
•«>
Working with the United Nations l luinan Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
Written information submitted to human rights treaty bodies is generally regarded as public
information. However, committees will keep information confidential if specifically
requested to do so
Written reports submitted by civil society actors do not become official United Nations
documentation, nor are they edited or translated. It is therefore important for civil society
actors to consider which language(s) to submit their information in and to ensure that their
submissions are in one of the working languages of the relevant committee(s).
Ml
Before submitting written information, it is important to check:
* Whether the State has ratified or acceded to the relevant instrument, and, if so, the
extent of any reservations the State has made to its provisions. (Generally,
reservations do not prevent civil society actors from addressing specific issues and
from bringing them to the attention of the committee);
When the next State report is due and when the next session of the relevant
committee is scheduled. These dates are subject to change at short notice so it is
important to be in regular contact with the relevant committee’s secretariat in the
lead-up to each session:
The main issues which are or have been under consideration. It is important for civil
society actors to familiarize themselves with the contents of previous States parties
reports, as well as the previous concluding observations and previous lists of
issues; and
The reporting guidelines of each human rights treaty body (so that civil society actors
can help monitor the extent to which States parties’ reports conform to them).
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
Submitting a written report
The most useful wav for civil society actors to submit information to human
rights trcatv bodies is by producing a written report alongside the State report.
Before civil society actors begin drafting their reports, they are advised to familiarize
themselves with the specifk reporting guidelines ot the given human rights treaty body.
Written reports should aim to reseml.de the structure of official State reports, lheii aim
should be to systematically analyse the extent to which law, policy and practice in the
State parly comply with the principles and standards of the treaty.
w
Written reports should:
- Be clear and precise, accurate and objective:
w Highlight what the authors see as problems in implementation, and should make
concrete recommendations to improve the human rights situation in the given
country; and
> Be submitted as early as possible before the scheduled examination of the State s
report, as this allows human rights treaty bodies to take the written report into
consideration when preparing lists of issues, preparing tor sessions and drafting
concluding obser\ ations.
Guidelines.
'I hc information that civil society actors provide must be country-specific and relevant
to the mandate of the human rights treaty body to which it is addressed. If possible, it
should make direct reference to the article of the treaty providing the specific light
that is allegedly violated;
« Allegations of human rights violations should always be supported by relevant
evidence and documentation;
w All information should be correctly referenced. When referencing a United Nations
document, paragraph numbers should be referred to, as page numbers vary fiom one
language to another. This should apply also to citations of State reports, which must
be referred to in their official United Nations version;
v An electronic version and multiple hard copies should be provided to the relevant
human rights treaty body secretariat, as the secretariat does not have the capacity to
reproduce materials from civil society;
* Documents that contain language deemed to be abusive will not be accepted.
Written civil society submissions to specific treaty body sessions are available on the
rmm.m o-mso./
■ u •
of the OHCHR website or, in the case of the
Committee on the Rights of the Child, the website of the Child Rights Information
Network (NGO Group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child).
Please consult the boxes at the end of this chapter for information on the
submission of written information specific to each human rights treaty body.
3\
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
i
i
i
Training workshop on writing a report on the implementation of
die International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
hi June 20(.n (he OHCHR
held presence in Georgia
convened a workshop in
Tbilisi for 20 NGO
rcprcscnraiives on
submitting a report to the
Committee on Economic.
Social and Cultural Rights.
The workshop was
facilitated by two member:
of (he Committee and
sought to:
Raise awareness of
international human
rights instruments, their
monitoring mechanisms
and the specific role of
NGOs;
- Enhance understanding
of the principles of
equality,
non-discrimination and
participation in
implementing the
International Covenant
on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights; and
© Increase knowledge of
the role of civil society
in monitoring progress
in the implementation of
the Covenant
As a follow-up to this
capacity-building training,
several round-table
meetings were held with
local NGOs during 2007.
a
1
t
a
t
t
f
4. Attending and contributing to human rights treaty body sessions
States party reports are considered at public meetings, which civil society actors may
attend as observers. Attending human rights treaty body sessions enables civil society
actors to.£
Brief the committee as a whole or its individual members;
a?
Observe the dialogue between the committee and the State; and
4
Learn first-hand about the issues raised and the recommendations made by the
committee.
The rules and practices governing the participation of civil socieXy in committee sessions,
as well as in the pre-sessional period, vary between committees.
Accreditation to attend human rights treaty body sessions should be requested from the
relevant secretariat in advance.
Civil society actors, including individual experts, academics and representatives of
professional groups, may have an active role in committee sessions. While they do not
participate in the dialogue between the State party and the committee, they may make
presentations to committee members on the issues contained in their written submissions.
Most committees set aside time for oral submissions by civil society actors. See the annex
to this chapter for more information on oral submissions at committee sessions and
pre-sessional working groups.
t
HUMAN RfGHTS TREATY BODIES
The Human Rights Committee, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
the Committee against Torture, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against
Women and the Committee on Migrant Workers allocate time to oral submissions during
their reporting sessions. This provides civil society actors with an opportunity to present to
the committees the key issues contained in their written reports.
Please note that, with the exception of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, whose
meetings are open, oral briefings by civil society actors take place in closed meetings.
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on the
Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the Committee on the Rights of the
Child allocate a specific time to civil society actors to contribute to pre-sessional working
groups. While other committees may not provide a formal channel for such contribution, it
may still be possible to arrange informal meetings with the committee members by
contacting the relevant committee’s secretariat.
Civil society contributions to pre-sessional working groups may be incorporated into the lists
of issues to be sent to States parties. Pre-sessional working groups also provide an
opportunity for civil society actors to submit written information or reports. Most committees
do not allow Government delegations to be present at the pre-sessional meetings.
Guidelines for oral submissions at human rights treaty body
sessions and pre-sessional working groups
c>
Oral submissions must be relevant to the specific treaty;
Oral statements must respect the time limits established by the committee;
a Interpretation facilities arc usually available at these sessions, and civil society
representatives should make sure that they have a written text of their oral
submissions to be provided to interpreters;
a Small we 11-coordinated delegations are usually more effective than large groups of
single-issue delegations; and
Language that is deemed abusive or offensive will not be accepted and anyone using
such language may be excluded from sessions.
<?
NGOs and other civil society actors are reminded to contact the secretariat of the
relevant committee well hi advance to inform it officially of their planned
participation.
V
5
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
i
1
I
I
Committee sessions normally provide opportunities for civil society actors to meet
informally with committee members. Informal briefings, generally arranged by NGOs,, may
be organized as side events in the margins of official meetings, most often during the lunch
break from 1 to 3 p.m. Please note that interpretation facilities are not available for
I
•‘lunchtime” briefings
(
The focus of informal meetings should be on the issues and States that the given
committee is addressing. Informal briefings normally take place on the day preceding or on
the day of the consideration of the State report of the relevant country. Wei I-organized and
coordinated briefings are more likely to be well attended by committee members and will
be more effective than numerous briefings on many different issues. Civil society actors are
thus encouraged to coordinate their activities.
I
In some instances, committee secretariats may facilitate briefings by providing rooms and
equipment, and by informing committee members about the briefings.
5. Following up on human rights treaty bodies’ concluding observations
Once the committee session has taken place and the concluding observations have been
adopted, civil society can undertake follow-up activities at the national level to raise
awareness of the recommendations and to encourage the State party to implement the
concluding observations.
It is therefore important that civil society actors familiarize themselves with the concluding
observations adopted by committees.
Visit OHCHR’s website to subscribe to an e-mail notification of treaty body
recommendations.
Civil society may work on follow-up to human rights treaty body concluding observations by-.
* Working together with the Government to help it meet its obligations; civil society
often acts as a catalyst to promote national legislative reforms and to establish
national policies. Civil society actors can also use the concluding observations of
committees as a basis for their dialogue with Governments and their own
programmes of action;
Monitoring the human rights situation in particular countries and the steps taken
locally to implement the concluding observations of committees;
e Raising awareness about the proceedings of committee meetings, the
recommendations that States parties are required to implement, and how concluding
[
t
L
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
observations can be used to strengthen the enjoyment of human rights nationally.
This may be done by organizing thematic discussions, round tables, seminars and
workshops: by trapslating and publishing concluding observations: or by collaborating
with NHRIs and the national media.
Contributing to the work of the human rights treaty bodies by informing committees
about Governments’ progress in implementing concluding observations and
recommendations, and providing them with focused and targeted information.
6. How to submit an individual complaint to the human rights treaty bodies
Any individual who alleges that her or his rights under a treaty have been violated by a
State party to that treaty may transmit a complaint to the relevant committee, provided
that the State has recognized the competence of the committee to receive such
complaints. Complaints may also be brought by third parties, including civil society actors,
on behalf of an individual, if that individual has given written consent to this end (“power
of attorney”, authority to act) or is incapable of giving such consent.
II
I
Individual complaints can be submitted only if domestic remedies have been exhausted
and all other eligibility criteria are fulfilled.
For more infonnaiion on individual complaints, please refer to the annex to
this chapter and to chapter VIII (Submitting a complaint on an alleged
human rights violation) of this Handbook.
7. Providing information for confidential inquiries
Civil society actors, by providing information to committees, may influence the decision of
a committee to undertake a confidenbal inquiry. Confidential inquiries are important
mechanisms which allow civil society actors to bring violations and situations of concern to
the attention of committees.
Most confidential inquiries have been instigated by information submitted by NGOs. For
example, the seven confidential inquiries undertaken by the Committee against Torture (on
Brazil, Egypt, Mexico, Peru, Serbia and Montenegro, Sri Lanka and Turkey) were all
initiated on the basis of information received from NGOs. The Committee on the
Elimination of Discrimination against Women has completed one inquiry (Mexico).
Civil society actors may also contribute further information once a confidential inquiry is
under way.
&
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
NGO participation in the initiation of a confidential inquiry7
The first inquiry
iindcr article <S of the
Optional Protocol to the
Convention on the
elimination of All I'orms ol
Discrimination against
Women was initiated on
the basis of information
provided to the Committee
on the Elimination of
Discrimination against
Women by three
NGOs—Equality Now.
Casa Amiga and the
Mexican Committee for
the Defence and
Promotion of Human
Rights—concerning the
killings and
disappearances of more
than 200 women in Ciudad
Juarez in Mexico. The
NGOs submitted detailed
information containing
allegations of (he
abduction, rape and
murder of women since
1993. The Committee
found that this information
was reliable and that it
contained substantiated
indications of grave or
systematic violations oi
rights set out in the
Convention.
During the course of the
inquiry, undertaken in
October 2003, the NGOs
submitted additional
information and actively
participated in the visit to
Mexico of two members of
the Committee. The active
participation of the NGOs
and the Slate party resulted
in a comprehensive report
addressing both the
violations and the
socio-cultural background
against which the events
took place, focusing on
the root causes of violence
against women and
making firm
recommendations to
ensure that the rights set
out in the Convention on
the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination
against Women are
realized.
The report and the reply
from the Government of
Mexico are posted on the
Division for the
Advancement of
Women’s website.
Civil society' actors wishing to submit information for confidential inquiries
should send it to:
[Name of Committee]
c/o Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 29
36
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
8. Providing information for early warning and urgent action procedures
information submitted by civil society actors can help trigger the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discritnination’s early warning and urgent action procedures. In the
past, these procedures have been initiated as a result of information received from NGOs
and indigenous groups.
For more intormarion on individual complaints, please refer to the annex to
this chapter and to chapter VTII (Submitting a complaint on an alleged
human rights violation) of this Ilanclbook.
9. Attending and contributing to the annual meeting of chairpersons and the
inter-committee meeting
871
These meetings are open to the participation of civil society actors as observers
The inter-committee meeting has an agenda item which allows NGOs to interact directly
with committee members on general themes related to the functioning, procedures and
working methods of the treaty bodies.
D. OHCHR resources
OHCHR human rights treaty body web pages
Information and documentation relating to the human rights treaty bodies are publicly
available on the OHCHR website. Each treaty body has a dedicated web page with
information on the treaty itself, recent ratifications, past and upcoming committee
sessions, working methods and more.
Furthermore, the Treaty Bodies Database on the OHCHR website provides access to a
range of documents related to the treaty bodies, including States parties’ reports,
concluding observations, general comments and decisions on individual communications.
OHCHR fact sheets
OHCHR fact sheets also provide information on international human rights treaties and the
human rights treaty bodies. A current and regularly updated list of OHCHR facts sheets is
available on the publications section of the OHCHR website.
<?
I
Working with the United Nations Hiuman Rigins Programme
A Handbookfor Civil Society
I
I
«
OHCHR Treaty Bodies DVD “Bringing Human Rights Home”
OHCHR has produced a training tool on the work of the treaty bodies in the form of a
DVD. entitled -The Treaty Bodies: Bringing Human Rights Home”. It is available on
request from the OHCHR Publications and Information Desk Contact
publications@ohchr.org
Extranet
V
Three human rights treaty bodies have dedicated pages on the OHCHR Extranet: the
Committee against Torture, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against
Women and the Committee on Migrant Workers. The Extranet page on each treaty body
records details of State reports, civil society reports, information relating to committee
meetings and other relevant information.
t
«
t
t
*
To access the password-protected Extranet page, fill in the online form available
on (he Human Rights Council page ol OHCHR's website. When you have done
(his you will receive a username and password bv e-mail.
Universal Human Rights Index
The Universal Human Rights Index (Index) is an on-line information tool, designed
primarily to facilitate access to human rights documents issued by the United Nations
human rights treaty bodies and the special procedures of the Human Rights Council. This
new website (which can be accessed via OHCHR's website) contains all the concluding
observations issued by the treaty bodies from the year 2000, as well as conclusions and
recommendations of the Human Rights Council's special procedures concerning specific
countries adopted since 2006. The Index will soon provide access to recommendations
made in fhe framework of the Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review
mechanism.
»
I
human rights treaty bodies
Annex: Human rights treaty body profiles
While the committees have common activities, procedures and practices, each also has its
own requirements. The reformation below provides a snapshot of each human rights treaty
body.
Monitors
International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR) and its Optional Protocols.
Membership
Eighteen independent experts elected for
four-year renewable terms.
Sessions
The Committee meets three times a year for
three-week sessions, normally in March at
United Nations Headquarters in New York
and in July and October/November at the
United Nations in Geneva.
Reporting requirements
States parties must report initially one year
after becoming a party to the Covenant and
then whenever the Committee requests
(between three to five years). The concluding
observations of the previous report usually
confirm when the next report is due.
Submitting written information
NGOs and other civil society actors, such as
academic or research institutes and
professional associations, may submit
written information or reports to the
Committee's secretariat. This may be done
at any time, but preferably two weeks before
the session at which the given country report
is to be examined and six weeks before the
meeting of the country report task force
which determines the list of issues to be
addressed at the Committee's next session.
All information must be submitted in
electronic form and in hard copy (at least 25
copies) to the Committee’s secretariat at the
address below.
Attending the Committee's sessions
NGOs and other civil society actors may
attend the Committee's meetings as
observers. To do so, they first need to write
to the secretariat at the address below to
request accreditation. On the first day of the
session at which the State party's report will
be considered, the Committee sets aside
time for civil society actors, in particular
NGOs, to brief it orally in closed meetings.
Additional breakfast and lunchtime briefings
are regularly convened to allow NGOs and
other civil society actors to provide
up-to-date, country-specific information.
The country report task force meets in
private during the Committee's sessions to
prepare the list of issues regarding State
reports which will be examined at the
Committee's next session. To this end, civil
society actors can arrange to hold informal
briefings with Committee members.
Individual complaints
Individual complaints under the First Optional
Protocol to the Covenant may be sent to:
>!*■
i
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbookfor Civil Society
Petitions Team
Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Paiais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: + 41 (0)22 917 90 22
(particularly for urgent complaints)
E-mail:
.
a
Secretariat contact details
Human Rights Committee
c/o Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
f. § .7J
Monitors
International Covenant on Economic. Social
and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Note that the
Human Rights Council adopted the Optional
Protocol to the Covenant in June 2008. The
General Assembly is also expected to adopt
it in 2008.
Membership
Eighteen independent experts elected for
four-year renewable terms.
Sessions
The Committee convenes twice a year for
three-week sessions with a one-week
pre-sessional working group, normally in
May and November at the United Nations in
Geneva.
Reporting requirements
Although the Covenant does not state the
periodicity of reporting, it is customary for
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: -r 41 (0)22 917 90 29
Phone-. +41 (0)22 917 93 32 or
+41 (0)22 917 93 95
To learn more about the Human Rights
Committee, consult Fact Sheet No. 15
(Rev.l). To learn more about the First
Optional Protocol to the Covenant please
visit the treaty bodies section of the OHCHR
website.
A model complaint form is contained in the
annexes to chapter VIII (Submitting a
complaint on an alleged human rights
violation) of this Handbook.
Jkl*
States parties to initially report within two
years of becoming a party to the Covenant
and thereafter every five years, or as
otherwise requested by the Committee.
Submitting written information
NGOs and other civil society actors, such as
research foundations, professional
associations and indigenous groups, may
submit written information or reports to the
secretariat for both the reporting sessions
and the pre-sessions. Information may be
submitted at any time, but preferably at least
one week in advance in both electronic form
and hard copy to the address below. For
reporting sessions at least 25 hard copies
should be submitted and for the
pre-sessional working group at least 10.
Please note that the secretariat will make
any written information formally submitted
by civil society actors in relation to the
►►
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
consideration of a specific State party report
available to a representative of that State as
soon as possible, unless specifically marked
‘■confidential”.
*
NGOs in consultative status with the United
Nations Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC) (or that are in partnership with
an NGO that has such status) may submit
written statements to the secretariat for
publication in the working languages of the
Committee at its reporting sessions. NGO
statements must be specific to the articles of
the Covenant, focusing on the most pressing
issues from the civil society perspective, and
must arrive at the secretariat no later than
three months before the session for which
they are intended.
Attending the Committee’s sessions
Civil society actors may attend the
Committee’s meetings as observers. To do
so, they will need to write to the secretariat
at the address below to request
accreditation. NGOs, NHRIs and individual
experts may make oral statements during
the first morning of the pre-sessional
working group meeting, which is usually
held on a Monday from 10.30 a.m. to 1
p.m., as well as during the NGO hearings
which take place on the first day of each
reporting session, from 3 to 4 p.m The time
limit for statements is 15 minutes.
At each session, the Committee devotes one
day. usually the Monday of the third week,
to a general thematic discussion of a
particular right or a particular aspect of the
Covenant. Specialized NGOs and other civil
society participants, including academics,
researchers and members of professional
groups, may submit background documents
or attend the day of general discussion.
I
Secretariat contact details
Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights
c/o Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 29
K
To learn more about the Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
consult Fact Sheet No 16 (rev. 1).
To learn more about civil society engagement
with the Committee, please visit the treaty
bodies section of the OHCHR website.
4
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
/
- ‘ Hiss
Monitors
International Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(ICERD).
Membership
Eighteen independent experts elected for
four-year renewable terms.
■o
Sessions
The Committee meets at the United Nations
in Geneva and holds two three-week
sessions in February and August each year.
Reporting requirements
States parties must report initially one year
after becoming a party to the Convention
and then normally every two years.
However, the last paragraph of the
concluding observations usually specifies
when the next report is due.
Submitting written information
NGOs and other civil society actors, such as
professional associations, academic
institutions, indigenous groups and
specialized institutions dealing with issues
relevant to the remit of the Committee, may
submit written information or reports to the
secretariat. This may be done at any time,
but preferably two months before the
Committee’s session.
An electronic version of the written
information as well as 37 hard copies
TH
Information Service (ARIS), an international
NGO in Geneva which helps to transmit
information to and from the Committee:
ARIS provides this service for regional and
national NGOs, other human rights groups
and individuals.
The Committee also accepts written
submissions from civil society in relation to
the review, without a report, of the
implementation of the Convention by States
parties whose reports are at least five years
overdue, and in relation to its early warning
and urgent action procedures. Civil society
actors, in particular NGOs, may send
information to the Committee requesting it to
deal with a situation that they deem urgent
under these procedures.
Attending the Committee’s sessions
Civil society actors may attend the
Committee’s meetings solely as observers.
To do so, they will need to write to the
secretariat at the address below to request
accreditation. The Committee does not
convene meetings with NGOs or other civil
society actors during its formal meeting
hours, but civil society actors may organize
informal lunchtime briefings on the first day
of consideration of each report between 1.45
and 2.45 p.m. and invite the Committee's
members. Civil society actors should request
the secretariat to book a room for such
briefings. They may also seek assistance
from ARIS, which organizes the briefings.
should be submitted to the secretariat at the
address below. National civil society actors
with limited resources that have difficulties
complying with these requirements may seek
assistance from the Anti-Racism
The Committee also holds regular thematic
discussions on issues related to racial
discrimination and the Convention, and
invites civil society actors, such as
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
academics, individual experts. NGOs and
specialized institutions, to attend and
express their views on the given subject.
The Committee also holds regular thematic
discussions on issues related to racial
discrimination and the Convention, and
invites civil society actors, such as
academics, individual experts. NGOs and
specialized institutions, to attend and
express their views on the given subject.
Individual complaints
Individual complaints under article 14 of the
Convention may be sent to:
Petitions Team
Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 22
(particularly for urgent complaints)
E-mail: to-peniiu.-.ii.
Secretariat contact details
Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination
co Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 29
Further information about ARIS is available
from:
Website: ’t’p:. wwa •:-t’r3::sn;-..ir'>.L>g23
E-mail:
h
To learn more about the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination,
consult *•
A model complaint.form is contained in the
annexes to chapter VIII (Submitting a
complaint on an alleged human rights
violation) of this Handbook.
-•‘’OHCHR is not responsible for the conicni of cxlurnul wubsilcs unci ihc provision of links on this
page clous not imply dial OHCHR associates itself with such content.
■-
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
; Jj-JH” x- . -V’.
1
n
IE
7 <
’WOW.' ■
Monitors
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)
and its Optional Protocol
to the International Women’s Rights Action
Watch Asia Pacific (IWRAW-AP), a
specialized NGO which helps to transmit
information to and from the Committee.-4
Membership
Twenty-three independent experts elected for
four-year renewable terms.
Attending the Committee’s sessions
Civil society actors may attend the
Committee's meetings as observers. To do
so. they will need to write to the secretariat
at the address below to request
accreditation. Civil society actors, in
particular NGOs, may make oral
presentations to the pre-sessional working
group (usually on the first morning). The
pre-sessional working group meets at the
end of the session before the one at which a
given Government’s report will be reviewed.
NGOs may also make oral presentations to
the Committee on the first day of each week
of its session. Informal meetings with the
Committee’s members may sometimes be
arranged by contacting the secretariat at the
address below.
Sessions
The Committee meets two to three times a
year, in both Geneva and New York, tor
two-week sessions that are usually
supplemented by a one-week pre-sessional
working group.
Reporting requirements
States parties must report initially one year
after becoming a party to the Convention
and then at least every four years and
whenever the Committee so requests.
Submitting written information
NGOs and other civil society actors, such as
women’s groups, faith-based organizations,
independent experts and parliamentarians,
may submit written information or reports to
the secretariat. This may be done at any
time, but preferably two weeks before the
pre-sessional meeting, or two months before
the Committee’s session. An electronic copy
and at least 35 hard copies should be
submitted to the secretariat at the address
below. NGOs and other civil society actors,
such as academic institutions, may also
choose to send copies of their submissions
Individual complaints
Individual complaints under the Optional
Protocol to the Convention may be sent to:
Petitions Team
Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-12Fl Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 22
(particularly for urgent complaints)
E-mail: rb petitions@ohchr.org
OHCHR is not responsible for the mnicnt of exicrnal wcbstio and lhe provision of links on this
page does not imply ihai OIK HR .^MKiaies ii^ell with such conicnt.
HUMA1N RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
Complaint guidelines under the Optional
Protocol to the Convention are contained in
the annexes to chapter VIII (Submitting a
complaint on an alleged hbman rights
violation) of this Handbook. A model
communication form is available online in all
United Nations languages on the website of
the Division for the Advancement of Women.
Confidential inquiries
Civil society actors, in particular NGOs, may
submit written information on serious, grave
or systematic violations of the Convention to
the secretariat. The information must be
reliable and indicate that the State party is
systematically violating the rights contained
in the Convention.
Secretariat contact details
Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women
c/o Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 29
E-mail: .
ohc-' •
To learn more about the Committee, consult
? ic:
No. 22 and Faci Snee ?+ . 7.
For a procedural guide on producing written
reports for the Committee, see the
IWRAW-AP website.
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbookfor Civil Society
Monitors
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel.
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment (CAT).
Membership
Ten independent experts elected for
four-year renewable terms.
Sess/ons
The Committee meets in Geneva and
normally holds two sessions a year
consisting of a plenary (of three weeks in
May and two weeks in November) and a
one-week pre-sessional working group.
Reporting requirements
States parties must report initially one year
after becoming a party to the-Convention
and then every four years.
Submitting written information
NGOs and other civil society actors, such as
victims’ groups, faith-based organizations,
representatives of trade unions and
professional associations, may submit
written information or reports to the
secretariat. This may be done at any time,
but preferably six weeks before the
Committee’s session. Inputs to lists of issues
should be submitted three months before
the given list is due to be finalized. All
information must be submitted in electronic
form and at least 15 hard copies should be
available to a representative of that State as
soon as possible, unless specifically marked
“confidential”.
Attending the Committee's sessions
Civil society actors may attend the
Committee's meetings as observers. To do
so, they will need to write to the secretariat
at the address below to request
accreditation. Civil society actors, in
particular NGOs, may brief the Committee
orally during its sessions. The attendance of
individual victims at briefings is normally
facilitated by NGOs. Briefings focus on one
country at a time and usually take place from
5 to 6 p.m. on the day before the dialogue of
the State party with the Committee.
Individual complaints
Individual complaints under article 22 of the
Convention may be sent to:
Petitions Team
Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 22 (particularly for
urgent complaints)
E-mail: tb-petitions(a>ohchr.org
sent to the secretariat at the address below.
A model complaint form is contained in the
annexes to chapter VIII (Submitting a
complaint on an alleged human rights
violation) of this Handbook.
Please note that the secretariat will make
any written information formally submitted
by civil society actors in relation to the
consideration of a specific State party report
Confidential inquiries
Civil society actors may submit information on
serious, grave or systematic violations of the
Convention to the secretariat. The information
S'
I
•I
I
I
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: 4-41 (0)22 917 90 29
must be reliable and contain well-founded
indications that torture is systematically
practised in the territory of the State party.
Secretariat contact details
Committee against Torture
c/o Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
J
i
ts"" ’
To learn more about the Committee, consult
r v '
’
Monitors
Optional Protocol to the Convention against
Torture and Other Cruel. Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(OPCAT).
Membership
Ten independent experts elected for
four-year terms, renewable once.
Membership will increase to 25 after the
fiftieth ratification or accession to the
Optional Protocol (see art. 5).
Sessions
The’Subcommittee convenes three times a
year for sessions of one week’s duration at
the United Nations in Geneva. It also
undertakes regular visits to places where
people are deprived of their liberty, in order
to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment.
Nc. i /.
••
State requirements
States parties must set up, designate or
maintain at the domestic level one or several
visiting bodies (which can include NHRIs,
ombudsmen, parliamentary commissions or
NGOs) for the prevention of torture and other
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. States parties must also allow
visits of the Subcommittee and their own
domestic visiting bodies to any place under
their jurisdiction and control where persons
are or may be deprived of their liberty. These
visits are undertaken with a view to
strengthening, if necessary, the protection of
these persons against torture and other
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment.
To learn more about the Subcommittee on
Prevention of Torture visit OHCHR’s website.
Ji?
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
i5&;
Monitors
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
and its Optional Protocols.
the secretariat at the address below, in
addition to an electronic copy Civil society
actors may request their written submissions
to be kept confidential.
Membership
Eighteen independent experts elected for
four-year renewable terms.
Sessions
The Committee convenes three times a year
for sessions of three weeks' duration and
three one-week pre-sessional working
groups, in January, May and September at
the United Nations in Geneva.
Reporting requirements
States parties must report initially two years
after the entry into force of the Convention
and then every five years. States parties to
its Optional Protocols must also submit
reports under these instruments, initially two
years after their entry into force, and then in
conjunction with their regular reports to the
Committee (or every five years if the State is
a party to one or both of the Optional
Protocols but not the Convention).
Submitting written information
NGOs and other civil society actors, such as
children’s organizations, faith-based
organizations, professional associations and
social service organizations, may submit
written information or reports to the
secretariat. This may be done at any time,
but preferably at least two months before the
relevant pre-sessional working group. At
least 20 hard copies should be submitted to
NGOs submitting information to the
Committee may also wish to contact the
NGO Group for the Convention on the
Rights of the Child, a coalition of
international NGOs which works to facilitate
the implementation of the Convention. The
NGO Group has a liaison unit that supports
the participation of NGOs, particularly
national coalitions, in the Committee's
reporting process. Civil society actors other
than NGOs are encouraged to contribute
information in coordination with their
national CRC coalition, if one exists in their
country.
1
1
The NGO Group may be contacted at:
NGO Group for the Convention on the
Rights of the Child
Secretariat
1, rue de Varembe
CH-1202 Geneva - Switzerland
Phone: +41 (0)22 740 4730
Fex +41 (0)22 740 1145
E-mail : secfetjriat@childrighisnet.org
Website: http://www.childnghrsnet.org25
Attending the Committee’s sessions
Civil society actors may attend the
Committee’s reporting sessions solely as
observers. To do so, they will need to write
to the secretariat at the address below to
request accreditation.
OHCHR is not responsible tor the content of external w ebsites and the provision ol links on this
page does not imply itiai OHC'HR associates itscli with such content.
n
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
Civil society actors are also invited to the
pre-sessional working group for the
three-hour meeting at which partners may
provide additional information. Individual
experts and members of youth organizations
are important contributors to the
Committee's pre-sessional working group.
Requests to participate should be sent to the
secretariat at least two months before the
beginning of the relevant pre-sessional
working group. Based on the written
information submitted, the Committee will
issue a written invitation to select civil
society actors, usually NGOs (whose
information is particularly relevant to the
consideration of the State party’s report), to
participate in the pre-sessional working
group. Introductory remarks by participants
are limited to a maximum of 15 minutes for
civil society actors from the country
concerned and 5 minutes for others,
allowing time for a constructive dialogue.
Each year the Committee also holds a day of
general discussion, in which civil society
p
actors, including children and experts, are
welcome to take part.
Secretariat contact details
Committee on the Rights of the Child
c/o Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 29
Please visit the NGO Group’s website to
access its guidelines on how to report to the
Committee on the Rights of the Child
To access the Committee’s guidelines for
the participation of NGOs and individual
experts in its pre-sessional working group
visit OHCHR's website.
To learn more about the Committee on the
Rights of the Child, consult
F.~c’ Sheet No. 10 ’Re/. I ■.
a
■
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
jagg
•> du
Monitors
<,
International NGO Platform for the Migrant
International Convention on the Protection of
Workers Convention, a coalition of
the Rights of All Migrant Workers and
international NGOs that work together to
Members of Their Families (ICRMW).
facilitate the promotion, implementation and
i
monitoring of the Convention. It may be
Membership
contacted at:
At present 10 independent experts elected
NGO Platform
for four-year renewable terms. This number
c/o December 18
will increase to 14 on the ratification of the
Rue de Varembe 1
Convention by its forty-first State party. For
P.O. Box 96
further details, see article 72.
CH-1211 Geneva 20 - Switzerland
Phone: +41 (0)22 919 10 42
Sessions
Fax: +41 (0)22 919 10 48
The Committee meets in Geneva and
E-mail: ipmwcicvdecember 18.net
Website: httc www.decemberlSmc^e
normally holds two sessions a year, usually
in April and November.
Attending the Committee’s sessions
Reporting requirements
Civil society actors can attend the
States parties must report initially one year
Committee's public sessions as observers. To
after becoming a party to the Convention
do so, they will need to write to the
and then every five years.
secretariat at the address below to request
accreditation.
Submitting written information
NGOs and other civil society actors, such as
In preparation for the examination of a State
social service organizations, individual
party’s report, civil society actors, in
experts and trade unions, may submit
particular NGOs, are invited to participate in
written information or reports to the
a private meeting with the Committee to
secretariat at any time.
report orally on the situation of migrant
workers in the given State, and to answer its
All information should be submitted in
members’ questions. This meeting takes
electronic format and at least 15 hard copies
place at the session preceding that at which
should be sent to the secretariat at the
a State party report will be examined by the
address below.
Committee.
Civil society actors submitting information to
At the session at which the State party report
the Committee may also wish to contact the
is examined, civil society actors that have
OHCHR is not responsible lor die content ol external websites and the provision of links on this
page does not imply that OHCHR associates itself with such content.
<?
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
submitted written information are given the
opportunity to provide oral information to the
Committee in a public meeting before the
Committee's examination of the State party’s
report. NGOs, academics and
representatives of professional groups,
among others, are invited to participate in
the days of general thematic discussion held
periodically by the Committee.
Secretariat contact details
Committee on the Protection of the Rights
of All Migrant Workers and Members of
Their Families
c/o Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 29
Individual complaints
The Committee will be able to consider
individual complaints or communications
once 10 States parties have accepted this
procedure in accordance with article 77 of
the Convention.
E-mail: .m., .• ohcm j.\..
To learn more about the Committee, consult
7
CVaVs-''5°,
DM
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
J?. ■ <.
At:
..;
Monitors
systematic violations of the Convention to
Convention on the Rights of persons witn
the secretariat. The information must be
Disabilities and its Optional Protocol.
reliable and indicate that the State party is
4
systematically violating the rights contained
i
in the Convention.
I
independent experts elected for four-year
Article 33
1
!
Membership
The Committee will initially consist of 12
terms, renewable once, and should include
The Convention contains a unique provision
experts with disabilities. After an additional
regarding the role of civil society in
60 ratifications or accessions to the
monitoring its implementation. Article 33
Convention, the Committee's membership
states that civil society shall be involved and
will increase to 18. States parties are invited
participate fully in the monitoring process
to actively involve persons with disabilities
established by States parties, thus giving
and their representative organizations when
civil society a central role in promoting the
nominating candidates for appointment to
implementation of the Convention.
the Committee.
Secretariat contact details
Committee on the Rights of Persons with
Sessions
By September 2008, Committee members
Disabilities
had not yet been appointed.
c/o Office of the United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Reporting requirements
Palais des Nations
States parties must report initially within two
8-14, avenue de la Paix
years after becoming a party to the
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Convention and then at least every four
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 29
years, or whenever the Committee so
,
E-mail; crpd@ohchr.org
requests.
For more information on the work of OHCHR
Individual complaints
on the Convention and on disability issues
The Committee will be able to consider
in general visit OHCHR's website.
communications from individuals or groups
of individuals. A model complaint form is
To learn more about the Convention and its
contained in the annexes to chapter VIII
Optional Protocol, see the OHCHR
(Submitting a complaint on an alleged
publication From Exclus/on to Equality:
human rights violation) of this Handbook.
Realizing the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (H R/PU B/07/6).
Confidential inquiries
Civil society actors, in particular NGOs, may
submit information on serious, grave or
HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES
Will monitor
International Convention for the Protection of
All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
Membership
The Committee will consist of
10 independent experts elected for four-year
terms, renewable once.
Reporting requirements
States parties must report initially within two
years after becoming a party to the
Convention.
Urgent action
The Committee w.'ll be able to receive urgent
requests from individuals that a disappeared
person should be sought and found. The
person in question must be subject to the
jurisdiction of a State party to the
Convention.
Individual complaints
The Committee will be able to consider
individual communications with regard to
States parties that have accepted this
procedure in accordance with article 31 of
the Convention.
Inquiries
Civil society actors, in particular NGOs, will
be able to submit information indicating that
a State party is seriously violating the
provisions of the Convention, in accordance
with article 33. Additionally, the Committee
is empowered to urgently bring to the
attention of the General Assembly
information indicating that the practice of
enforced disappearances is widespread or
systematic in a State party.
To learn more about enforced or involuntary
disappearances, consult Fact Sheet No. 6
n3ev.2). ’
I
I .
%
%
%
9
The Human Rights Council at a glance
%
Wbat is it?
The Human Rights ('outkil
is flic principal Tinted
Natu >ns iniergov ernmenial
body responsible foi human
rights Established by
General Assemble resolution
60 251, it replaced and
assumed most mandates,
mechanisms, function^ and
respt insibilitics pre\ iousl\
entrusted to the Commission
on Human Rights. The
Office of the Lnited Nations
High Commissioner for
Human Rights (OHCHR) is
(he secretariat for the
Human Rights Council, as u
was for the Commission on
Human Rights.
Hoiv does it work?
The Human Rights Council
is an intergovernmental
body of -P member Stales
based in Geneva. It meets
loi al least 10 weeks a year
spread o\cr no fewer than
three sessions, and can also
hold special sessions. While
the Commission was a
subsidiary organ of the
Economic and Social
Council (l.COSOC). lhe
Human Rights Council is a
subsidiarv organ ol the
General Assembly. Its role
in< Indus addressing
violations of human rights,
including gross and
systematic \ iolations, and
the promotion of effective
coordination and the
mainstreaming of human
rights w ithin the L nited
Nations system.
On 18 June 2007, one year
after its first meeting, the
Human Rights Council
agreed on a package that
established the procedures,
mechanisms and
structures to torm the
basis lor its future
work. This package,
adopted as its
resolution 5/1.
included the Council’s
agenda, programme of
work and rules of
procedure and made
modifications to the
system of expert advice
and the complaint
procedure inherited
from the Commission.
Resolution 5 1 also set
out lhe modalities for
lhe operation of the
Council's new universal
periodic review'
mechanism and
established a process
for reviewing,
rationalizing and
improving all special
pn»ccdures mandates.
Thu Ikindlxxik i> av.ui.tblc in digital loitnal on the OHCHR wubsilc al:
hlip:
a x-.
.(.ju io'.oj
d*-.< k u . •. 1: hsJJk* >K
Thuic yon will Ihul ilk Handbook s chapters available for dow nload, as well as links to all lhe references
contained in the publication.
i
%
%
%
%
%
MW
%
5
I
1
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Key contacts relating to the Human Rights Council
The Human Rights Council Branch
Human Rights Council Branch
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Phone: +41 (0)22 917 92 56
Fax: 4-41 (0)22 917 90 11
The Civil Society Unit
OHCHR Civil Society Unit
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
‘•^>225
Phone: 4-41 (0)22 917 90 00
E-mail; .
. ?
.
For requests or information relating to consultative status with ECOSOC
United Nations headquarters
NGO Section
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Section
One UN Plaza, Room DC-1-1480
IS
New York, NY 10017
Phone: 4-1 212 963 8652
Fax: 4-1 212 963 9248
E-mail: desangosectionvu/umorg
United Nations Office at Geneva (UNOG)
NGO Liaison Office
Office of the Director-General
Office 153, Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Phone: +41 (0)22 917 21 27
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 05 83
E-mail: ui^enevam^,..^.
. unog .:
Key contacts for each of the Human Rights Council's mechanisms are included in
relevant sections throughout this chapter.
&
I
n
*
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
t
C
VV hat is the Human Rights Council?
Transition from Commission on Human Rights to Human Rights Council
The Human Rights Council, established by General Assembly resolution 60/251 of 15
March 2006. is the principal United Nations intergovernmental body responsible for
human rights. It replaced the Commission on Human Rights, which, for over 60 years,
was at the centre of the United Nations human rights system. The Commission met for the
last time in March 2006. at its sixty-second session. Its normative and standard-setting
achievements form the foundation of the work of the Council.
<
While the Commission was a subsidiary organ of the Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC), the Human Rights Council is a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly. This
elevation emphasizes human rights as one of the three essential pillars of the United
Nations, along with development, and peace and security. The Council's creation also
affirms the General Assembly’s commitment to strengthening the United Nations human
rights machinery, with the aim of ensuring the effective enjoyment by all of all human
rights—civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to
development.
9
A
In its resolution 60/251, the General Assembly tasked the Human Rights Council with
reviewing and. where necessary, improving and rationalizing all mandates, mechanisms,
functions and responsibilities that it assumed from the Commission. The Council was
required to complete this task within one year of holding its first session. The Council’s
methods of work were also required to-.
& Be transparent, fair and impartial;
* Be results-oriented;
* Enable genuine dialogue; •
* Allow .for follow-up discussions to its recommendations and their implementation;
and
- Allow for substantive interaction with its mechanisms.
f
•
9
9
B
•
>
I
J
The General Assembly will review the Council’s status within five years.28
-h Sec resolution 60 251. in whic h the General Assembly also requires the Council to review its work
and functioning five years after its establishment and report lo it.
a
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
The Human Rights Council’s institution-building package (resolution 5/1)
On 18 June 2007. one year after its first meeting and following an intensive period of
“institution-building ,,. the Council agreed on a package that set out its procedures,
mechanisms and structures. Adopted as its resolution 5/1 on institution-building of the
United Nations Human Rights Council,29 the package included:
A new agenda and a framework for the programme of work;
New methods of work and new rules of procedure based on the rules established for
committees of the General Assembly;
- The complaint procedure (which replaced the 1503 procedure);
The Human Rights Council Advisory Committee (which replaced the
Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights);
Principles, processes and modalities to guide the operation of the new universal
periodic review (UPR) mechanism; and
- Criteria for the continuing review, rationalization and improvement of special
procedures mandates.
How do the Human Rights Council and its mechanisms and
mandates work?
iSI
V’
Membership
Membership of the Council consists of 47 States elected directly and individually by secret
ballot by the majority of the members of the General Assembly. The human rights records
and voluntary human rights pledges and commitments of candidate States are to be taken
into account when electing member States. The Council’s member States serve for three
years and are not eligible for immediate re-election after two consecutive terms.
If a member State of the Council commits gross and systematic violations of human rights,
the General Assembly, by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting, may
suspend its rights of membership in the Council.
For a list of the current Council member States visit OHCHR’s website.
29 Resolution 5 1 was endorsed by the (.•uncrul Assembly in in resolution 62 219.
57
o
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
s
Meetings
i
t
Whereas the former Commission met only once a year for a total of six weeks, the Council
meets at the Palais des Nations in Geneva. Switzerland, for at least three regular sessions
a year, for a total duration of no less than 10 weeks. The Council’s main (four-week)
session is normally held in March.
The Council may also hold special sessions at the request of a member State, where such
a request is supported by at least one third of its member States.30 By September 2008,
the Council had held seven special sessions.3-
The Council also organizes panel discussions and special events to enhance dialogue and
mutual understanding on specific issues. By September 2008 the Council had held six of
these events,32 including annual discussions on the rights of persons with disabilities33 and
the integration of a gender perspective into its work and the work of its mechanisms.34
Mandates and mechanisms
■•iC*
'3
»
B
B
B
I
>
a
1
The universal periodic review (UPR) is a new human rights mechanism. Through it the
Council periodically reviews the fulfilment by each of the United Nations 192 Member
States of its human rights obligations and commitments. The UPR is a cooperative
mechanism, based on an interactive dialogue with the State under review. It is intended to
complement, not duplicate, the work of the treaty bodies.
Vi
Il require'^ die support
k-uer Si.ik-s
IuiIU i •'pwiul session .11 lhe Council than u did al the
Commission (one ihuxl ol t~ incinlx-rs uguin.M i niaiority oi
members). The Comini>sion held
only five special session"
$l Three on lhe occupied Paksiinian lerriiorv (Juk and Nov cmlxrr 20U(> and January 2u08). one on
Lebanon (.August 2O(K>). one on Darfur < December 2006). one on Myanmar (Octolx-r 2007) and a
thematic special session on the world food crisis (Mav 2008) •
Two on the adoption and entry into forc e of the ('onveniion on the Rights of Persons w ith
Disabilities (March 2(.M)7 and June 2008). one on the !>r.iO J nilvd N.nioii" Guid*••incs ior tile
Appropn.Mi l
nu. < hjUsoo i> o) o .
-.k to;; lo; s hiklo < i (June 2008). one on
intercultural dialogue on human rights (March 2008). one on human rights voluntary goals (March
2008) and one on missing persons (SeptemlKi 2008).
'5Thc lirsi debate is scheduled to lake place at the Council’s tenth regular session, to focus on keylegal measures lor the ratification and elkctive implementation ol the < < <m c-s-ti*m '•..■! the Rights
. xoi.s '.suh i Jis.ttHiuf. s. OHCHR has been requested to prepare a thematic study on this topic
in consultation, with, among others, civil society organizations.
Sec resolution 6. 30 of l i Decemlx*r ’GOT The first meeting on the question of violence against
women was held at its eighth session and consisted of two panels: one on violence against women,
and one- on maternal mortality In September 2i»08 the Council held a panel discussion on lhe
integration ol a gender perspective into Us vv .ik
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
The DPR is to be seen as a process composed of several steps within a four-year cycle:
The preparation of information upon which reviews are based (including information
prepared by the State under review (national reports), a compilation of United
Nations information prepared by the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and a summary of stakeholders
submissions, which is also prepared by OHCHR;
The review itself, which takes place in the Working Group on the UPR, composed of
the 47 member States of the Council, which meets in three two-weeks sessions each
year;35
The consideration and adoption of review outcome documents by the Council at its
regular sessions-, and
Follow-up to the implementation of UPR outcomes by reviewed States.
Relevant stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), human rights
defenders, academic institutions and research institutes, regional organizations and civil
society representatives, may participate in some of these steps.
■.V'TL
For information on the universal periodic review, please refer to chapter VII
(Universal periodic review) of this Handbook.
I
The Advisory Committee is a subsidiary body of the Human Rights Council. It replaced the
Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights of the Commission on
Human Rights, and functions as a think tank for the Council, focusing mainly on studies
and research-based advice in a manner and form requested by the Council.
While unable to adopt resolutions or decisions, or to establish subsidiary bodies without
the Council’s authorization, the Advisory Committee can make suggestions to the Council:
° To enhance its own procedural efficiency; and
* To further research proposals within the scope of its work.
The Advisory Committee consists of 18 experts drawn proportionally from the five United
Nations regional groups (Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean,
and Western Europe and others). Members serve in their personal capacity for three y
terms and are eligible for re-election only once.3b The Advisory Committee meets in two
sS The Working Group on die I PR reviews lb Suucs al each session—a loial ol 48 Malo each year.
56 Resolution S 1 provided, however, dial for the first lean one third of members would m_tvu for one
year and anollur ihird would serve lor iwo years in order lo staggei men iburship.
(
I
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbookfor Civil Society
t
S
I
sessions each year for a total of up to 10 working days, and can hold additional ad hoc
sessions with the Council's approval.
For current information on the Advisory Committee visit OHCHR’s website.
t
t
I
1
•
The complaint procedure addresses consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested
violations of all human rights and fundamental freedoms occurring in any part of the world
and under any circumstances. It is based on the former Commission’s 1503 procedure,
improved to ensure that the procedure is impartial, objective, efficient, victims-onented
and conducted in a timely manner.
r$
The complaint procedure is based on communications received from individuals, groups or
organizations that claim to be victims of human rights violations or that have direct,
reliable knowledge of such violations. Two distinct working groups—the Working Group on
Communications and the Working Group on Situations—are responsible, respectively, for
examining communications and bringing consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested
violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms to the Council’s attention.
The Council examines reports of the Working Group on Situations in a confidential manner
(unless it decides otherwise) and may:
3
Discontinue its consideration of a situation when further consideration or action is not
warranted;
Keep a situation under review and request the State concerned to provide further
information within a reasonable time;
rJ
Keep a situation under review and appoint an independent and highly qualified expert
to monitor the situation and to report back to the Council; or
Recommend that OHCHR should provide technical cooperation, capacity-building
assistance or advisory services to the State concerned.
For more information on the
(’ complaint procedure, please refer to chapter
VIII (Submitting a complaint on an alleged human rights violation) of this
Handbook.
I
I
I
I
4
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
“Special procedures” is the general name given to the mechanisms established by the
former Commission and assumed by the Council to monitor, advise and publicly report on
human rights situations in specific countries or territories (country mandates), or on major
phenomena of human rights violations worldwide (thematic mandates).
Since June 2007 the Council has begun a process to review, rationalize and improve each of
the special procedure mandates it inherited. It has discontinued and amended some mandates,
created new ones, developed new selection and appointment processes for mandate-holders,
and produced a Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate-holders (resolution 5/2).
Mandate-holders (special rapporteurs, special representatives, representatives,
independent experts and members of working group) serve in their personal capacity. Their
activities may include-.
Receiving, sharing and analysing information on human rights situations;
- Responding to individual complaints;
* Conducting studies;
v Sending urgent appeals or letters of allegation to Governments-.
Undertaking country visits at the invitation of Governments and producing findings
and recommendations based on these visits-,
Providing advice on technical cooperation at the country level; and
w Engaging in general promotion.
OHCHR provides special procedures mandate-holders with personnel, logistical and
research assistance to support their mandates.
For more information on the special procedures, please refer to chapter VI
(Special procedures) of this Handbook.
vA
.•
Open-ended Working Group on the Right to Development
The open
u;e
to Dv.dopment was established by the
Commission on Human Rights?7 In March 2007, the Human Rights Council renewed its
mandate for two years (resolution 4/4).
The Working Group convenes in an annual session of five working days. Its mandate is to.
Monitor and review progress made in the promotion and implementation of the right
to development;
r Sec ils rest )hHion
und l < < »< >< decision 1998. 2o9
b\
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
«
Review reports and other information submitted by States, United Nations agencies
and other relevant international organizations and NGOs; and
Present for the Council's consideration a sessional report on its deliberations,
including advice to'OHCHR with regard to the implementation of the right to
development, and suggesting possible programmes of technical assistance at the
request of interested countries.
in this same resolution, the Council also renewed for two years the mandate of the
high-level task force on the implementation of the right to development, established
within the framework of the Working Group on the Right to Development.
The objective of the task force is to provide the necessary expertise to the Working Group
to enable it to make appropriate recommendations to the various actors on the issues
identified for the implementation of the right to development. The task force comprises five
experts nominated by the Chairperson of the Working Group on the Right to Development
in consultation with each of the United Nations regional groups and other institutional
members, including representatives from identified international trade, finance and
development institutions. The task force convenes in annual sessions of.seven working
days and presents its reports to the Working Group.
In 2007 the Human Rights Council renewed the mandate of the Social Forum, preserving
it as a '‘unique space for interactive dialogue between the United Nations human rights
machinery and various stakeholders, including grass-roots organizations, and underlines
the importance of coordinated efforts at national, regional and international levels for the
promotion of social cohesion based on the principles of social justice, equity and solidarity
as well as to address the social dimension and challenges of the ongoing globalization
process” (resolution 6/13).
An initiative of the former Sub-Commission, the Social Forum38 originated as a two-day
pre-sessional forum on economic, social and cultural rights held before annual sessions of
the Sub-Commission. Whereas the Social Forum was previously a subset of the
Sub-Commission, it is now an independent Human Rights Council mechanism.
The Social Forum meets each year for three working days to focus on specific thematic issues
designated to it by the Council. It met for the first time as a mechanism of the Council in
September 2008 and, as requested by the Council, some thematic procedures
mandate-holders participated in it. The Social Forum was asked to formulate conclusions and
recommendations to be presented to relevant bodies through the Council and focused on:
« Questions relating to the eradication of poverty in the context of human rights,58 Not to be confused with die World Social I oium
HUiMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Capturing best practices in the fight against poverty in the light of grass-roots
presentations to the Social Forum; and the
Social dimension of the globalization process.
The Social Forum is chaired by a chairperson-rapporteur appointed by the Council’s
President each year from among nominations presented by the regional groups.
For currcm information on the Social Forum visit OHCHR's website.
The Forum on Minority Issues39 replaced the former Sub-Commission's Working Group on
Minority Issues. It provides a platform for promoting dialogue and cooperation on issues
pertaining to persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities by:
Providing thematic contributions and expertise to the work of the independent expert
on minority issues; and
Identifying and analysing best practices, challenges, opportunities and initiatives for
the further implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to
National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.
The Forum meets for two working days in Geneva each year for thematic discussions, and
is expected to contribute to the High Commissioner's efforts to improve cooperation among
United Nations mechanisms, bodies and specialized agencies, and funds and programmes
on activities related to the promotion and protection of the rights of persons belonging to
minorities, including at the regional level.40
Whereas the Chairperson of the Forum (appointed by the Council’s President each year on
the basis of regional rotation) is responsible for the preparation of a summary of the
Forum’s discussions, the independent expert on minority issues guides its work and
prepares its annual meetings. The independent expert is also invited to include in her/his
report the thematic recommendations of the Forum and recommendations for future
thematic subjects, for consideration by the Council.
The Council is to review the Forum’s work after four years, i.e., in 2012.
For current information on the Forum on Minority Issues, and on the
independent expert on minority issues visit OHCHR's website.
Creak’d bv llum.in RigliK Count il rt>i>lu(h»n <> IS t>l 28 Scplcinbci 200"?.
40 Al ils inaugural session, on IS and 16 December 2008. die I'oruni i> cxpccivd io consider minorities
and access to cdutaliun.
&
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
The Expert mechanism on the rights of indigenous peoples41 is the successor to the former
Sub-Commission’s Working Group on Indigenous Populations. A subsidiary of the Human
Right Council, the Expert Mechanism provides it with thematic expertise on the rights of
indigenous peoples in a manner and form requested by it. The Expert Mechanism reports
annually to the Council, focuses mainly on studies and research-based advice, and may,
within the scope of its work, suggest proposals to the Council for consideration and
approval..
The Expert Mechanism consists of five independent experts, each serving for three years
v.'ith the possibility of being re-elected for an additional term. It may meet for up to five
days per year in a combination of private and public meetings and is free to decide on its
own methods of work, though unable to adopt resolutions or decisions.
The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of
indigenous people and a member of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues also
attend and contribute to the Expert Mechanism’s annual meetings.
ft
For current information Expert mechanism, and on rhe Special Rapporteur
on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of
indigenous people visit OHCHR’s website.
In 2001, the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and
Related Intolerance was held in Durban, South Africa. The Durban Declaration and
Programme of Action, adopted at this Conference, records a commitment by States to
work together to eradicate racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance. It is a comprehensive and action-oriented road map, offering a functional
common approach to realizing the principles of equality and non-discrimination.
In 2006, the United Nations General Assembly decided to convene a review conference in
2009 on the implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. It
requested the Human Rights Council to prepare this event, making use of the three
existing and ongoing follow-up mechanisms,42 to formulate a concrete plan, and to provide
11 Crcjlcd by Human Kighi> Council resolution 6 36 of l~i DcccnibcT 2007.
'-The InivTgowrnmcntal Working Group on the Effective Implementation of the Durban Declaration
and Programme ot Action, the group of independent eminent experts on the implementation of the
Durban Declaration and I’rograinmc of Action, and the Working Group of Experts un People of
African Descent
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
annual updates and reports on this issue starting in 2007. - The Council’s Preparatory
Committee for the Review Conference decided that the Review Conference would be held
in Geneva in April 2009.
1. Intergovernmental Working Group on the Effective Implementation of the Durban
Declaration and Programme of Action
The Intergovernmental Working Group on the Effective Implementation of the Durban
Declaration and Programme of Action was established by the Commission on Human Rights
(resolution 2002/68). In June 2006, the Human Rights Council extended its mandate for a
further three years (resolution 1/5). The Intergovernmental Working Group is mandated to:
• Make recommendations with a view to the effective implementation of the Durban
Declaration and Programme of Action; and
Prepare complementary international standards to strengthen and update
international instruments against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and
related intolerance in all their aspects.
To find out more about (he Intergovernmental Working Group visit
OHCHR's website
2. Group of independent eminent experts on the implementation of the Durban
Declaration and Programme of Action
The World Conference requested the High Commissioner to cooperate with five
independent eminent experts to follow up the implementation of the provisions of the
Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.44
In 2003, the independent eminent experts (one from each regional group) were appointed by
the then Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, from among the candidates proposed by the
Chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights after consultation with the regional groups.
Their mandate is to:45
Follow the implementation of the provisions of the Durban Declaration and
Programme of Action in cooperation with the High Commissioner; and
* Assist the High Commissioner in preparing her/his annual progress report to the
Council and to the General Assembly based on information and views provided by
States, relevant human rights treaty bodies, special procedures and other
mechanisms of the Council, international and regional organizations, NGOs and
national human rights institutions (NHRIs).
4 A See General A.s^inbk rest dm ion 61 149.
See para. 191 (b) of the Programme of Action and General Assembly resolution S6/266.
'' Sec Commission on Human Rights resolution 2003 SO See also General Assembly resolution 39/1
•Is
11
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
To find out more about the independent eminent experts and for current
information on the Working Group of Experts on People of African
Descent visit OHCHR’s website.
3. Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent
The Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent is a special procedure of the
Council. It was created by the Commission at the request of the World Conference. The
Working Group comprises five independent experts appointed on the basis of equitable
geographic representation. It holds a five-day session every year and conducts country
visits at the invitation of Governments in order to facilitate in-depth understanding of the
situation of people of African descent in various regions of the world. It also submits an
annual report to the Human Rights Council.
its mandate is to:46
Study the problems of racial discrimination faced by people of African descent living
in the diaspora and to this end gather all relevant information from Governments,
NGOs and other relevant sources, including through holding public meetings;
c Propose measures to ensure full and effective access to the justice system by people
of African descent;
Submit recommendations on the design, implementation and enforcement of
effective measures to eliminate racial profiling of people of African descent;
- Elaborate short-, medium- and long-term proposals for the elimination of racial
discrimination against people of African descent;
~ Make proposals on the elimination of racial discrimination against Africans and
people of African descent in all parts of the world; and
Address all the issues concerning the well-being of Africans and people of African
descent contained in the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.
4. Ad Hoc Committee on the elaboration of complementary standards
c>
The Human Rights Council established the Ad Hoc Committee on the elaboration of
complementary standards in December 2006. It is mandated to develop, as a matter of
priority and necessity, complementary standards in the form of either a convention or
additional protocol(s) to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination. These complementary standards are to:47
» Fill existing gaps in the Convention; and
* Provide new normative standards aimed at combating all forms of contemporary
racism, including incitement to racial and religious hatred.
See Conmiis'iion on Human Rights resolutions 2002 68 and 2003 30.
1 Sec Human Rights Couneii decision 3 U>3 and its resolution 6 21
^6
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
The Ad Hoc Committee convenes in an annual session of 10 working days to draw up the
requisite legal instruments. It held its inaugural meeting in February 2008 and is required
to report regularly to the Council on its progress.
5. Preparatory Committee for the Durban Review Conference and the intersessional
open-ended intergovernmental working group to follow up the work of the
Preparatory Committee for the Durban Review Conference
in 2007. meeting the mandate assigned to it by the General Assembly?3 the Human
Rights Council established the Preparatory Committee for the Durban Review
Conference - The Preparatory Committee held an organizational meeting in August 2007,
followed by two substantive sessions of 10 working days in April and October 2008 to
decide on ail the relevant modalities for the Durban Review Conference, such as:
: Its objectives.The structure of its outcome document;
The level at which it would be convened;
Regional preparatory meetings and other initiatives, including at the national level;
and
4 Its date and venue.
The intersessional open-ended intergovernmental working group to follow up the work of
the Preparatory Committee for the Durban Review Conference was established by the
Human Rights Council at the first substantive session of the Preparatory Committee in
April 2008. It is mandated to.-50
Follow up the work of the Preparatory Committee, including through reviewing
contributions and through commencing negotiations on the draft outcome document;
and
Review additional written contributions and report thereon to the Preparatory
Committee.
To find out more about the Preparatory Committee for the Durban
Review Conference and the open-ended intergovernmental working
group visit OHCHR's website.
Stv Gcnctul Assclllbh K.-M .lulkHibl I 19.
'‘'Scu its looltiiion 5 2 See also ii> resolution () 23.
1V‘ Sue dec ision P( 2 u
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society
How to access and work with the Human Rights Council and its
mandates and mechanisms
Arrangements and practices for NGO participation in the Human Rights
Council’s sessions
■
..the participation of and consultation with observers, including States that are not
members of the Council, tne specialized agencies, other intergovernmental organizations
and national human rights institutions, as well as non-governmental organizations, shall
be based on arrangements, including Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31 of
25 July 1996. and practices observed by the Commission on Human Rights, while
I
ensuring tne most effective contribution of these entities. "5l
i
In resolution 60/251, the General Assembly acknowledged the important role played by
NGOs and other civil society actors nationally, regionally and internationally in the
promotion and protection of human rights. It also provided that NGO participation in the
Human Rights Council would:
Be based on arrangements and practices observed by the Commission (including
ECOSOC resolution 1996/31); and
Ensure the most effective contribution of NGOs and other observers.
The arrangements and practices of NGO participation observed by the Commission on
Human Rights have been successfully transferred to the Human Rights Council. In line
with the Human Rights Council’s obligation to ensure “the most effective contribution” of
observers, these practices and arrangements continue to develop and evolve.
NGOs in consultative status with ECOSOC participating as observers in
Human Rights Council sessions
The role of NGOs is essential for the promotion and protection of all human rights at the
national, regional and international levels. NGO participationJiLlhe Human Rights
C0^011’3 f,rst two
existence has been a key element for enhancing the credibility
0LSieIIr)it^^
significantly to the institutionarbuilding of the
Human Rights Council, withj/aluadle and essentiaTTnputsTas well as~ln its substantive
debates while considering~alTagenda items of the~Council.
’
Moreover, the complementary work of NGOs in the field of human rights is perceived to
be increasingly moving from traditional "naming and shaming" policies towards a more
cooperative engagement with Governments and other stakeholders. Such responsible
engagement should be aimed at improving the human rights situation on the ground.
See (.enecul As^emhh le^oluiion (>() 251 und Human Rights Council resolution 5 1. annex.
]
1;
'g
■1®
s
. §-K
•0^
aB
c.
HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
f ”?■■■
- :?'Z
Universal
periodic
review
Working
Group on the
UPR
Human
Rights
Council
Advisory
Committee
zc
T"
Complaint
Procedure
Special
procedures
Working
Group on
Communi
cations
Working^roup
on Situations
Country
mandates
Thematic
mandates
Social
Forum
Working
Groups
Forum on
Minority
Issues
< | Open-ended
\ r Working
I Group on the
[
Right to
I Development
■
“J
Expert
Mechanism
i
on the
Rights of
Indigenous
Peoples
Mechanisms
related to
the
Durban
Declaration
and
Programme of
Action
|||.V
riw'j
lIlAVhWvv
sfSl
/
L?
Ml
J illlll
?C—
L 7 tUx>|
O !^VU\
I
wzl'. . --
i
Annex: Accessing and working with the Human Rights Council and its mandates and mechanisms
MEETING/MECHANISM
.
K Human Rights cSuhcifs
...... . .
Which civil society actors
How can these CSAs
; (CSAs) can attend meetings participate in meetings they
Which CSAs can contribute
What forms can these
to the work of the
contributions take?
mechanism (other than by
attending meetings)?
. . . . . . ... -... ....
.... ....... .......... .......... ....
< NGOs in_gQnsultative status
Only NGOs in consultative i NGOs in consultative status
• Submission of written
L
with^SSQGx^nce
status with ECOSOC can
statements
with ECOSOC should
accredited
subrfiTf written statements to
• Oral statements
consult the guidelines for
*~regular/special sessions
written statements
• Hosting of parallel events
"■0;
: SR' '
1
I
NGCh^ln consultative stalls • Hosting of information
with ECOSOC, once
sessions
accredited
• Brief general comments
can be made before the
adoption of outcome
documents at regular
sessions of the Human
Rights Council
Relevant CSAs
s
1
?
Human Rights Councir'
Advisory Committee
I
i
■
J; :.
€
▼
HGOs
ffltu. • Submission of written
with ECOSOC, once
statements
accredited
• Oral statements
: CSAs cannot participate in
meetings of the complaint
•; procedure or its working
- groups; these meetings are
Btei
:
j-
'ZZZ...
■ i
r-
■■
N/A
p^e
Relevant CSAs
I.
Relevant CSAs
Working with
Governments towards
the preparation of
national reports
• Contributing
stakeholders'
submissions for potential
inclusion in the OHCHR
summary
• Work on follow-up to
UPR outcomes
(conclusions,
recommendations,
voluntary
pledges/commitments)
• Nominating candidates
for appointment to the
Advisory Committee
• Submission of
complaints under the
complaint procedure
1
I
h—<
o
■ i
M-...
O
,SM
;
■j;>
Si.
.9■4
~'r'~
NGOs and other CSAs may ' •
arrange to meet with
mandate-holders during
select segments the
|
annual meeting of special
procedures
a.
£
l
i•
I
.Bit
7'
S
2
I
5
z
—....... -rr-vr— —'■
----- ---------------- -—-j —
,Which civil society actors I
How can these CSAs
i! Which CSAs can contribute ’
(CSAs)
! participate in meetings theyy i.
-- can
------attendjineetings
—
io the
to
me work
worn of
or the
me
. of;themechanism?
attend?
’i mechanism------------------(other
than by
I___ I
attending meetings)?
Interactive dialogue with i
mandate-holders during I
select segments of the
annual meeting of
special procedures
NGOs in consultative
status with ECOSOC can
participate in interactive
dialogues with
mandate-holders at
regular sessions of the
Human Rights Council
OperveHaed Working Group NGOs in consultative status NGOs attending meetings of
\oh the Right to if
with ECOSOC, once
the high-level task force
..^^yelopmont^y,,^
accredited, can attend
have the opportunity to
public segments of the
: make opening statements.
1
'
Working Group’s meetings
This opportunity does-not
;
A wide range of CSAs can
apply, however, to the
attend public sessions of the Working Group’s meetings.
high-level task force
A wide range of CSAs can I
attend meetings
Providing feedback on
the human rights work of '
international
mechanisms at meetings ;
i* Exchanging best
practices at meetings
• Grass-roots presentations i
at meetings
Relevant CSAs
Relevant CSAs
Relevant CSAs
What forms can these
contributions take?
• Submission of urgent
appeals/individual cases
i • Providing support for
:
country visits
I • Working to advocate,
disseminate, follow up
and implement the work
’
of the special procedures
i • Meeting with
mandate-holders
• • Nominating candidates
as mandate-holders
• Submission of
statements to the
Working Group
i • Engagement with the
task force
■ • Working to implement
:
Working Group
recommendations
I ...............................
• Submission of
information to the Social
i
Forum
■;
o
S’ *®
5’
‘^1"
' • <5i . Er : .
-
if .
st- £
to •
c
■ ■f
Is
. CTQ3
3 ;
Q
•
MEETING'MECHANISM
|
^WHchc^
(CSAs) can attend meetings i participate in meetings they
of the mechanism?
attend?
:
.-o
few
ger
i *-®
ia,
1?^
Ii
ation^nV'
f Action .
f
5
I
7
w>.<
'
What forms can these
contributions take?
Relevant CSAs
« Submission of
information to the Forum .
• NGOs in consultative
status with ECOSOC can
nominate candidates for
appointment as
!
chairperson of the Forum j
.._______________
A wide range of CSAs,
• Oral
including NGOs, academics
presentations/statements
and experts on minority
• Written statements
issues
A wide range of CSAs,
Including NGOs and
indigenous peoples and
organizations
..................................... ;
• Oral
presentations/statements !
• Written statements
Relevant CSAs
few
s.
I
_____ ______...................
............ 7........... ■
Which CSAs can contribute
to the work of the
mechanism (other than by
attending meetings)?
NGOs in consultative status • Oral presentations
with ECOSOC
• Written statements
NGOs accredited to the
Durban World Conference
Only CSAs falling into the
I categories provided at left
: may contribute information
I to the Intergovernmental
Working Group
Meetings are, in principle, • Exchange of views at the j
pXrfs'v '-’W' closed. However, the Group
invitation of the Group
may invite CSAs to
exchange views with it
Relevant CSAs
♦ Submission of
information to the Expert
Mechanism
« Nomination of
candidates for
j
appointment as
independent experts
'
•
■
:
;
I
■
•
....
: fife
• Submission of
information to the
Working Group
C• Submission of
information to the Group
..
z
1 ■
8 ,
— i
"I-
How can these CSAs
Which CSAs can contribute
etings they
to the work of the
mechanism (other than by
attending meetings)?
I
NGOs in consultative status • Oral presentations
with ECOSOC
• Submissions of written
NGOs accredited to the
statements
Durban World Conference
:<
?■
Relevant CSAs
... -... I......... -.................
S‘
7
■IS
?Coi
w
• Oral statements
, • Submission of written
statements
NGOs in consultative status , • Oral presentations
with ECOSOC
• Submission of written
NGOs accreditecfto the
■
statements
Durban World Conference !
fl
.-O •<; •>; ■
§5^
• Submission of
information to the
Working Group
• Providing information in
situ during country
missions of the Working
Group
• • Meeting with its
members during country
visits
f
NGOs in consultative
status with ECOSOC
NGOs accredited to the
Durban World
Conference
NGOs (without
consultative status and
that did not attend the
World Conference) can
submit applications to
participate
Indigenous peoples'
representatives
•
i
i
=
5s
What forms can these
contributions take?
Only CSAs falling into the •
I categories provided to the
left may contribute
information to the
I Preparatory Committee and ■
the Intersessional
| open-ended working group
i
;
■
2. ? •
g •'
S'
x
e
I
I
Submission of written
statements to the
Preparatory Committee
and the Intersessional
open-ended working
group
(fl
3
1
,3; b.,. . ;
V"-. <7^;.
I
Relevant CSAs
.
:
'^“7 j.
- 'l-gff rc'f
• Submission of
information and studies
to the Ad Hoc Committee
-
j-.-
■•
I.
rW'-
■ ■.
a: ■■• • w®
■
■
-z-.-
SPECIAL PROCEDI RI?.S
Special procedures at a glance
■
■
s
Wbat are they?
<?
"Special procedures” is
the general name given to
the mechanisms
established by the
Commission on Human
Rights and assumed by
the Human Rights
Council to examine,
monitor, advise and
publicly report on human
rights situations in specific
countries or territories
(country mandates), or
on major phenomena of
human rights violations
worldwide (thematic
mandates). By September
2008 there were 38 special
procedures (30 thematic
mandates and 8 country
mandates) in operation.
Persons appointed to the
special procedures are
independent experts
• Act upon human rights
concerns either in
individual cases or on
more general issues
through direct
communications with
Governments;
• Undertake fact-finding
missions in countries
and issue reports with
The Office of the United
recommendations;
Nations High
• Prepare thematic studies
Commissioner for
I
that serve as a guide on
Human Rights (OHCHR)
nonns and standards; and
! provides them with
• Raise public awareness
personnel, logistical and
i
through the media on
research assistance to
issues within their
support them in their
mandates.
mandates.
• Unlike United Nations
treaty bodies, special
How do they work?
procedures can be
activated
even where a
The special procedures:
State has not ratified the
♦ Interact daily with actual
relevant instrument or
and potential victims of
treaty, and it is not
human rights violations
'
necessary to have
and advocate the
exhausted
domestic
protection of their rights; :
(mandate-holders) and
may be known as special
rapporteurs,
representatives, special
representatives,
independent experts or
members of working
groups.
The Handbook is available in digital format on the OHCHR website at:
h(tp://www.ohchr.org/cK’iEocietyhandbook/
There you will find the Handbook’s chapters available for download, as well as links to all the references
contained in the publication.
Office
the I nked Nation?* ihgh Commissioner for Human Rights
►►
1 m:
;
5
Working with t
hlatipns Human Rights Programme
A Handbook/^^iZiocfety '
■-’I
remedies to access the
special procedures.
How to access and work
with the special
procedures
Civil society actors,
individually or
collectively, may access
and work with the
special procedures. They
can do this by:
• Submitting individual
cases to special
procedures;
: i
-
'
.•r
.-c-
a Meeting individual
mandate-holders
throughout die year and
participating in die
annual meeting of
special procedures
mandate-holders.
• Providing information
and analysis on specific
human rights concerns;
• Providing support for
special procedures’
country visits;
® Working locally or
nationally to advocate,
disseminate, follow up
and implement the work
of special procedures;
• Inviting special
procedures
mandate-holders to
participate in their own
initiatives; and
Civil society actors can
also nominate candidates
as special procedures
mandate-holders.
J
Ui Contacting special procedures mandate-holders
t
VI I
>
- E-nuul: SP1 ^
r ,s’W^fehr.oig (for general
inquiries and^hfonna^n)
-if|
...............
_
urgent gct:ion@ohchr
rorg (for individual cases/complaints only) : 1
....
iction@ohchr.org
::
■■ fax:
'Mpo^eDesk
- - ' ' W3|WE
Fax, <«■
-------------....
...
[ the United Nat.ons High
Commissioner
for
Human ...
R.ghts
Palaisl
may enee del. Falx
,
^yaio-swluedaed
-«»; 1
'Illi
-
^^ibWdiadtote
^b»uM h.d.ea.e in
In tl^e
.be subject
s^l^Obee-m^
.he cover of fl, ejeaeetope, which apeend pmcwlureCs) they wlsh.bjc
Sr"^
mainsiibj^
*FZtewh?1het,hec„fr<!SpP„*,-ee15a
Office o> the United Nations High CtHiiniissiunct
Human Rights
-
a
I
mv.tation to attend a’their assistants)?.
assrstants).
■
iiV’ ■
■■
fc “
i
■ y
W
■ 1M
Kr ■/
■
y
W
■ J s!|
-toe!
:■
-
.-yy.yyy
:<■
y
-yL;
What are the special procedures?
Introduction to the special procedures
“Special procedures” is the general name given to the mechanisms established by the
Commission on Human Rights and assumed by the Human Rights Council to address
either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. A key feature
of the special procedures is their ability to respond rapidly to allegations of human rights
violations occurring anywhere in the world at any time.
Special procedures mandates usually require mandate-holders to monitor, advise and publicly
report on human rights situations in specific countries or territories (country mandates), or on
major phenomena of human rights violations worldwide (thematic mandates). Each special
procedure’s mandate is defined in the resolution that created it. Thematic mandates are
renewed every three years and country mandates annually, unless otherwise decided by the
Human Rights Council.56 By September 2008 there were 38 special procedures in
operation—30 thematic mandates and 8 country mandates (see the annex to this chapter).
Special procedures mandate-holders are either an individual (special rapporteur, special
representative of the Secretary-General, representative of the Secretary-General or
independent expert) ora group of individuals (working group).57 Mandate-holders serve in
their personal capacity for a maximum of six years and do not receive salaries or any other
financial compensation for their work. The independent status of mandate-holders is
crucial to the impartial performance of their functions.
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
provides special procedures mandate-holders with personnel, logistical and research
assistance to support them in their mandates.**
Special procedures mandate-holders:
• Receive and analyse information on human rights situations provided by various
sources on an ongoing basis;
• Network and share information with partners, both governmental and
non-governmental, within and outside the United Nations;
• Seek—often urgently—clarification from Governments on alleged violations and,
where required, request Governments to implement protection measures to guarantee
or restore the enjoyment of human rights;
56 See resolution 5/1, annex, para. 60, and “Terms of office of special procedure mandate-holders”
(A/HRC/PRST/8/2).
57 Working groups are commonly composed of five members, one drawn from each of the five United
Nations regional groups: Africa; Asia; Latin America and the Caribbean; Eastern Europe; and Western
Europe and others.
Ofilcv of (he I ailed NatKins High Commissioner for Human Rights
i■
W:-sh ■ ■
Bf
■ .SO"
' W
:
..
Working wBthe United Nations I lutnan Rights Programme
A Handbookjbr Civil Society
'
-
*
■ ■■
'
"
T
■■
-f
■
Spfe, -
I
g
B’
-
•W-r
. • -•
KSii B Bl® Sib
I
. Raise awareness about specific human rights situations and phenomena, and threats
I
• Xhe^S^
1
communicate their concerns through the
media and other public statements;
» Undertake country visits to assess human rights situations pertaining to their
respective mandates, and make recommendations to Governments with a view to
improving those situations;
« Report and make recommendations to the Human Rrghts Council and, where
relevant to their mandates, to the General Assembly (and in some cases to the
Security Council) on: regular activities under their mandate; field visits; and specific
* Sributethematic studies to the development of authoritative norms and standards
for the subject area of the mandate, and may provide legal expertise on specific
issues.
Review, rationalization and improvement of the special procedures system
The General Assembly, in its resolution 60/251, required the Human Rights Council to
review and, where necessary, improve and rationalize the special P^^s systerm
resolution 5/1 on institution-building of the United Nations Human Rights Counc the
Council elaborated new selection and appointment procedures for special PJ^edures
mandate-holders, and established a process for the review rationahzation and
improvement of special procedures mandates. The Counc.l also adopted reso'ution 5/2,
setting out the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate-holders of the Human
Rights Council.
VII
. ..
Two country mandates (Belarus and Cuba) were discontinued upon
adoption^
resolution 5/1. By the end of its ninth regular session, the Co“"cd had. l^lduding
slavery,
thematic mandates (the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms
fonn of^
v^including
nc
its causes and consequences, and the independent expert on
obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation) and had discontinued
two more country mandates (Democratic Republic of the Congo and Libena).
S ;
Office o- the Outed Xutions High Commissionfci for Honan Rights
i
I
I
I
>
’
■
■■
■
/life
..
•
'
as '
■■■
-
*Rocr'
SPECIAi
H
- i #1
■
' .J;.'.-
.......
'
Selection and appointment of mandate-holders
General criteria for appointment
In line with resolution 5/1, the following general criteria apply to the nomination, selection
and appointment of mandate-holders:
Expertise;
e Experience in the field of the mandate;
Independence;
e Impartiality;
e Personal integrity; and
Objectivity.
In the appointment of mandate-holders, due consideration is also given to gender balance
and equitable geographic representation, as well as to an appropriate representation of
different legal systems.
Who is eligible for appointment?
Highly qualified individuals with established competence, relevant expertise, extensive
professional experience in the field of human rights and flexibility/availability of time are
considered eligible candidates for appointment as mandate-holders.58
Individuals holding decision-making positions in Government or in any other organization
or entity (including non-governmental organizations (NGOs)), national human rights
institutions (NHRIs) and other human rights organizations) which may give rise to a
conflict of interest with the responsibilities inherent in the mandate are excluded.
The principle of non-accumulation of human rights functions is also respected when
appointing mandate-holders. This means that individuals should not occupy multiple
United Nations human rights mandates at the same time.
Who can nominate candidates?
The following may nominate candidates as special procedures mandate-holders:
• Governments;
• Regional groups operating within the United Nations human rights system;
Q
International organizations or their offices (e.g., OHCHR);
G NGOs;
Other human rights bodies; and
Individuals.
58
See also Human Rights Council decision 6/102.
Otr'icv of ihc t nitvd .Naiions High Commissioner for Human Rights
■
' ' A' ''f*'
... ................ ......
r ■■
V
Public list of candidates and list of vacancies
Based on the nominations received, OHCHR prepares, maintains and periodically updates
a public list of eligible candidates. This includes candidates’ personal data, areas of
expertise and professional experience. OHCHR also publicizes all upcoming vacancies of
mandates.
.......................................................................
,
.
■■
.
••
■■
.
KEB The public list of candidates is available under the special procedures section
of.feCounril.sE^net
'1
1
*
1
Consultative Group
1
The Consultative Group, with one member from each of the five regional groups, serving in
their personal capacity, examines the OHCHR public list and proposes its own list of
candidates for the consideration of the President of the Human Rights Council. The
Group’s recommendations must be public and substantiated.
When determining the necessary expertise, experience, skills and other relevant
requirements for each vacant mandate, the Consultative Group takes into account, as
appropriate, the views of stakeholders, including the current or outgoing
mandate-holders. The Consultative Group is assisted by OHCHR.
Appointment of mandate-holders
VI
On the basis of the Consultative Group’s recommendations and following broad
consultations, the Council’s President produces his/her own list, which identifies an
appropriate candidate for each vacancy. This list is presented to the Council s member and
observer States at least two weeks before the session and, if necessary, the President will
conduct further consultations to ensure that her/his proposed candidates are endorsed. The
appointment process is completed with the Council’s approval of the Presidents list.
Pl
r
a,'®®;.-;
■
■
h
■
-oc
Office of the Lnuecl Vjiions High Commissioner for Human Rights
Jg
;
■
;
/. S-.L-
-
..
-7
3
-
■
TrSPECESL PROCEDBi?r
ki
>
s;
<
■
■■
Annual meeting and Coordination Committee of the special procedures
Since 1994, annual meetings of special procedures mandate-holders, which take place in
Geneva, have been organized as a follow-up to the Vienna World Conference on Human
Rights. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, adopted at the World
Conference, underlined the importance of preserving and strengthening the system of
special procedures and specified that special procedures should be enabled to harmonize
and rationalize their work through periodic meetings.
The annual meeting is also an opportunity for mandate-holders to meet and exchange
views with member States, the Bureau of the Human Rights Council, human rights
treaty bodies, NGOs and other civil society actors, and representatives from the United
Nations Secretariat and agencies and programmes on issues such as follow-up to their
country visits and recommendations.
jr-
. *Ra5S
t-- " / 'r
I
ft
For current information o
on the annual meeting of special procedures
visit OHCHR’s website.
The Coordination Committee of special procedures was established at the twelfth annual
meeting of special procedures mandate-holders in 2005. The Coordination Committee
facilitates coordination between mandate-holders and acts as a bridge between the special
procedures and OHCHR, the broader United Nations human rights system, and civil
society actors.
The Coordination Committee is composed of six mandate-holders elected for a one-year
term and is chaired by one of them.59 The election of its members takes place at the
annual meeting and takes into account the need for regional and gender balance, and the
need for a balanced representation of thematic and country special procedures
mandate-holders on the Committee. The Coordination Committee is supported in its work
by the Special Procedures Division of OHCHR.
Formr^ntinfA^f
SOtS
H
•
x■
.. -
59 The previous Chairperson remains on the Committee for a further year ex officio.
Office oi the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Kights
... W
Working with the United Nations.Human Rights Programme ■v.
A HandbookJor Civil Socie^
'•A.
'4-
How do the special procedures work?
Special procedures mandate-holders have a number of tools available to them to meet the
terms of their mandates, including:
® Sending communications;
o Undertaking country visits;
« Publishing reports;
• Preparing thematic studies; and
• Issuing press releases.
Mandate-holders are also guided in their work by the Manual of the special procedures
and the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate-holders.
A. Code of Conduct and Manual of the special procedures
Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate-holders
The Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate-holders was adopted by the
Human Rights Council in 2007. Its purpose is to make the system of special procedures
more effective by defining the standards of ethical behaviour and professional conduct that
special procedures mandate-holders must observe when discharging their mandates.
Manual of the special procedures
The Manual of the special procedures, produced by the mandate-holders, aims to provide
guidance to mandate-holders in the performance of their roles. It also seeks to facilitate a
better understanding of their work by all other stakeholders. The Manual tries to reflect
good practices and to assist mandate-holders in their efforts to promote and protect human
rights.
VI
The Manual was originally adopted at the sixth annual meeting of special procedures
mandate-holders in 1999. Since that time it has been revised to reflect the changing
structure of the United Nations human rights machinery, new developments in relation to
mandates and the evolving working methods of mandate-holders. For its latest revision,
input was sought from Governments, NGOs and other stakeholders. The Manual is subject
to periodic review and operates in consonance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct.
MM
■'
’
ualof the special procedures visit its page
^3
Office of the Ctiked Nations High CGniniissionei for Ifutniin Rights
' ■ ■
■
■
SPECIAL PROCEDU
SI
SR -
Wk.-., s a .
■■■<
■
.
<
-
-
:
Km'-'
•
- -
B. Communications
One of the main activities of special procedures mandate-holders is taking action on
individual cases, based on information that they receive from relevant and credible sources
(mainly civil society actors).
Interventions generally involve the sending of a letter to a Government (letter of allegation)
requesting information on and responses to allegations and, where necessary, asking the
Government to take preventive or investigatory action (urgent appeal). These interventions
are known as “communications”.
Communications in 2007
A total of 1003 communications were sent in 2007
49 per cent of these were joint communications
2294 individual cases were covered; 13 per cent of these concerned women
Governments responded to 52 per cent of communications
A’total of 128 countries received communications.
Urgent appeals are sent when the alleged violations are time-sensitive in terms of involving
loss of life, life-threatening situations or either imminent or ongoing damage of a very grave
nature to victims. Letters of allegation are sent when the urgent appeal procedure does not
apply, to communicate information and request clarification about alleged human rights
violations.
Mandate-holders may send joint communications when a case falls within the scope of more
than one mandate. The decision of whether or not to intervene with a Government is left to
the discretion of special procedure mandate-holders and will depend on criteria established
by them, as well as the criteria set out in the Code of Conduct. Mandate-holders are also
required to take into account, in a comprehensive and timely manner, information provided
by the State concerned on situations relevant to their mandate.
In their information-gathering activities, mandate-holders must:
• Be guided by the principles of discretion, transparency, impartiality and
even-handedness;
• Preserve the confidentiality of sources of testimonies if divulging them could cause
harm to the individuals involved;
• Rely on objective and dependable facts based on evidentiary standards that are
appropriate to the non-judicial character of the reports and conclusions they are
required to write; and
Office of (tie United Nations High CommLssioner for Human Rights
$3
— .............■
■
■
■
--
■
:
■
® Give representatives of the concerned State the opportunity to comment on their
assessments and to respond to the allegations made against the State. The State’s
written summary responses are also to be annexed to the mandate-holder's report(s).
r
C. Country visits
Country or field visits (or fact-finding missions) are an important tool available to special
procedures mandate-holders. Mandate-holders typically send a letter to a Government
requesting to visit the country, and, if the Government agrees, an invitation to visit is
extended. Some countries have issued “standing invitations”, which means that they are,
in principle, prepared to receive a visit from any special procedures mandate-holder.
Country visits are guided by the provisions contained in the Code of Conduct and the terms
of reference for fact-finding missions by special procedures.60
r
f
r
r
r
■?
i| J
By September 2008 more than 60 States had issued standing invitations.
To see
procedures visit OHCHR’s website.
VI
Country visits allow mandate-holders to assess the general human rights situation and/or
the specific institutional, legal, judicial and administrative situation in a given State, under
their respective mandates. During these visits, they meet national authorities,
representatives of civil society, victims of human rights violations, the United Nations
country team, academics, the diplomatic community and the media.
On the basis of their findings, they make recommendations in public reports. These reports are
submitted to the Human Rights Council. Some mandate-holders also hold press conferences
and issue preliminary findings at the end of a country visit. The success of country visits is
greatly enhanced by the commitment of the Government and the participation of civil society
actors, before, during and after the visit, to support the work of the mandate-holder.
D. Reporting and contributing to the Human Rights Council
Special procedures mandate-holders are requested by the Human Rights Council to
present annual reports in which they describe the activities undertaken during the previous
year. In some circumstances, the Council may also request a mandate-holder to report on
a specific theme or topic of interest to it. Reports are public and represent an authoritative
tool for follow-up or advocacy in the mandate’s area.
60 The terms of reference for country visits were adopted at the fourth annual meeting (1997) of
special procedures (E/CN.4/1998/45) and are intended to guide Governments in the conduct of
country visits.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
-
sCte-
'CC..p
'
i
-
|
g :
spe!
..j..
B r ->■
CL PROCEDURES
■' WSi’B
■
®
■
■ - ■
■' p ...
J-.
Cfes i'teT
■ . a s.-
Annual reports contain information on working methods, theoretical analysis, general trends
and developments with regard to the mandate and may contain general recommendations.
Reports may also contain summaries of communications transmitted to Governments and
the replies received. Reports on country visits are usually presented as addenda to the annual
reports. Some mechanisms are requested to report to the United Nations General Assembly,
which meets in New York from September to December each year.
Special procedures mandate-holders also contribute expertise to other aspects of the
Human Rights Council’s work.
I
■
I Tut To access special procedures reports to the Council visit OHCHR’s website.
UzSi ■■■"
' -y ' '
:.. ■
Special session on the world food crisis
* i
In May 2008 the Special
Rapporteur on the right
to food, Mr. Olivier De
Schutter, called on die
Human Rights Council to
hold a special session on
the world food crisis. In
response, the Council held
a special session on “the
negative impact on the
realization of the right to
■ food of the worsening of
the world food crisis,
caused inter alia by the
soaring food prices” op 22
May 2008.
> J
The Special Rapporteur on
the right to food attended
and was actively involved
in the special session,
which was the first to be
held on a thematic issue.
■
■
■
■■ tec..-:'-/ S.:;,’.-.
E. Thematic studies
Special procedures mandate-holders can also prepare thematic studies, which are useful
tools to guide Governments, as well as civil society, on the normative content and
implementation of human rights norms and standards. Mandate-holders also host and
attend expert meetings on thematic human rights issues.
Ofticc nf ihe United Nations High Commissioner for Human Right*
■1
fc
■J-/
.
7 7 7'77:./ 37 .. ' .
-7 fefc.-777
■
Working with the United Nations. Human Rights Programme
A Handbook for Civil Society^
. .
j.
c ' --..y 7
OU-
'k
.....
■
■
Expert workshop - Strengthening the protection of women from
torture
In September 2007, an
treatment or punishment :
expert workshop on
with a view to contributing I
;
“Strengthening the
to a more systematic
|
protection of women from
application of the
torture” was organized by
international framework on i
:
OHCHR on behalf of the
torture to women’s
■
Special Rapporteur on
: concerns and
•
torture and other cruel, i strengthening their
,
inhuman or degrading
| protection. Twenty-five
experts from different
regions and from a broad
range of non-governmental
and intergovernmental
organizations (including
regional and United
Nations anti-torture
mechanisms) participated
in the discussions.
F. Press releases
Special procedures can—individually or collectively—issue press releases highlighting
specific situations or the international norms to be respected by States.
r® ^5^“ av*lhblc
VI
,hc
p
5^';-
5M“ol
How to access and work with the special procedures
‘'Civil society in general, and international, regional and national NGOs in particular,
provide invaluable support to the Special Procedures system. They provide information
and analysis, help to disseminate the findings of the Special Procedures, and assist in
follow-up activities, and thus help also formulate and implement relevant national
policies and programmes for human rights education to improve situations of the issues
under the Special Procedures. Meetings with their representatives are appropriate in all
aspects of the work of the Special Procedures including in their activities in Geneva and
New York, on field missions, and more generally. It is thus appropriate for
mandate-holders to give careful and timely consideration to invitations from NGOs and
academic institutions to participate in activities such as conferences, debates, seminars
and regional consultations. The OHCHR should generally be kept informed of the relevant
activities of mandate-holders as they relate to civil society."
Manual of Operations of the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council (para. 133)
Office of chc United Nations High Conmiissioner for Human Rights
^6
1
■
...
,W'
■
| SreCALPROCEIMHCS
’
'Ol JL-V>lZxJL/ a
■■
■
"
'-i:
<
/
11 s ■.
Over the years, the special procedures have established relationships and have cooperated
with various civil society actors. Special procedures have helped them in providing
protection to actual or potential victims and have contributed to their empowerment.
Different mandates have developed different forms of participation and collaboration.
The effectiveness of the special procedures system in protecting human rights and
preventing violations is, in turn, also dependent upon the active involvement of other
human rights actors, including civil society. International, regional and national NGOs and
other civil society actors are essential participants in the special procedures system.
Furthermore, civil society has long been at the forefront of human rights standard-setting
and advocacy for the creation of new mandates.
Categories of civil society actors that engage with the special procedures include:
® Human rights organizations (NGOs, associations, victims groups);
® Human rights defenders;
• Related issue-based organizations;
• Coalitions and networks (women’s rights, children’s rights, minority rights,
environmental rights);
• Persons with disabilities and their representative organizations;
• Community-based groups (indigenous peoples, minorities);
• Faith-based groups (churches, religious groups);
• Unions (trade unions as well as professional associations such as journalist
associations, bar associations, magistrate associations, student unions);
• Social movements (peace movements, student movements, pro-democracy
movements);
• Professionals contributing directly to the enjoyment of human rights (humanitarian
workers, lawyers, doctors and medical workers);
• Relatives of victims; and
• Public institutions that include activities aimed at promoting human rights (schools,
universities, research bodies).
Office nf the United Nations High Commissioner h u Human Rights
o
J
ft
: > .,hd\.dN I
A ■
■-'VS
‘■'r?
■■■
■
..S’iM'
■■•.■.ry?
■
Specia. procedures’ interaction with ciyiLiocietyactors i^QQ? (pergent).;,
IOO
90
100
8
93
80
69
70
70
65
60
50
I- g
20
10
o
II II ft
g B
I I iI I I
8
50
45
®: . SB
40 —
30
60
3
|
34
II
I I h 1 Is
I A
I
1
I
i
i i
J
I
JI
I1I
I
i B
ft B
Sis
o
B
13
9
f'”'
c
p
I
g
i
3
2o
c
p
I
o
t
Q.
oo
E
£
o
£
o
Civil society actors, individually or collectively, may access and work with the special
procedures. Unlike the United Nations treaty bodies, special procedures can be activated
even where a State has not ratified the relevant instrument or treaty, and it is not
necessary to have exhausted domestic remedies to access the special procedures.
Special procedures can therefore be used for any country or human rights issue, within
the parameters of existing mandates.
Civil society actors may contribute to the work of the special procedures by:
• Submitting individual allegations of human rights violations to the relevant special
procedures mandate-holder(s);
• Providing support for country visits and information and analysis on human rights
violations to various special procedures mandate-holders;
• Performing a preventive role by providing information to special procedures on the
introduction of new legislation which may lead to human rights violations,• Working on follow-up to special procedures’ recommendations locally and nationally.
More broadly, civil society can support the dissemination of the work and findings of
special procedures mandate-holders within its constituencies.
The vital relationship between the special procedures and civil society is illustrated in the
mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders.
Office of the L'wted Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
•.
- r- -
Mis/
MS'
-f.-.
. I' --
■<.
SPECIAL; PROCEDURES
lik "
■■ /
K
'
'
j
■
-
w-■ ■
a®
./••C
rai Special Rapporteur oiithe situation ofhugan rights defenders
I
k
and cultural rights. Human
association with others,
rights defenders must
to promote and protect
accept the universality of
human rights and
human rights as defined in
fundamental freedoms;
the Universal
| • Establish cooperation and
Declaration of Human
conduct dialogue with
The mandate of die Special :
Rights. A person cannot
Governments and odier
Rapporteur on the
deny some human rights
interested actors on die
situation of human rights
•
and yet claim to be a
promotion and effective
defenders (formerly the
i implementation of the
human rights defender
Special Representative of
j because he or she is an
Declaration on the
the Secretary-General on the
j advocate for others.
Right and
situation of human rights
Responsibility of
defenders) was established
j Are civil society actors
Individuals, Groups
as a special procedures
human rights defenders?
and Organs of Society
mechanism in 2000 by
|
National and international
to Promote and Protect
Commission on Human
Universally Recognized
staff and volunteers working
Rights resolution 2000/61.
{
for civil society and NGOs,
Human Rights and
Its establishment recognizes
j institutions or associations
Fundamental
die vital, and often
diat address human rights
Freedoms (commonly
precarious, role of human
I concerns around the world
known as die
rights defenders around the
j may be described as human
“Declaration on Human
world. The “protection” of
| rights defenders.
Rights Defenders”); and
human rights defenders is
• Recommend effective
the Special Rapporteur’s
What is tire Declaration
strategies to better protect
overriding concern; it is
on Human Rights
human rights defenders
understood to include both
Defenders?
and follow up on these
the protection of defenders
Adopted by the General
recommendations.
and die protection of the
Assembly in December
right to defend human
1998, the Declaration on
What is a human rights
rights. The Special
Human Rights Defenders
Rapporteur’s main roles , ;?•:£. defender?
defines die “defence” of
A human rights defender is
are to:
human rights as a right in
anybody who, individually
• Seek, receive, examine
itself and recognizes any
or in association with
and respond to
person undertaking human
information ori the
. others, is engaged in. the
rights work as a “human
situation and die rights
promotion, protection and
rights defender”. The
realization of civil and
of anyone, acting
political, economic, social
Declaration provides for
individually or in
Who is the Special
Rapporteur on the
situation of human
rights defenders?
.. y
n
'S
*
t
1
►►
Office nf die t ailed Nations High Cominissioner foe Human Kights
wt
■
... - ■
-
-
--
.‘SsK/
■
i|
T- ’
,^,r.
:y
;
y
.
the support and protection
j CH-1211 Geneva 10
How to contact the
of human rights defenders
[ E-mail:
Special Rapporteur or
in the context of their ,
submit an allegation of a j To submit an allegation of
work. It does not create
a violation:
! violation against a
new rights but instead
i urgent-action@ohchr.org
human rights defender
articulates existing rights in
: To contact the mandate
Civil society actors can
a way that makes it easier
| holder for other purposes:
contact die Special
to apply them to the
defenders@ohchr.org
Rapporteur at the following
practical role and situation
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 06
address (note that
Phone: +41 (0)22 917 12 34
of human rights defenders.
correspondence should
| - This is the number of the
clearly refer to the human
A key role of the Special
rights defenders mandate): ■ United Nations switchboard
! in Geneva, Switzerland.
Rapporteur is to report on
the situation of human
Special Rapporteur on
| Callers should ask to speak
j with staff at OHCHR
rights defenders in all parts
the situation of human
s dealing with the special
of the world and on
rights defenders,
| procedures, and specifically
possible means to enhance
Office of die United
their protection in full
Nations High Commissioner | with staff supporting die
mandate of the Special
compliance with the
for Human Rights
Rapporteur on the situation
Declaration.
Palais des Nations
of human rights defenders.
8-14, avenue de la Paix
■
■
.
.
.
•
.
.
-
.
.
.
rjgfats defenders
VI
AA < :
■ ■'
A'
AA
■■
^[ef^nders from over 7p ..
stJje defence of women's
rights.
61 The Special
dSithtries.
fights.61 The
Special
Rcpfcsentarive 61
Representative
also acted on
Secretary-General on the
449 cases of violations of
situation of human-rights ; During her term of office,
women human rights
defenders, Ms. llinajikini; ? . the Special Representative
j
spearheaded a threejyfcaf ' consistently reiterated that
^fenders, concerning 1,314
ritlrvimr»r* • ■
I'*:
rz-»rv-*zio z4o£c»rv
'defenders, during her term
international
campaign
: women
defenders were
more
at
risk
of
certain
forms
of office. Sixty-five of these
culminat^^
” * and' restrictions,
’
! communications were sent
Conference on Women A of violence
l joindy with the Special
and became vulnerable to
Human_Righl^
j Rapporteur on violence
prejudice, exclusion and
held in Sri Lanka, which
women, its causes
public repudiation by State [ against
:
brought together leading
forces and social actors ? , and consequences^
.
espeaaliy
when engaged in . ,
women h»»m r.Shtt
... .0
' -
...
- -
•
i ’
-
61 See E/CN.4/2002/106, paras. 80-94.
Office of the l.nlted Nations High Coiimiissionei for Human Righb
I
4
I
9
I
..i. -A
■<.
I
:•
< s
i;
SPECIAL PROCEDURES
r
v
.
X
■
;
■■
A. Submitting individual cases to special procedures mandate-holders
Anyone can submit credible and reliable information on human rights violations to
special procedures mandate-holders who have been mandated to receive information on
human rights violations. The submission of individual complaints to the special procedures
is one of the most effective ways of seeking direct intervention in individual cases. Civil
society actors can often act as a conduit for individuals seeking protection from human
rights abuses.
Communications sent and received are usually confidential and remain so until the
mandate-holder ’s report to the Human Rights Council is made public, unless the
mandate-holder decides to issue a public statement earlier in the process. This report
contains information on communications sent and replies received from Governments on
specific cases. Please note that the alleged victims are named in the reports, except
children or other specific categories of victims, such as victims of sexual violence.
Given the public nature of the reports of special procedures mechanisms, it is important
that organizations acting on behalf of victims of human rights violations ensure that the
victim is aware that his/her case is being transmitted to the special procedures
mechanisms, that his/her name will be communicated to the authorities and that his/her
name (or initials) will appear in the public report of the special procedure. It should be
noted, however, that the authorization of the victim is not always required to submit the
case (e.g., if the victim is unreachable because he or she is in detention, or other such
circumstances). Several mandates have developed special questionnaires to be used when
submitting information on human rights violations.
c>
Each special procedure establishes different requirements for the submission of
communications. However, the following minimum information must be included for a
communication to be assessed:
• The identification of the alleged victim(s);
• The identification of the alleged perpetrators of the violation-,
• The identification of the person(s) or organization(s) submitting the communication
(this information will be kept confidential);
• The date and place of incident; and
• A detailed description of the circumstances in which the alleged violation occurred.
Standard question^ ire,
for spccitic
foecffic mandates
MU a«
ires tor
c available under several
1 “ sSl
^ alleged vlolarions on OHCI Hi a wvbsicc.
Office nf die United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
I
V
f
7'. ':'
Working with the.-United Nations :Jfluman Rights Programme'
I
MG G;
:
f■
. ...
:
:
/'-'.tf
'
1
.-.Vfc
■
Civil society actors may also submit follow-up information to mandate-holders on whether
or not the human rights issue(s)/situation(s) addressed in their original submission has
improved. Follow-up information is of great use to mandate-holders. Some base their
requests for country visits on trends identified through the communications procedure.
Information provided to the special procedures should not be politically motivated,
abusive or based solely on media reports.
Individual cases/complaints can be submitted by:
J® /.
E-mail: urgent-action^ohchr.org
:
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 06; or
Postal address: OHC1IR UNOG, 814 avenue de I3
Switzerland.
---
;
-Ge
When sending epnimunications, please specify which special procedures
mechanism the information is addressed to in the subject line of the e-mail or
ax.oronthceojdope.
;
For more information on how to submit iniormauon mgardmj an alleged viobbon to
the special praoWares, please refer to chapter Vl« (SubmKUag a complamt on an
aUcged human right, rfolatlon) of thia UandM, and comae. SrDlnfotohehr.on;.
B. Providing support for country visits
w
Country visits by special procedures mandate-holders are essential for gathering first-hand
information as they allow for direct observation of the human rights situation in a specific
country. International and national NGOs, members of civil society and grass-roots
movements have important contributions to make at different stages of a mission.
1. Proposing a country visit
Civil society actors can encourage Governments to invite mandate-holders to visit a
country, or to extend a standing invitation to the special procedures. Alerting
mandate-holders to the issues in a State may also determine whether a mandate-holder
requests a particular visit, as some mandate-holders base their requests for country visits
on the amount of information (individual complaints/cases) that they receive. Some
mandate-holders have also conducted joint country visits.
Office of the l.nited Nations High Commissioner for 1 finnan Rights
■
4
SPECIAL PROCEDURES
. J: 'fc
-■W<.
-
•
■■
-
<.4
....
•
2. When a country visit has been confirmed
Once a country visit has been confirmed (when a State has approved a mandate-holder’s
request to visit and dates for the visit have been agreed), civil society actors may raise
public awareness of the visit.
Civil society actors can also submit relevant information to and raise matters of concern
with a mandate-holder before a country visit takes place. This may enable the
mandate-holder to raise specific issues with the authorities ahead of time and, if needed,
make arrangements to include it in the official programme of the visit (e.g., by requesting
access to specific detention centres or refugee camps or by arranging to meet with specific
national or local authorities, or private individuals).
National level coordination among Brazilian NGOs
A group of Brazilian NGOs
(Plataforma Dhesc) has
established a human rights
monitoring system
modelled on the special
procedures. Six focal
points each work on an
economic, social and
cultural issue—the right to
adequate housing,
\ issue to each focal point
education, environment,
has maximized the use of
food, health or work—and
resources and expertise,
produce national reports
and has reduced
on that issue which are
duplication, resulting in a
transmitted to the relevant j more effective contribution
special procedures
■ to the work of die special
____________
mandate-holder(s).
The
j procedures.
allocation of a specific
I
3. During the country visit
During a country visit, civil society actors may ask to meet with mandate-holders by
contacting the mandate-holder, or relevant OHCHR staff in Geneva or in the field, by fax,
post or e-mail.
4,^-,:.... ......................
__ ithe O
—' ^eld omce and desk officer
Li
i
.1
■..
4. After a country visit
Civil society actors can play a key role in follow-up to the conclusions and
recommendations resulting from a country visit by:
• Disseminating recommendations to their local constituencies;
Office nf rhe l.nilvd Nations High Conuni-ssioncr for Hu num Kights
C\i
I
<
|
_
w-'illt
---. Working
InnedNZsHon^^ Programme
^Handbo<^^v^ Society^
|| rfM
Wf-W
-.i
. Working with Governments towards the implementation of special procedures
. ZtXting'inZs to specific follow-up reports issued by some mandate-holders;
. Xitoring the steps the Government has taken to meet the recommendations, and
keeping the mandate-holder(s) informed of the States progress towa
implementing recommendations.
r = | Developing networks to work on the implementation of sP< rial
|^| procedures recommendations
by racism and xenophol .«,
of his mission report. This
Following the visit of the
including the Ainu
network served as a
then Special Rapporteur
I (formally recognised by
means for local
on contemporary forms ! central
NGOs to share information | Japan as an indigenous
of racism, racial
concerning racism and
| people in 2008) naUona
discrimination,
; minorities (Buraku people
discrimination in Japan
xenophobia and related
J and people of Okinawa?,
and to engage with
intolerance, l^lr. Doudou
descendants nf
of neoolc
people
international mechanisms.
Didne, to Japan in 2005, ' J
from former Japanese
The Special Rapporteur
the International
colonies (Koreans and
welcomed the
Movement Against All
Chinese), and new
establishment of this
Forms of Racism
| immigrants from other
network as well as the _
(IMADR) and B5 minority
Asian,,African, Soutli
constmetive dialogue
and human rights groups
American and,Middle
established between the
established an NQO
_ ^em cdpntries.
networkforte
auhonies NCOS and <
elimination of racial
members
of the
---------j
communities most affected j
discrimination, on the basis
;;L< ;
VI
■
’
.
w
C. Providing information to special procedures mandate-holders
NGOs can bring information on a specific b11™31? a^Sspecial
on its laws and practice with human. r.ghts impon a topic {a|ling
actors, including research and academic institutions.
*
Office of the United Unions High Commissioner for Human Rights
t,
X :
X
;xxx x
-
St-ztw i M
zz<
i
-
■-
...
<<
'
■
.-Z
:.
...
:CIAL PROCEDURES
■Z-Oz
■
■ ft-; I
STTg Civil society cooperation with the Special Rapporteur on the right
, zz: ®
j___ «__ ;__ _ the Report r%<-»
education in developing
on the tnofit
right tn
to education
education of
of
persons with disabilities
In 2007, the Special
Rapporteur on the right
to education, Mr. Vemor
Munoz Villalobos, devoted
his third annual report
(A/HRC/4/29) to the right
to education of persons
with disabilities, given that
they are one of the groups
most affected by exclusion
from education.
The report provided
in-depth analysis of the
institutional and legal
framework of the right to
education of persons with
disabilities. It also
examined the implications
of “inclusive education” as
an inherent and
fundamental component of
■ the right to education, and
addressed the main
! obstacles and challenges
i threatening the hill
realization of the right to
education of persons with
disabilities.
and to develop
recommendations.
OHCHR, in cooperation
’ with the Special
Rapporteur, also organized
a two-day expert seminar
In developing the report,
on the right to education
the Special Rapporteur
of persons with disabilities,
consulted with national
!
in which persons with
and regional organizations,
including organizations of j disabilities and persons
i working on disability
persons with disabilities,
] issues took an active part.
and received first-hand
The contributions of civil
information (including
!
society representatives at
studies, statistics and
the seminar were reflected
perspectives) from
•
in the Special Rapporteur’s
well-established local and
! report, which has been
regional organizations.
■ widely disseminated to
This information helped
j persons with disabilities
him to identify the
and their representative
challenges and obstacles
| organizations, universities,
hampering the realization
of the. right to education of ! Government agencies, and
I other civil society groups.
persons with disabilities,
c>
c»
*
Office of die Uiiied Naiion> High Commissioner for Human Kigho
- pi .
■ ;
- s
'
1
.........
.
;
Workmg wlth theSHnited
United Nations
Nation Human Rights Programme*
■
■
...
•i
■
w
I
rzi
f =:
t.
’i*''
The contribution of academic institutions to the mandate of the
Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of
human rights and transnational corporations and other business
enterprises
A wide range of academic
institutions from around
the world have contributed
to the work of the Special
Representative of the
Secretary General on the
issue of human rights
and transnational
corporations and other
business enterprises.
Contributions have taken
the form of research on
specific topics requested or
agreed by the Special
Representative,
participation in
consultations and expert
I meetings convened by
I him, and comments and
submissions to the Special
,
j
i
[
.
| Representative on various
issues covered by his
{ mandate. All contributions
! received by the Special
Representative are
available on a website
i operated by the Business
i & Human Rights
Resource Centre.62
|
D. Working locally, nationally or regionally to advocate, disseminate, follow up
and implement the work of special procedures
The ongoing work of special procedures mandate-holders, including their reports and
recommendations, provides valuable material that civil society actors can integrate into
their ongoing advocacy work. This may include:
1. Implementing special procedures' recommendations at the national level
VI
c>
Follow-up advocacy with Governments to implement special procedures’
recommendations, especially after a country visit, is an important role that civil society can
perform to advance human rights. Civil society actors may take action to monitor a
Government’s progress in implementing recommendations, or may seek to fulfil the
recommendations themselves if they are addressed to civil society.
2. National or local standard-setting
International standards, model laws or best practices documented by special procedures
mandate-holders can be used by civil society actors to raise awareness of a particular
issue, to campaign for improved national or local standards, or to act as a benchmark to
interpret national laws.
i
62 OHCHR is not responsible for the content of external websites and the provision of links on this
page does not imply that OHCHR associates itself with such content.
Office of the l.'iiitecl Nations High Commissioner for Hum in Rights
-
Civil society actors may also host events and training programmes towards the
development of standard-setting, and to work towards building the capacity of other civil
society actors to use and Engage with the special procedures. Mandate-holders often
contribute to such capacity-building activities.
3. Tools for the development of operational guidelines
The work of special procedures mandate-holders can provide detailed material on rights
and obligations that civil society actors can use to develop internal operational guidelines.
For example:
.
• The work of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education provides valuable
guidelines for educational institutions;
• The work of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment can be used by detention centres and prisons in
developing internal training and operational standards; and
• The work of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and
consequences can provide valuable definitions of violence against women, their
causes and the best practices for eliminating them. These guidelines, definitions and
procedures can be used in schools, prisons, women’s shelters or other organizations
seeking to create safe conditions for women.
E. Meeting with special procedures mandate-holders
Special procedures mandate-holders are available for meetings with civil society actors as
part of their consultations in Geneva, New York (for those attending the General Assembly)
and during their country visits. These meetings are particularly important to help build an
ongoing partnership between mandate-holders and civil society. The staff servicing
mandate-holders at OHCHR can be contacted throughout the year to arrange these
meetings.
( Unix ’'4 die I nhvd \adon> High Commissioner foi Human Kigho
w ! " J®
9:'
1'1.
.
ji
i f - 98
» S j1. ■ <11:'
1Working with the United Nanons tan R|
'W
:
91
1
•
1 i-
9
....gf.--- t k-;. , - f 1
:119 w -if..
•
:'vW. ■■
_..
■
B. Table of country mandates
Independent expert on the situation
of human rights in Burundi
Special Representative of the
Secretary-General for human rights
in Cambodia
..............
)n
Special Rapporteur on the
situation
of human rights in the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea
2008
2004 Commission on
Human Rights
resolution 2004/82
(duration of
[
mandate not
j specified)
m
[2008
1993 Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
I
1993/6
: 2004 Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
(2004/13
Human Rights
Council
resolution 9/19
(duration of
mandate not
specified)
Human Rights
Council
resolution 9/15
(for 1 year)
12008 Human Rights
I
I
Council
resolution 7/15
(for 1 year)
• Commission on
Independent expert appointed by the 1995
Human Rights
Secretary-General on the situation of
* resolution
human rights in Haiti
i 1995/70
2008 j Human Rights
i 1992 I Commission on
2008 j Human Rights
Special Rapporteur on the situation
of human rights in Myanmar
Special Rapporteur on the situation
of human rights in the Palestinian
territories occupied since 1967
; Human Rights
I resolution
j 1992/58_____
( 1993 (Commission on
Human Rights
resolution 1993/2 A
(“until the end of the
Israeli occupation")
Council
President’s
Statement
A/HCR/PRST/9/1
(for 2 years)
Council
resolution 7/32
j (for 1 year)
1
! Commission on
Independent expert appointed on the 1993
j Human Rights
situation of human rights in Somalia
? resolution
? 1993/86
2008 I Human Rights
i 2005 | Commission on
{Human Rights
! resolution
I
| 2005/82
; 2008 [Human Rights
Special Rapporteur on the situation
of human rights in the Sudan
Office of the United Nations High Coniniissioner for Human Rights
I Council
I resolution 7/35
I (for 1 year)
(Council
| resolution 9/17
: (for 9 months)
-
• i
;
i
a
-
Ji
■ 'll
'
' SPFClAlPROCBDtJHl'S
-- .
z*.
■ wI
Title / Mandate
Mandate established
8
te-' Mandate extended
Special Rapporteur on the adverse
effects of the illicit movement and
dumping of toxic and dangerous
products and wastes on the
enjoyment of human rights
1995 Commission on
! 2008 Human Rights
Human Rights
resolution
j 1995/81
Council
resolution 9/1
(for 3 years)
Special Rapporteur on the human
rights aspects of trafficking in
persons, especially in women and
children
i 2004
Special Representative of the
Secretary-General on human rights
and transnational corporations and
other business enterprises
2005
Special Rapporteur on violence
against women, its causes and
consequences
Commission on
Human Rights
decision
2004/110
1
Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
! 2005/69
j 1994 • Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
I 1994/45
i 2008 Human Rights
Council
resolution 8/12
(for 3 years)
i ________
I 2008 Human Rights
-4
Council
resolution 8/7
(for 3 years)
—
i 2008 Human Rights
Council
resolution 7/24
i
(for 3 years)
f
r
Ofticc nf die United Nauons Uigli Commissioner for Human Kigho
■■
i
.
I :
3 It
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Prograrnnu
■
-
8
■
/■
...
■.
-
■
■ • <
n Eli EE1
•_ i
Special Rapporteur on the Human
rights of migrants
Independent expert on minority
issues
1999 Commission on
2008
Human Rights
Council
resolution 8/10
(for 3 years)
2005 Commission on
2008
Human Rights
Council
resolution 7/6
(for 3 years)
Human Rights
resolution
1999/44
Human Rights
resolution
2005/79^
Special Rapporteur on contemporary 1993
forms of racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and
related intolerance
Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
1993/20
. ------- f 12007
Special Rapporteur on contemporary
forms of slavery, including its causes
and consequences
Human Rights
Council
resolution 6/14
(for 3 years)
Independent expert on human rights 2005
and international solidarity
Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
2005/55
i 2008 •. Human Rights
Council
| resolution 7/34
(for 3 years)
2008 | Human Rights
. Council
j resolution 7/5
I (for 3 years)
-- I1—2008
- I Human Rights
I_____
Independent expert on the effects of ■ 2000 Commission on
| Council
Human Rights
resolution
2000/82
foreign debt and other related
international financial obligations of
States on the full enjoyment of
human rights, particularly economic,
social and cultural rights
t 2008 | Human Rights
Independent expert on the issue of
Council
human rights obligations related to
resolution 7/22
access to safe drinking water and
(for 3 years)
sanitation
_ _________
.
2005 Commission on
Special Rapporteur on the promotion
Human Rights
and protection of human rights while
■ resolution
countering terrorism
I 2005/80
Special Rapporteur on torture and
other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment
1985
Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
1985/33
*
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
j resolution 7/4
[ (for 3 years)
2007 Human Rights
Council
resolution 6/28
(for 3 years)
2008 Human Rights
Council
resolution 8/8
(for 3 years)
►►
a Si
.'-i I
■■ ■
•
mu
‘
J
SI' --'
.
’I'
SPECIAL PROCEDURES
, • .-'X
■
'll l^emi ■
I
Mandate established
Title / Mandate
fEW! H
Mandate extended
aaaaa
Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
1998/25
s 2008 Human Rights
Council
resolution 8/11
(for 3 years)
Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
2000/10
j 2007
Special Rapporteur on the promotion ; 1993
and protection of the right to
freedom of opinion and expression
Commission on
Human Rights
"
resolution
1993/45_____
2008 Human Rights
Special Rapporteur on freedom of
religion or belief
j 1986
Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
1986/20
! 2007
Special Rapporteur on the right of
everyone to the enjoyment of the
highest attainable standard of
physical and mental health
2002 Commission on
Human Rights
resolution
2002/31
Council
resolution 6/29
(for 3 years)
Special Rapporteur on the situation
of human rights defenders (formerly
Special Representative of the
Secretary-General)
__
2000 j Commission on
I Human Rights
■ resolution
j 2000/61
2008 I Human Rights
■ Council
resolution 7/8
(for 3 years)
Special Rapporteur on the
independence of judges and lawyers
1994
Commission on
j Human Rights
I resolution
j 1994/41
2008 Human Rights
Special Rapporteur on the situation
of human rights and fundamental
freedoms of indigenous people
2001 | Commission on
I Human Rights
i resolution
2001/57
2007 Human Rights
Independent expert on the question 1998
of human rights and extreme poverty
j
Special Rapporteur on the right to
food
4! —
2000
I
Human Rights
Council
resolution 6/2
(for 3 years)
• Council
■ resolution 7/36
j (for 3 years)
Human Rights
Council
resolution 6/37
(for 3 years)
2007 Human Rights
Council
| resolution 8/6
(for 3 years)
Council
resolution 6/12
(for 3 years)
—- --------------j--------------------- -———
2004 j Commission on
Representative of the
| Human Rights
Secretary-General on the human
j resolution
rights of internally displaced persons i
2004/55
2007 Human Rights
2005 i Commission on
| Human Rights
I resolution
I 2005/2
2008 Human Rights
Working Group on the use of
mercenaries as a means of violating
human rights and impeding the
exercise of the right of peoples to
self-determination
Council
resolution 6/32
(for 3 years)
Council
resolution 7/21
(for 3 years)
I
►►
Office nf (he l. niied Nations High Commissioner for Human Kights
101
i..
j R |
- JOB
■Nations Human Rights Programme
■
-.•ife-:
-
,
• '
■
.
etc
* :
s
---V—
-
■
■
Annex
B, September 2008 there were 38 special procedures mechanisms in operation <30 thematic
mandates and 8 country mandates).
• !S mechanisms, please visit the special
For a current list of special procedure:
procedures section of the nuri-II?
OHCHR xxrr*
website.
A. Table of thematic mandates
Special Rapporteur on adequate
housing as a component of the right
to an adequate standard of living
2007
Human Rights
‘ Council
resolution 6/27
(for 3 years)
Commission on
; Human Rights
Resolution
2002/68
2008
Human Rights
Council
resolution 9/14
(for 3 years)
■1991 Commission on
I 2007
Human Rights
Council
resolution 6/4
j (for 3 years)
!2000 i Commission on
Human Rights
Resolution
2000/9
________________ i_______
Working Group of Experts on People ’ 2002
of African Descent
Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention
Special Rapporteur on the sale of
children, child prostitution and child
pornography
Special Rapporteur on the right to
education
Working Group on Enforced or
Involuntary Disappearances
Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial,
summary or arbitrary executions
i
Human Rights
Resolution
1991/42_____
1990 Commission on
Human Rights
Resolution
1990/68_____
2008 I Human Rights
I Council
; resolution 7/13
j (for 3 years)
2008
Human Rights
Council
| resolution 8/4
[ (for 3 years)
1980 i Commission on
; Human Rights
; resolution
) 20 (XXXVI)
I 2007
Human Rights
Council
- resolution 7/12
j (for 3 years^
1982 Commission on
2008 j Human Rights
j Council
resolution 8/3
(for 3 years)
1998 Commission on
I Human Rights
I Resolution
11998/33
Human Rights
resolution
1982/35
Office of the l.nited Nations High Contmissionei for Human Rights
RHP--'cr0o
I
i
►►
SB?
e
•r. ..
I
-
a/-y-
H -■
ef• W
It I
El .
a '
'' '
:;
e.^..
t
:
......
te;
jp.EC ■ Echoes
SHB'
t
B ■
-•■-■
■. ■ ;’IS8W:':
?
-
f■ \
’A'
■
•
■
>
I
te' - p I
Annual eon.pM.on o. special proeedu.es recommendations
=iS= -===-:==■-“
website.
Universal Human Rights Index
SE
—
SSSSS..
-—"'-r"•:.
=======-=£==S:
====:-==:=----‘“mechanism.
o„te a.
— «' —
[Db
i
I
-
*■
r
■J
A
UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
VIE
The universal periodic review at a glance
What is it?
Established by General
Assembly resolution
60/251, the universal
periodic review (UPR) is a
new human rights
mechanism. Tlirough it the
Human Rights Council
reviews, on a periodic
basis, the fulfilment by
each of the 192 United
Nations Member States of
their human rights
obligations and
commitments. The UPR is
a cooperative mechanism
and is intended to
complement, not
duplicate, the work of the
human rights treaty
bodies.
How does it work?
Human Rights Council
resolution 5/1 sets out
• The review itself takes
place in Geneva in the
Working Group on the
UPR, which is composed
of die 47 member States
of the Council, and takes
die fonn of an interactive
• Preparation of the
dialogue between the
information upon which
State under review and
reviews are based,
the member and observer
including: information
States of die Council. The
prepared by the Stale
Working
Group meets in
under review (national
three two-week sessions
report); a compilation
each year and reviews 16
of United Nations
States at each session—a
information on the State
total of 48 States each
under review prepared
year;
by the Office of the
|
•
A group of three
United Nations High
1
rapporteurs (“troika”),
Commissioner for
drawn from among the
Human Rights
Council’s member
(OHCHR); and a
States, facilitates the
summary of infonnation
review of each State;
submitted by other
• The Working Group’s
stakeholders (including
adoption of ah outcome
civil society actors),
document at the end of
also prepared by
each review;
OHCHR;
the periodicity and
process. The UPR operates
on a four-year cycle and
consists of several stages,
for instance:
►►
The Handbook is available in digital format on (he OHCHR website at:
hl tp://wwAv.ohchr.org/,civiLsocietvh«uidb0tfk/
There you will find the Handbook’s chapters available for download, as well as links to all the references
contained in the publication.
Office of (he United Nations High Cominissioner for Human Right:
at
•
iW ■■
-
;
a. ■ ■
. /
■.
•
■
fe’.
J
•,
■'
; #
./'B
t: L:
.
,
Solely
'
■
/
. ...
LA
V
V
- ■
witfeAUn^Rations Hunran Rights Prog—
Workini
AHana^
■ ..o ■ ■ ■ L' \
.
9 The Council’s
consideration and
adoption of the UPR
outcome document,
normally at its next
regular session; and
e Follow-up by reviewed
States and other
stakeholders, including
civil society, on the
implementation of the
conclusions and
recommendations
contained within
outcome documents.
How to engage with the
universal periodic
review
Resolution 5/1 provides for
the participation of all
relevant stakeholders in the
process. Accordingly, the
participation of regional
intergovernmental
organizations, national
human rights institutions
(NHRIs), as well as civil
society representatives,
including non-governmental
organizations (NGOs),
human rights defenders,
academic institutions and
research institutes, is
envisaged at relevant stages.
Consultative status with
the United Nations
Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC) is
required to attend sessions
of the Working Group on
the UPR and sessions of the
Human Rights Council.
However, civil society actors
i may contribute to work of
; the UPR, inter alia, by:
• Participating in
consultations held by
Governments to prepare
their national reports on
the human rights
situation in their
countries;
• Preparing submissions
on the hyman rights
situation in States under
VII
Office of the United Nations High Commissions for Human Rights
review for potential
inclusion in the
summary of
stakeholders’
submissions prepared
by OHCHR. The
OHCHR summary is
taken into consideration
by the Working Group
when reviewing States;
and
• Contributing to the
follow-up to the
implementation of
review outcomes.
The Working Group’s
j sessions are broadcast live
j on an OHCHR webcast,
j and a broad range of UPR
documentation and
I information is available on
j the UPR section of the
OHCHR website and on
j the UPR page on the
I Human Rights Council’s
I Extranet.
'■
-r.
•
UNIVERSAL PERIODIC RE
-
r-
■-I-
■ VcM . i
Key contacts relating to the universal periodic review
XH“ eXXS —ner tor Hwnan
V
7: .<?•.
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Phone: +41 (0)22 917 92 69
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 11
OHCHR Civil Society Unit
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
:
A'W
- s
-..■x r
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10- Switzerland
. .
.
Xi 2SSX-
'W
What is the universal periodic review?
Establishment of the universal periodic review
The unwemal periodic reylew (UPR>. established b. General
StaZXVhZ^^^
duplicate, the work of the human rights treaty bo les.
Operating on a tar-year cycle, the UPR Is
T'^XXolXup to
regional intergovernmental organizations, national human nghts .nst,tu o
r
relevant stages of the review process.
■ " » Human Rights Council may review the
At the conclusion of the first UPR cycle, the
^ItaTn'd'the periodicity of the reviews, based « best practices and lessons learne .
Office of the unwed Nations High Commissioner for Human Krghts
E 1
■-
?
\
■* y
■
E1
•
<
Working with tfieju gd Nations-Huinan Rights Programme
A Handbookfpr^
S: ■■
‘.'-i
;
W'T'.
■ -
>
■
.■■!■<■-■■
•
Ik
w
-L."S/?
••
-
■
Principles and objectives guiding the universal periodic review
A number of principles guide the UPR through its various stages It must:
• Promote the universality, interdependence, indivisibility and interrelatedness of
« BeTcooperative mechanism based on objective and reliable information and on
interactive dialogue;
• Ensure universal coverage and equal treatment of all States;
• Be an intergovernmental process, United Nations Member-driven and action-oriented;
• Fully involve the country under review;
Complement and not duplicate other human rights mechanisms, thus adding value;
e
Be conducted in an objective, transparent, non-selective, constructive,
non-confrontational and non-politicized manner;
Not be overly burdensome to the concerned State or the agenda o e ounci ,
Not be overly long; it should be realistic and not absorb a disproportionate amoun o
time, human and financial resources;
• Not diminish the Human Rights Council’s capacity to respond to urgent human rights
situations;
• Fully integrate a gender perspective;
• Take into account the level of development and specificities of countries; and
. Ensure the participation of all relevant stakeholders, including non-govemmen al
organizations (NGOs), in accordance with General Assembly resolution 60/251 and
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) resolution 1996/31, as well as any
decisions that the Human Rights Council may take in this regard.
The UPR’s objectives are:
• The improvement of the human rights situation on the ground;
• The fulfilment of the State’s human rights obligations and commitments, and an
assessment of the positive developments and challenges it faces;
• The enhancement of the State’s capacity and the provision of technical assistance, in
consultation with, and with the consent of, the State concerned;
• The sharing of best practice among States and other stakeholders;
• Support for cooperation in the promotion and protection of human rights; an
• The encouragement of full cooperation and engagement withrthe Human Rights
Council, other human rights bodies and the Office of the Unrted Nat.ons High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
VIII
Two financial mechanisms, the universal periodic review Vo'untary Tru^und and the
Voluntary Fund for Financial and Technical Assistance,« have been established to
facilitate the participation of developing countries (particularly the least developed
countries) in the UPR mechanism and support its follow-up at country level, respective y.
6S See Human Rights Council resolution 6/17.
Office of Che United Nations High Conmiissiunei for Human Rights
/P9-
.
its: s i
■
Si
I. -J'
S ii, S ilSIll
- > -1
■*-.&
..
«w S »
ff lJN,VERSA,.
Iconic Rl-EVIEW ' ■
i
..V.
■" djf' 9 S*^K'
How does the universal periodic review work?
A. Periodicity, order and basis of the review
Periodicity
States during the first cycle.
To see rhe order orsu.es .o be reviewed during rhe drst cycle <2003.2011)
f t
tty.
-z-'-’-'-
visit OHCHR’s website.
■ ~*v'
'-r
Order of review
:
tor
review.
Basis of review
Each State is examine^ on the basis of-.
• The Charter of the United Nations;
• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
when presenting its candidature for election to the Council,
• Applicable international humanitarian law.
B. The review process
1. Documentation
The preparation ol Information for reviews Is a preliminary stage o, the process. State
reviews are based on the information contained in three documents.
Office of die i niied Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
.fl ■
■ OS
.■a.
>
'■M-'
—
T.
■
■ T- '
1
• Information prepared by the State under review;
• A compilation of United Nations information prepared by OHCHK; ana
• A summary of stakeholders' submissions (prepared by OHCHR).
These three documents provide distinct and complementary perspectives on the human
rights situation in each State under review. They should be available at least six weeks
before each review and are posted on the UPR section of the OHCHR website.
(a) Information prepared by the State under review (national report)
A State presents the information that it has prepared towards its review, wh ch
may take the form of a national report, orally or in writing. Written presentations
must not exceed 20 pages. States are encouraged to prepare this information
through a broad national consultation process with all relevant stakeholders,
including civil society.
(b) Compilation of United Nations information, prepared by OHCHR
OHCHR prepares, in no more than 10 pages, a compilation of the information
contained in the reports of human rights treaty bodies, special procedures and
other relevant official United Nations documents.
(c) Summary of stakeholders’ submissions, prepared by OHCHR
OHCHR also prepares, in no more than 10 pages, a summary of submssions
provided by other UPR stakeholders (including NHRIs and NGOs and other
civil society actors). The stakeholders' summary is taken into consideration
during reviews.
General Guidelines for the preparation of information towards reviews
In decision 6/102, the Human Rights Council set out its
preparation of information under the UPR. These Guidelines apply to States and other
stakeholders, as well as to OHCHR for the preparation of the documents under its
responsibility, and provide that information submitted towards reviews should include:
VII
. A description of the methodology and the broad consultation process followed for the
. XS
~a,ly normative and institutional) tor tde
promotion and protection of human rights in the State, including constitu ion,
legislation, policy measures, national jurisprudence, human rights infrastructure (e.g.,
NHRIs) and the scope of international obligations identified in the basis of review
(see above)*
. The promotion and protection of human rights on the ground. including the
implementation of the international human rights obligations identified in the basis
Office ill the Liiited Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
/f'i
Rx-xa ?.®L
-•
• .a,.
>% tW:
..
:
.
X - : E' < x , \
■
•
.Xa ■ •,.
/*ssagB|>
: |g|
«xX-.
.... .. ........
•
lll!l nWIFW S
umvAsal periodic rpa
■• a
-•Xu»;». -s ’.
IB
t V 1 * * VY
I
-
■SE-5
■
:XX
?x--ER: 3I
—xr-SSS"
• The identification of achievements, best practices, cn
k
Each State should also identify/provide information on-.
eTpeXions i„ terms ot eapacRy-buWng end quests.« any, for tonfa,
.
assistance;
e Any other information it considers relevant; and
. During later reviews, its follow-up to the previous review.
2. Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review
The ectuat re»te» of States takes place In the
the President of the Human Rights ounci an
X?
Peviewing 16 States at each
SXTSTbe wring Group cenyened for the first time in
April 2008.
A three-bour internets dialogue between the ^X.XVmXXbsXr
observer States of the Council takes place. Durmg th s d^mgendations t0 the state under
States have two hours to ask questions an su^
Dresent to the Working Group
and to make concluding comments at the end of the rev
NGOs in consunative status with ECOSOC may attend sessions of the Working Group on
the UPR, but do not play a role in the interactive dialogue.
■■■
’
. p.....,,;b!.v „oi,..„ llta«ta »»se^ns «.b« ^^#—9
-
8 X-o-i
Io. NCOS vislt<be m 3e«o„ ol OHCHRC
^orNGOseishdreUPRseerionofOffCHg
I
.
H
. ,.
,. ; ... ...
■ nforination on consultative statu
® RQf’XW®^.
A
.:.;viS
-:°n
•ffairSX
f'f;
'st'.-/
the universal periodic review process" (A/HCR/PRST/8/1).
Office of rhe < dted Nations High Grmrniss.iner for Human Kigh‘>
110
..^.r,-A.--;-'
■^■■
-2 ■
■
*
a*
M lt^e United Nations Human Rights Programme
.-J.
11
.
-■“Ox ■
: K-
-W?
Troikas
A group of three rapporteurs (“troika”) facilitates the review of each State. A different troika
is formed for each State review, with troika members (drawn from different United Nations
regional groups) selected by the drawing of lots from among the Human Rights Council’s
members States.65 OHCHR provides assistance to the troika members in the performance
of their role.
States have the opportunity to raise questions/issues in writing on a State under review in
advance of its review.66 The troika is responsible for receiving these questions/issues and,
if it so decides, clustering them.67 The troika then sends the questions/issues to the
secretariat of the UPR, which in turn sends them to the State under review no later than
10 working days before its review. The questions/issues are also circulated among the
Council’s member and observer States.
3. Working Group outcome document on the State under review
After the interactive dialogue on each State, the designated troika facilitates the
preparation of an outcome document (report) on the review with the assistance of the UPR
secretariat and with the full involvement of the reviewed State. The Working Group
allocates a maximum of 30 minutes to the consideration and adoption of each outcome
document no less than 48 hours after the review. The Working Group country reports are
adopted ad referendum leaving two weeks for States to make editorial changes to their
own statements.
Outcome documents include a summary of the proceedings of the review, conclusions
and/or recommendations, and any voluntary commitments and pledges made by the State
under review.
VII
Each reviewed State is given the opportunity to indicate whether or not it supports the
conclusions/recommendations contained in the outcome document. It can do this:
• During the meeting of the Working Group;
• Between the Working Group’s session and the Council's next session; or
• During the meeting of the Council to adopt the Working Group’s outcome document.
65 The State under review may request that one of the three should be from its own regional group
and may also request one substitution on only one occasion. A member of a troika may also request
to be excused from participation in a specific review.
66 These questions/issues are sent to the troika and should be based mainly on the three UPR
documents.
67 In doing so, the troika must not alter the meaning of questions/issues in any way, and must refrain
from assessing the questions/issues or the human rights situation in the State under review.
Office of die l.niied Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
nt
Mi'
’
UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
4i'.:
•'
",
•--4
•'
*
•
•
Tfr
••
Recommendations supported by the State.areudent
recommendations that are not supported by the State are n
together with any comments that the State may have on them.
document)
4 Adoption of outcome documents by the Human Rights Council
Once adopted P, the WOTkmg Group
"
SXXr = XeZular session, allocating up to an hour to each.
In accordance with resolution 5/1, before each outcome document IS adopted.
. The reviewed State Is ottered the
*XTn7comZen^ and to
”*
“C
a"ssed dur,ne ,hc
Working Group’s interactive d'alogLI®;
states of the Council are given the
. The reviewed State and member and observer States or
“,e s,atus *
.
ECOSOC) are given an opportunity to make genera
When adopting outcome documents, the Ceuneli a!so decides It and when an, specific
follow-up to the review is necessary.
5 Follow-up to reviews
The eonc1Uslo—
“
support of the reviewed State serve as the basis for UPR
It is primarily the responsibly «however,
also have a role to play in their imp emen
caDacjty-building and technical assistance,
States to implement review outcomes regarding capadty
in consultation with them and with their consent.
Later review cyc.es wid .ecus, among other
recommendations and, to this^end, t ®
.
persistent non-cooperation with the UPR mecha
encourage a State to cooperate with it.
where it has exhausted all efforts to
Office Of .he L nhed Nations ibgh Com.nuss.oner for Hunun R.gh.s
x
r-
.s
•
S.
I
I® '
’
w;
2
TheupRprocess
• ■H. /■
.»• P“-
1
i
a
’5-
A'Pret^lrOd«^,.ma'i°n
.BBrrL
f■
yX11
■ • ■Natlqn^hformatlon.
Sun-maryc’sUKe-.oK
EW
I
w- SSSSOHO™.
V'
■•'■
/
/
■
i1
■Xs-X
|E
< ;5-' '''' Q.
a
■ s
'■ I
■
Four year cycle
t"‘
z
1
5
rS-'
CTQ
11
Ixx
w
I I
3
’■
<
:
. Xp -
c&
7.
/
r ■
asssi’x-
U’SSX:
x.
\JO
B. Working Group on the UPR
• Meets in Geneva for three
two-week sessions each year;
examines 16 States/session
(48 States/year)
• Interactive dialogue held with
State under review
• Adopts ad referendum a report
containing recommendations,
conclusions and voluntary pledges
• Reviewed State indicates at this
stage or later (at the latest during
the regular session) which
recommendations it does/does
not support.
y
y
;
C. Human Right* Council
regular aeulon
• Council considers each
document for one hour
• Reviewed State. Council
Member and observer
States and other
stakeholders given
opportunity to express views
before adoption of outcome
document
,
• Outcome document adopted
by the Council.
■
■
i- --.-:. ■■■ y?,.
••
■<■
XC.
. .......
wSB
■X;^ SXr ; ;
■
.
•
■■
<
a
;
;•
rg:--
I
■....
f
I
I - 'I
..
-.1
How to engage with the universal periodic review mechanism
Civil society has an important role to play in relevant stages of the UPR in preparing
submissions for the reviews, in attending reviews, and by contributing to follow-up to the
implementation of UPR recommendations and conclusions.
A. Working with States to prepare national reports
Resolution 5/1 encourages States to prepare the information that they submit towards their
reviews through a broad, national consultation process with all relevant stakeholders. This
can include NHRIs, as well as civil society representatives, such as NGOs, human rights
defenders, academic institutions and research institutes.
The experience of the UPR to date demonstrates a diversity of examples of best practice
for civil society and Government collaboration in the preparation of national reports.
Contributing to the preparation of State information (national
B^t reports)
i
•
/•
C-
In the lead-up to the
review of Switzerland at
the second session of the
Working Group on the
UPR in May 2008, a
coalition of 32 Swiss-based
NGOs met to coordinate
the preparation of a
stakeholders’ submission.
Coordinated by three
■NT/^r^c
A rrinpehr
NGOs ((Amnesty
International - Swiss
section, Humanrights.ch
and CODAP), the aNGO
Coalition” prepared and
an initial draft
rtransmitted
-----of its submission to the
Swiss Government.
The Swiss Federal
Government shared its
draft national report to the
UPR with the NGO
Coalition and invited its
members to attend a day
r
. ....u
of discussion with the
Government. At the
meeting, the Coalition
provided substantive
comments on the
Government’s draft report
and presented a series of
recommendations. A
number of the Coalition’s
comments were
incorporated into the final
version of the national
report submitted to the
| UPR, with the Government
s also dedicating a section of
its report toirfenrifvino
identifyingand
and
addressing some of the
<key concerns raised by the
Coalition.
B. Stakeholders’ submissions
In line with resolution 5/1, stakeholders are also invited to make submissions on States
under review for potential inclusion in the summary of stakeholders submissions prepared
by OHCHR. The OHCHR summary of stakeholders’ submissions is one of three documents
on which reviews are based.
Office nf (he United Nations High Comtnissit mer fci Human Kights
IKf
Wk ■
I
B-
:
H
I
' 'mH P
ramme W
■
■
f
with tlte bni.t.G Natans Human tOghrs Programme
Working. W
A HandbM
.
- - a—
■ '
■
t
.■
|
Stakeholder submissions should contain
■
-z
sig Cg:-,
:
i 'it tj tt
t'
-- • /-t,•
7s-:
-’--t
. tt.B' '
'•
credible and reliable information on the State
under review.
OHCHR references all stakeholder submissions incorporated into summary documents.
Zbettstehter submits are a-aMe, in the torn, origmail, reserved.
through the UPR section of the OHCHR website.
Preparing and submitting stakeholders' submissions to OHCHR
5'a iSMTWOois-a-
5 for the submission,
Human Rights Working I undertook a “bottom-up’’
• transmitting it to the
! process, inviting a number
Group (HRWG) OHCHR UPR secretariat.
of national NGOs working
Indonesia, a coalition of
!
on thematic issues to meet j
Indonesian human rights
HRWG-Indonesia also
to discuss the UPR
organizations, contributed
chanism ana
tv develop
collaborated with Komnas
mechanism
and to
a stakeholders’ submission
outline and structure for
HAM, the Indonesian
towards the review of
national human rights
the submission. After the
Indonesia at the first
j institution, and engaged in
meeting, each NGO was
session of the Working
dialogue with the
assigned the responsibility
Group on the UPR in April
Indonesian Ministry of
for preparing information
2008.
relevant to its area(s) of | | Foreign Affairs in _
? ' d expertise, while HRWG
. preparing its stakeholders
In preparing its;
took editorial responsibility i submission.
submission, HRWG
A|
' Format of submissions
Stateho/ders are /nwted to provide OHCHR with submissions which:
VII
. Follow the structure of the General Guidelines for the preparation of information
under the UPR set out in Council decision 6/102 (see previous sectio ).
. A"er ^5 pages or. in the ease ot
eoaiitions ct stagers. 10
: Ex:«
. STin a short paragraph intonation on the objectives and work ot the entity
. AtonVmmmo^mirt-processing format, with Pa^P^X1”885
. Include an introductory paragraph summanzrng the mam pomts,
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
//r
wiii
Ova
'
UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
fill
-
■
sIBf* ‘ W
w
jSjC* 5- w ii
• Indicate key words in relation to their submission (e.g., domestic violence);
. Refrain from reproducing concluding observations and recommendations of the
human rights treaty bodies or the special procedures of the Human Rights Counci ,
though they may refer to the extent of implementation;68 and
• Refrain from quoting or annexing reports from other organizations.
Please note that:
• Submissions in excess of the 5-or 10-page limit will not be considered;
• Submissions received in a language other than one of the six official United Nations
languages will not be considered;
• Submissions submitted after specified deadlines will not be considered; and
• Submissions containing manifestly abusive language (e.g., incitement to violence,
inherently racist language) will not be considered.
F
—
Kg Civil society actors are encouraged to reguUflyfcor^^^^
! :
OHCHR website for the submission deadlines specific to each
bWorking Group. Stakeholder information should normally be subnntted
to OHCHR seven months in advance of the Working Group s sessions.
Civil society actors wishing to submit information for consideration and possi$|.
inclusion by OHCHR in the stakeholders’ compilation should send their contnbution to
A
with
,
.
. '
information
subnusMon of stakeholders information.
SUl
HI iSgs
,
C. Attending sessions of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review
NGOs in consultative relationship with ECOSOC, once accredited, may attend sessions of
the Working Group on the UPR, but cannot make oral statements at its meetings.
f tai—
MBs
““slonsof"‘'i
Workir^Jlroup^ntheUI’ y i
<* Human rights treaty' body and special procedures recommendations and^se^^ are
incorporated into the compilation of United Nations information prepared by OHCHR.
Office of die United Nations High Commissioner tor Human Rights
I
11
iiii ••
/■ :ii-
■;
. u
■ /"l^
jhts Pro£,ST”C
.'/1:
••
■
■<
'
li llil
■
*
a
information sessions
••
NGOs in consultative status with ECOSOC, once they are accredited to attend a session of
the Working Group, may arrange to hold information sessions during the Working Group’s
session. NGOs interested in holding such a session should contact the UPR secretariat.
D. Attending sessions of the Human Rights Council
NGOs in consultative status with ECOSOC, once accredited, may attend regular sessions of
the Human Rights Council, at which UPR outcome documents are considered and adopted.
NGOs in consultative status with ECOSOC are given the opportunity to make brief
general comments before the adoption of outcome documents by the Human Rights
Council.
■ESI For information on how to Ire accredited to sessfons of the Human Rights
•
....... .
- .
E. Working on follow-up to review outcomes
Resolution 5/1 provides that it is primarily the responsibility of States to implement their
review outcomes (including conclusions and recommendations, and voluntary pledges and
commitments). Resolution 5/1 also states that other relevant stakeholders, including civil
society actors, have a role to play in the implementation.
VII
Civil society actors, including NGOs, academia, the media, trade unions and professional
groups, can work on follow-up to UPR outcomes in a number of ways, for instance:
• Working with national entities (including Government, parliament, the judiciary and
NHRIs) to help the State meet its obligations; civil society often acts as a catalyst to
promote national legislative reforms and develop national policies. It can also use the
UPR outcomes as a basis for dialogue with State entities and for defining its own
programmes of action;
• Monitoring the human rights situation and steps taken locally to implement UPR
• Raising awareness about the UPR, the outcomes States are required to implement,
and how outcomes can be used to improve the enjoyment of human rights nationally.
This may be done by organizing thematic discussions, round tables, seminars and
workshops, translating and publishing UPR outcomes and working with NHRIs and
the national media, and by raising awareness of UPR outcomes among the general
public and civil society;
Office of the Liiited Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
-I
119-
1
w
*
Ji
^KAL PERIODIC REVIEW
>
IK
® /•
Engaging with national entities towards the preparation of information for the next
• Collaborating with other civil society actors in the preparation and submission to
OHCHR of follow-up information on the implementation of UPR outcomes.
Working on follow-up to UPR outcomes
?: —
Follow-up to the report
adopted by the Working
Group on the UPR
1
■V
i
j
and voluntary
commitments by
establishing partnerships
with NGOs that work on
specific issues in order
to assess Brazil’s
progress in
implementing UPR
outcomes; and
• Worked with die
Government in an
ongoing process to
identify concrete steps
and policies towards
implementing UPR
recommendations and
achieving voluntary
commitments.
Council’s eighth session;
and
• In collaboration with a
coalition of Brazilian
NGOs (Comite
Brasileiro de Direitos
Humanos e Politfca
Externa), Conectas
arranged a public
discussion on the UPR
process with the human
I
rights commission of the
Brazilian parliament.
Segments of the webcast
of the review of Brazil
were screened at the
meeting.
After the review and the
adoption of the Working
Group’s report on Brazil,
in April 2008, Conectas, a
Brazilian human rights
organization, undertook
the following activities:
• It translated the
recommendations and
voluntary commitments
contained in the
Working Group’s report
into Portuguese;
• It analysed the content
of the Working-Group’s
_
^pGri £is£ted
report, the; conclusions
X^port adopted by the
Council
of which were brought t Human Rights CaA
to the attention of the
Brazilian Government
and identified by
Conectas in an oral
intervention made at
the Human Rights
•
\
f ■'
ConecUs
fealso
shared
"its experiences with
partner organizations in
Since the Council’s
‘
Argentina, Peru, the
;
adoption of the final report | Philippines-and
Philippines and South
on Brazil, Conectas has:
! Africa to contribute
• Worked on follow-up. to ij towards the review of
UPR recommendations
i . these countries.
1
a” A
’
x xamv**
•_
a. —
aa.
T-5
'
r
Oftice of (lie United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
-..
.XIB
- '.X.
i
»
•x Workmg
Bi SK
<. •¥«»
with fte Un.ted Nanons tiumat
ST ■-
1J
CivilSociety
.•
. as a?
<3.
• - . v --
1
’ <<-7
:
3'
'-i
sis - :' J
I
OHCHR resources
Universal periodicjeview web page
Civil society actors are encouraged to regularly consult the UPR section of the OHCHR
website for updates and information on the Working Group’s sessions.
Human Rights Council web page
Civil society actors are encouraged to regularly consult the Council’s section of the OHCHR
website for updates and information on its sessions. Session-specific information is
normally posted on the web page two weeks before each regular session.
Extranet
The Extranet is linked to the Human Rights Council's homepage. It contains a dedicated
UPR page with information specific to each session of the Working Group, including:
• The States (to be) reviewed at the session;
« The documents on which reviews are/were based;
.
• Questions submitted to States under review by the Council’s member States m
1
1
advance of reviews;
• Oral statements made by member and observers States at reviews; and
a
• Outcome documents adopted by the Working Group.
1
«:=srs£=
,
<
XT”..
ie online form
Jxtranej^^ J^m-andpa^oni
..
...
■
••
...
-■
<?
Webcast
VII
The Working Group’s sessions can be viewed live on the Human Rights Council’s webcast
The webcast site also contains archived video of its previous sessions. To view the webcast
you will need to download the appropriate software.
plge of
HH: ^^TH-
..SSi'. i
<s»
r ’
’
>
i
£| 24 ni :
'
L'<-;
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rignts
1!^
T
••yc
'•■ -'fe'
O:
a
■ ' ' AT
- '
£■
A"
/ fa -
A is “ ®1
.ABC. A>A.
Oj' A y.yAy •
j1s|ebA''A-
-A^A®
aJO-
.a-a
la
M A
■ Ap|f
.‘■■A
i
VI11.
ki
>:j .r.-:
® - - ^4’' --v
A®- A
. / '
A A'■
i*feAA. ....
.
. .
SUBMITTING A COMPLAINT ON AN
ALLEGED IIUMALLEIGEEE^
Complaint procedures at a glance
j These need to be carefully
considered before deciding
which one(s) to use:
Human rights complaint
• Individual complaints of
procedures are mechanisms
human rights violations
for bringing cases of alleged
can be submitted under
human rights violations to
five of the core
the attention of the United
international human
■ Nations. There are three
rights treaties;
such mechanisms:
• Individual
• Individual complaints
communications operate
under the international
under the thematic and
human rights treaties
geographic mandates of
(petitions);
the special procedures
• Individual
of the Human Rights
communications under
Council; and
the special procedures
v
• The Council’s complaint
of the Human Rights
procedure addresses
Council; and
consistent patterns of
• The complaint
gross and reliably
procedure of the
attested violations of all
Human Rights Council.
human rights and all
fundamental freedoms
How do they work?
occurring in any part of
the world and under
Each procedure has its
any circumstances.
own requirements,
advantages and limitations.
What are they?
How to access and work
with the complaint
procedures
Any civil society actor,
with due regard for the
specific requirements of
I each procedure, is able to
• access these mechanisms,
regardless of statusjsrith
the United Nations.
Complaints under each of
these procedures can be
submitted by the
: individual who has
suffered the alleged human
rights violation or on that
person’s behalf by third
parties, for example, by a
non-governmental
organization (NGO). Civil
society actors can often act
as a conduit for individuals
seeking redress from
human rights abuses by
| preparing, submitting or
I lodging a complaint on
►►
The Handbook is available in digital format on the OHCHR website at:
hl tp: //www.ohchr.org/clvilsocietyhandbook/
There you will find the Handbook’s chapters available for download, as well as links to all the references
contained in the publication.
Office of die L’niled
High Gjimnissuxier cnr Human Rights
Working xyithaKe United Nations. Human Rights Programme
A Handbookfor CivilSociety
\
' O. •
consent of that individual
and that the individual is
aware of the implications
of making a complaint.
The requirements for each
their behalf. However,
anyone submitting a
complaint on behalf of ah
individual should ensure
that they obtain the
:fife M
i'?
fi >■ ■.
•
..■>%>»-rJiriv
<>
procedure should be
carefully followed to
ensure that the complaint
is admissible.
1
Key contacts for the human rights complaint mechanisms
Complaints under the human rights treaties
(To the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, the Committee
on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Comnuttee on the
of Racial Discrimination or the Committee on the Rights of Persons
Elimination oL
:**»4 jl
-
—
• . .
Jk
I ■Z'k^W’
with Disabilities)
Petitions Team
Office of the-United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rigtits
Palais des Nations
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211. Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax:-.41 (0)22 917 90 22
E-mail: d>.Petitions@ohchr.org
.... .
Communications under special procedures
E-mail:
ut^encaction^chr.org
L-X1
I- ■
H»man KighB Comdr, complaint pmcedntn .
HU„»„1ljjhpCoU.K.IB™eb(co„pla,„.p»«dr)
<®3gS.£„^^
VIII
: ,4,4.W
■■
■
sMSSliMfilB
it
Eatedes,^
S-ioSwiS.
■
....
Ifc
is sr aWW--4
...
KW.,
.... "
desSlo^' .
Palais des'Nat
uvonnedel. Pox
CH-1211 G||v«lwigfhd
^:T^(liilo 11
E-mail: CPMar^-.®
...
.
Office of die United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
-
■
ft
i;-<4^3Sr.S'-7’A3'X'
ft®-
eOifS
•?&
' •' iS;l'
■■
■
■;
■
'
t
.
I
SUBMITTING
A COMPLAIffriON AN
'------------------------------ALLEGED HUMAN RIGHTS \ VIOLATION
.LT..
• -
.
■■
What are the complaint procedures?
The United Nations system focuses largely on the obligations of States and operates at the level
of Governments. However, its human rights system also provides for different procedures that
are open to individuals and groups seeking United Nations action on a human rights situation
of concern to them. These are called human rights complaint procedures.
Through these procedures, individuals may bring a human rights concern to the attention
of the United Nations; thousands of people around the world do so every year.
Human rights complaints may be submitted under these three mechanisms:
• The international human rights treaties (petitions);
® The special procedures mechanisms of the Human Rights Council; and
• The complaint procedure of the Human Rights Council.
Under certain circumstances, these different procedures may be complementary and more
than one may be used.
How do the complaint procedures work?
It is important to consider carefully which complaint procedure is best suited to a
particular case. Each has its own strengths, specific requirements and limitations. They
need to be considered in the interests of the victim(s) and of the individual(s) or
organization(s) presenting the complaint.
A. Individual complaints under the international human rights treaties
Seven international human rights treaties allow for individual complaints to human rights
treaty bodies:
• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights under its First Optional
Protocol;
• The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment under its article 22;
• The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
under its Optional Protocol (this treaty also allows communications from groups of
individuals);
,
.
• The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination under its article 14 (this treaty also allows communications from
groups of individuals);
Office of die United Nations High Commissioner ’nr Human Rights
IM
■
■
11
■
■
■
s. ■■■
Working with thcJLI
Rations Hpman Rights:Programm
A HaTulboo^-f^^
MlSociety 5 _
3WS :
- -
i.
• -
|
Ip >./-/
Jill
r-jAL liWK-A I
» The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers
and Members of Their Families under its article 77. However, this provision will
come into force only after 10 States parties have made a declaration to that effect.'69
♦ The Convention oh the Rights of Persons with Disabilities under its Optional
Protocol (this treaty also allows communications from groups of individuals); and
* The International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced
Disappearance under its article 31. By September 2008 this Convention had not yet
entered into force.
Upon its entry into force, the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights70 will also allow for individual complaints.
Strengths
• An important advantage of submitting a complaint to a treaty body is that, once a State
party has made the relevant declaration under the treaty, it should comply with its
obligations under that treaty, including the obligation to provide an effective remedy for
breaches of the treaty. The relevant human rights treaty body, through individual
complaints, authoritatively determines whether there has been a violation, and the
State concerned has an obligation to give effect to the treaty body’s finding(s);
• Human rights treaty bodies can issue interim measures in urgent cases to preserve a
situation until they make a final decision on the matter. This interim measure will
stay in place until the decision is made;
• Decisions of human rights treaty bodies can go beyond the circumstances of the
individual case and provide proactive guidelines to prevent a similar violation
occurring in the future;
• Human rights treaty bodies can also consider complaints that are being or have been
addressed by a special procedure.
Specific requirements and limitations
• The complainant’s case must fall within the scope of application of one of the treaties
that allow for individual complaints;
• The State in question must be a party to the treaty and must have ratified the
relevant optional protocol or accepted the competence of the specific human rights
treaty body to accept complaints;
• When submitting an allegation to a human rights treaty body, a number of requirements
must be met, including the consent or authorization of the victim. If any of these
requirements are not met or are missing, the complaint may not be considered;
69 By September 2008 only one State had made such a declaration.
70 The Optional Protocol was adopted by the Council on 18 June 2008 and is expected to be adopted
by the General Assembly later in 2008.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
IS?
S
r .
-
: r.
g,
■■
;
1 J. t' MPtAIN1.ONAN
*y<
■ -
S
, undo, the International Convention on the Elimination
Under the International Convention
Discrimination, complaints must be lodged within six
. rbTzx0;^
“ fXl^dtc ision by
r■:"zr
before sending a complaint to a treaty body--a remedy >s considered
offers a reasonable prospect of redress for the complainant,
• It takes two to three years, on average, for a final decision to be taken on
. oZal'Z complaint addressed to a human rights treaty bod, does not relate to a
by another international or regional adjudicative complaint procedu .
•
---I
B. Communications under special procedures
A number of the special procedures mechanisms allow for allegations to be made
ZncX her individual eases or a more general pattern of human ngh s abuse. All
.TLrs acting on an individuafs behaif. can s^*"^ can
special procedures mandate-holdem, if the mandate allows for tms Civil society
often support individuals seeking protection from human nghts abu
.
Strengths
• individual communications-under special procedures are a procedure that may be
general pattern of violations;
eacaon
.
. X”
.< the State in which the, occur and ot whether
that State has ratified any of the human nghts treaties;
. It is not necessary to have exhausted all domestic remedies before using
. ThTcommunication is not required to he made by the yictin, aithongh the source
. rZ'ai Zi belodged sinruitaneousiy before a human rights treat, body and a
special procedure (if there is a relevant mandate).
71 This can be^notheTiireatybody, the European Court of
of Human Rights, but does not include the spectal procedures of the Human
g
Office of (he United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
1
; .s>
■i.M
L
a -
> - th the United Nations Human Rigl
.r • g
■ V
' ■A
B-
J
- L
' -.•■^•■-.'x®/*i
■ ■■■-
r--.
-
Limitations
• There must be a special procedure in place covering that specific human rights issue
or that specific coirtitty (not all special procedures mandate-holders can act on
%
individual cases);
ct,*o'C
• Special procedures are not legally binding mechanisms: it is at each states
discretion to comply with the recommendations of special procedures
mandate-holders; and
• Procedures vary depending on the mandate.
*
For detailed information on the special procedures, please refer to chapter VI
%
C. Human Rights Council's complaint procedure
Any individual or group claiming to be the victim of human rights viotetions; may' s^rnrt a
complaint under this procedure, as may any other person or group with di ec'able
knowledge of such violations. The Council's complaint procedures the only unive sa
complaint procedure covering all human rights and all fundamental freedoms
St
Communications under it are not tied to the acceptance of treaty
by the country
concerned or the existence of a special procedures mandate. The complain procedure
deals with consistent patterns of gross human rights violations in a S ate. It neit
compensates alleged victims, nor does it seek a remedy for individual cases.
V
1»
%
%
Strengths
%
• The procedure can deal with violations of all human rights and fundamental
freedoms; a State does not need to be a party to a treaty for a complaint against it
»
be submitted under this procedure;
various key stages of the process; and
• The admissibility criteria are generally less strict than for other complaints
VIII
%
mechanisms.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
i
i
i
s,
i
i
i
1 . . .
J
.submi— .....
< ALLEGI'I) Hl
..
..
Possible limitations
. The process can be lengthy, since the complaint goes through several stages of
consideration and therefore may not be suitable for urgent cases
. The complainant must have exhausted all available and effective domestic remed
before sending information under this procedure;
<* There are no provisions for urgent interim measures 0 pro ec ion,
...
. Communications must generally refer to a consisten\patte7pOfXrThanTdividual
violations, in other words affecting a larger number of people, rather than mdivid
. Zto its confidentiality, this procedure may not draw public attention to the human
. Cases tha^ Xpear'oreveaTrconsfstent pattern of gross violations of human rights
already being dealt with by a special procedure, a treaty body or other Un t
Nations or similar regional human rights complaint procedure are not admiss b
under this procedure.
■1
SS «o„ o» d,e cxymplalnl
Olumpn Kighis Coondl) of (his Hmdboot
V
How to access and work with the complaint procedures
be submitted by an individual wbo has suffered an alleged human rights v.olatton or y
third parties on that person’s behalf, for example, by an NGO.
Civil society actors Otten act as a conduit tor individuals seeking
abuses by preparing, submitting or lodging a complaint on
submitting a complaint on behalf of an individual should ensure that they obtain^
=“:±x:x"=:==- -procedures operates.
The requirements for each procedure should also be carefully followed to ensure that the
complaint is admissible.
Oftke of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Kights
St EE E-E..S:V; ■<
■
E
;
- -s
.. . „
Working wid. dre United Nanons
i ■
.
- x*-
''
r-
-
• ■
.-.-’ll
-■
. ' A
’
W
a
lol.... .
A. Individual complaints under the international human rights treaties
Complaints ma, he Pmught by " “
»^7^
lawyers, non-governmental organizations (NGQs) o ro ess
g P
individuals who claim to be victims of human rights violations. I his
requirements and the main elements of individual complaints.
Requirements
1. State party ratification
A complaint ot a human rights violation under a human rights treat, may be made against
’
The State is a pad, to the treaty in question, haying ratified « etherise accepted It;
. The Slate party has recognized the competence,
a ^;°
relevan*wtional ,,'0,0“'
or to have made the necessary declaration under the treaty.
“ZeSEESSSFi"
complaint can be made under a certain section of a treaty.
2. Individual violations
.ndividua, complaints under treaty bodiec, may beu»d only Jr«s^™*
3. Domestic remedies
Individual complaints under '"terna^^^^hTras^complaint has completed
capable of providing an available and effective re
VIII
un(Jul
J
rolonged. what
e""a"ya"a ™St be
case by case.
treaty and the relevant optional protocols click here.
Office of the United Nations High ComniisMoner for Human Rights
r-j
•r:-'
.
-.y
-
,
|
mMPI uwr ON...
?
■■
;
I
. : .'
■
'
■>
'
Sic . ' §
■
4. Bringing a complaint on behalf of the victim
• i behalf of another person provided the
A person or organization can bring a complaint on
individual victim has given written consent in the
t. form of a “power of attorney" or an
“authority to act”.73
5.
Other complaint processes
If a case is already being considered by the adjudicative complaint procedures of another
United Nations body, international or regional organization, it generally cannot be
considered by a United Nations treaty body. If the case has previously been'Considered
and rejected by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights or the European Court o
Human Rights then the same complaint may sometimes be eligible for consideration by a
treaty body. Cases submitted under a special procedures mandate can also be submitte .
to a treaty body.
6. Form of the complaint
model complaint forms (see annexes I and I! to
is in principle
sufficient This should be submitted in one of the working languages of the relevant human
rights treaty body.74
there are strong grounds for believing that it is impossible to obtain
under the circumstances.
body.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Kights
|
!
?C.. ’•V
<sfe.
'-A':
Ilf
•W
-W If
. -'o’
What information should individual complaints under treaty
f
bodies include?
Basic personal information on the person whose human rights have allegedly been
.
violated (name, nationality, date of birdi);
Name of the State party against which the complaint is directed;
e
If the complaint is made on behalf of another individual, proof of that persons
0
consent or authorization Cppwer of attorney”, in hard copy) or, alternatively, a
justification of why such consent or authorization is unavailable or cannot be
A thorough account of the facts on which the complaint is based, clearly presented
¥
.
. D^srfWtC^n to exhaust aU available judicial remedies in the local
Xts, as well Js an^effetive administrative retnedies which might be available
in the State.concerned; ,
-Zw-h w
:
• Details of other submissions of the case or the facts tnyo v
* •Jo
=S'—“ZT'
. Account of arguments as tp wh,—
ne u^aty
the human rights contained in the
treaty whose provisions are invoked. Ir is usrfnl tor
^.treidenhte*,
J
./I
the relevant articles of tlte —
- h.
^dpiips and argumeptsi(c6urt deeisions, etc.);
• All documents relevant
• Copies of relevant national
^a^tanguageareno.—.
■
fc-
A to ano er
..
’
As a genet
few *<
■
'
■
■
-.f??v--
7. Time limits
VIII
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination is
the only human rights treaty that has set a formal deadline for the filing of complamK
Nonetheless, complaints should ideally be submitted as soon as possible after the alleged
violation has occurred and the domestic remedies have been exhausted. Delayed
submission may make it difficult for the State party to respond properly and for the treaty
body to evaluate the factual background thoroughly. Complaints concerning violations
which occurred prior to the entry into force of the complaint mechanism for the relevant
State party will not be examined (except if they have a continuous effect in violation of the
treaty). Complaints submitted under the International Convention on the Ehmmation 0 A
Forms of Racial Discrimination must be submitted within six months of the final decision
by a national authority in the case.
Office ot the l.tiited Nutions High Commissioner for Human Rights
i
!
•4
-/
•
.
-4=^ A;
w
HM*
..
□
lT J 111?
■■■■
' • r mMHAJNT ON AN
AT I FC l^n Hl^fAN 'RKln^llOI-A'l 'ON
'r
8. Urgent action
Each committee may take urgent actioni by way of
usua| ^urse. Typically,
would otherwise be suffered before a gi
such initiatives are undertaken to prevent act.ons that can not
undone, for example
g
the execution of a death sentence or the epc> a
ts treaty body to consjder
torture. Individuals or organizations reques i
h . complaint,
undertaking interim measures are encouraged to clearly state
9. Sensitive matters
the victim’s name in its final decision
that his/her identity does not become public.
Elements of the procedures
comment on the State s response.
P
•
desnite one or several reminders, the
= X 5 S’“dXn <
on the
gMng due weight to We daints
formulated by the complainant.
The two major stagesd
^XXXCaiotmeo^
body
request of the State party. If a
the case to be admissible, it considers t e me i
The human dghts treat,
r eonsiM = in
rights treaty body has taken a decision o
complainant and the State s,™ltane°^:
.
decjdes that a
rights violation by a State party under
to
^-0 rights treaty Ood,N tindings.
office of die Cnited Nations High Commissioner for Human Kights
\^l>
if i
k
• "■:-
-
■
■ -
■
k O ‘
•
-•
-xM . .a<>
....
■
I
B3i IMMli
•V’5'
,„,me
•Wteci Nations Human Rights Progra.
Atfandbookfoi ^isociefy'^^
k
i
.'rr
‘
Hi I'
■
The text of any final decision on the merits of a case or of a decision of inadmissibility is
posted on the OHCHR website as part of the human rights treaty body’s jurisprudence.
j
j
Where to send an individual complaint under the international
human rights treaties
Complaints should be sent to:
Petitions Team
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Palais des Nations .
■ - ; :
t
■ ..,V
.•
8-14, avenue de la Patx
;k............. T':' 1
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland
Fax: +41 (0)22 917 90 22 (particularly for urgent matters, should include all relevant
documents in jhird Tppy)
E-mail: tb-petiUons@ohclir.org
Always specifywhich human rights treaty body you
B. Communications under special procedures
This mechanism allows for communications to be made concerning either individual cases
or more general patterns of human rights abuses. Any individual or group or an
organization acting on an individual’s behalf can submit cases to special procedures
mandate-holders.
Civil society actors can often act as a conduit for individuals seeking protection from
human rights abuses. Individuals or organizations wishing to submit a case under any of
the special procedures mandates should first check whether there is a country or thematic
mandate relevant to their case. In addition, they should carefully read the specific criteria
of the mandate that must be fulfilled before the communication can be accepted. In
particular, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Working Group on Enforced
or Involuntary Disappearances have specific criteria that differ from those of other
mandates.
VIII
On receipt of an individual case, the decision to intervene is at the discretion of the special
procedure mandate-holder. It will depend on the criteria that the mandate-holder has
established and should be in line with the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures
Mandate-holders. The criteria will generally relate to:
• The reliability of the source, which should not exclusively be based on media reports;
• The credibility of the information received, which should not be politically motivated;
Office of the Lniied Nations High Coniniissionei for Human Rights
131
■
...
ft-
%<
W”'
'
>
> ...
-
• s
SUBMITTING A COMPLAINT ON AN
AT TWEE) I lUMAN R1GI ITS VIOI..' TIOT
« The detail provided; and
« The scope of the mandate itself.
To facilitate the examination of reported violations, questionnaires relating to several "^dates
are available online for persons wishing to report alleged violations (see below). It should
however be noted that communications from individuals or other authors are considered evei
when they are not submitted in the form of a questionnaire. Authors of communications ar
encouraged to send regular updates of the information they have submitted.
i
••_
:
What information should individual complaints under special
;
procedures include?
-r'.,/
« Identification of the alleged victimCs);
• identification of the alleged perpetrators of the violation;
. Identification of U.e ^rsonfs) or organi/ation(s) submitting the conmmnkatKi
(tills information will be kept confidential);
! M "e
•‘Safi1. ififil •“
“ahdl,,e for ,hc submis51on
canbe written in English, French or Spamsh.
• Communications can be y/ritt™ ‘n Fr
■
•■
“
■'
<
T
.
:;
‘-t
t-
Special Pre
ift'®SpedaLPfiM.
cShccofrhetlmtcdNa&m
gh Commissioner for tluqi^n Rights
Palais des’Natioris
'
131315 TIE avenue de UPAix ■b
,
;
l,„d
^lO.^^Switzenaiicl
c H-i 211 GSBBvaMlO
Switzerlana m t
>,7
;g
'ir
-
.
. , nrncedures
ft® . ^m^unmnder-soeciai
i lender
soecialp
ndivKlualcompkuntu
.J
P
B
t
.
<'■'.*
|®i
-■
'.
■'
■
•
;';■.■■■■■■■
L
- :w^-:??/r^r....w.;.... ■ - - ■
■ E-mail:
Please spgg
■
'
'
. . ,
orocSu
xvh^^g^^pi^.
subject linS
mandates h|j
of these requfci
-
■;;«««
-•
.---•■■•
^urem?^nis-^
^XXB«»XX«“p7i Lt.««- »e»ls
Safer
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Kights
I?,
1
-
■ i
■
. ■ s®
Is
r
Working with the United Nations Ih
A Handbook for Civil Society ‘
- vrr
p/1'
Wig
■. Wee '
. St
-.....
a ■ ,
■• -a
Eal-:;aEaO' ■
e
.-EiE;.;E'EE<<E:
EE -■
®
On the basis of credible and reliable information received from victims of alleged human
rights abuses, special procedures mandate-holders can send communications to
Governments. These are transmitted through OHCHR and may take the form of an urgent
appeal, if a serious violation appears ongoing or imminent, or a letter of allegation, if a
violation has allegedly already occurred. Through communications, the mandate-holder
asks the Government concerned for clarification on a specific case and/or adequate
remedial measures. Mandate-holders can also request Governments to communicate the
results of their investigation and actions.
Depending on the response received, they may decide to further inquire or make specific
recommendations. In some instances they can also decide to issue a public statement on
the case.
Under the rules of the Human Rights Council, all special procedures are required to report
on their activities at its annual sessions. Communications sent and received are usually
confidential and remain so until the annual report of the relevant special procedure is
made public, unless the mandate-holder decides to issue a press statement.75
Please note that the alleged victims are named in the reports of special procedures
mandate-holders, except in the case of children or specific circumstances. Given the public
nature of the reports of special procedures mechanisms, it is important that individuals or
organizations acting on behalf of victims of human rights violations ensure that the victims
are aware that their case is being transmitted to the special procedures mechanisms, that
their names may be communicated to the authorities concerned, and that their names (or
initials) may appear in the public report of the relevant special procedure.
VIII
75 In addition to annual reports, some mandate-holders issue other documentation that helps to
explain their woric and the scope of their mandates. In particular, the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention issues “deliberations” on general matters and “opinions” on individual complaints; and the
Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances issues “general comments on the
Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
Office of die United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
i.......... ■
1
1
i
3
.• - ■
•'
;al
fr /• ■.
Standard questionnaires are available for reporting alleged violations
under the following mandates:
I < .<■
£4
- it 91 fl IH!
W
W,
A
,
• Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
• Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances
• Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of impeding the
exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination
. Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitral^ executions
. special Rapporteur ™ the promotion and protection of the rtght to
freedom of opinion and expression
• Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants
.
. Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and child
t-
■
' ■
■
. Spectol Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment
Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, especially in women and
g
children
.
o Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its
■ consequences; and . .
'
,.
.
. Special Rapporteur on ffie situation of human rights defenders.
•
However, communions from individuals .„d other sdu&s win be considered
even when they are no—in the foam ota uuesdonnatm.
.
‘
.
' v'.;
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
-
.
/
/ .5-
■f ■
'»■
’
,;A- L ULL
.■■'(■u.
.
-W
L;-
-B
U
■ .
..
'LL '?'■
©L u
■'
■
- U
—
I
C. The Human Rights Council’s complaint procedure
Under the Human Rights Council’s complaint procedure, communications may be
submitted by any individual or group claiming to be a victim of human 'i1ghts^,0^t0
having direct, reliable knowledge of such violations. The important elements of th
procedure are set out below.
What information should complaints under the Human Rights
r
‘ Council’s complaint procedure include?
/'fey'''TV..
. IdemJlbMii® pcnaonfslororgaatationMsubadalngd.aeommuadcalton
Ml ot me personvu
~
tation will be kept confidential, if requested). .|^nymot|
Anonymou.s comp 4m
a in s r .
(this information
■■
:•
not admissible;
.....
.
.
•
admissible; the
: relevant
% as possible,
\ i■ 113 7aproviding
~ 7’4' 4tynames
»^c of of
. Descriptionof
facts in as much detail
of
alleged victims; dates, locations and other evidence;
SeSplaint and tie
the rights aUegrfly
allegedly vtobM:
violated;
.
. i:
case may reveai
mveat .a patten,of
of^ss
„d tehably attested
.
i,»w the ose
gtoss sad^hahly
hu^^^eSMohsrsd.erdnnindMdsalvriauons.and
human rights vtolations rather than tndlvidnal viol,irons and .
. S S&^tteT^stavcbeehd^^
ht domestic -mcdlt, have been exhausUd, o. expbnauon of how
i°AU eomphloLs must be In writing. Please note that it.h.« su« tmtejyggss
media reports. If you intend to. submit a human rights,report as epdenqe,. a t^c .
bitsvish
| eote/legr
covcrjetter fcidatify
|o identify yossjeiyexplaln
yo^elf,explain the ease »»
.
■
sstKisrfi
C • ©JiOlhir thL'rnmnlaint to 1P-15 pageLeWltalii^ftt
sgggaBi
1
-y UK? < ?
IL.....;.
Tc^±.^
VIII
the process, will be further developed.
Office of the United Nations High Commissiener for Human Rights
13^
. .
.OlT-Tx-'r- • .
-
j&Ka-D
J - ■'
W
T
S "
•
•
.’-Sf .
•
• - -
;
■
■
i
■
sUBNnrriNG A COMPLAINT ON AN
i
’
;
P
'
W
■
RIGHT5 VIOIATIOl,
"■
.. .
The stages of the complaint procedure are:
Stage 1: Initial screening
The OHCHR secretariat, together with the Chairperson of the Working Group on
Communications, screens all communications (complaints) as they arrive on the basis of
the admissibility criteria, and discards those found to be manifestly ill-founded or
anonymous. If a communication is admitted to the next stage of the procedure, the author
receives a written acknowledgement and the communication is sent to the Government
concerned for reply.
Stage 2: Working Group on Communications
The Working Group on Communications is composed of five appointed members of the
Human Rights Council Advisory Committee and is mandated to meet at least twice a year
for five days each session. This Working Group examines complaints that have passed the
initial screening stage and any replies received from Governments with a view to bringing
to the attention of the Working Group on Situations any particular situation appearing to
reveal a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and
fundamental freedoms.
Stage 3: Working Group on Situations
The Working Group on Situations is composed of five members of the Human Rights
Council, who serve in their personal capacity, and is mandated to meet at least twice a
year, for five days each session, to consider situations referred to it by the Working Group
on Communications. It assesses the cases referred to it and produces a report for the
Human Rights Council with specific recommendations on the action to be taken with
regard to any situation that reveals a consistent pattern of gross violations. Alternatively, it
may decide to keep a situation under review or to dismiss a case.
fe--.'
WO;Stage 4: Human Rights Council
The Human Rights Council considers, in plenary, situations brought to its attention by the
Working Group on Situations as frequently as needed, but at least once a year. It examines
the reports of the Working Group on Situations referred to it in a confidential manner, unless
it decides otherwise. Based on its consideration of a situation the Council may take action,
usually in the form of a resolution or decision. It may decide on the following measures:
• To discontinue considering the situation when further consideration or action is not
warranted;
Office of (he United Nations High Commissioner tor Human Kights
Ji':..
A4■
Sfe
' Aw 1 •
Ax-%s|||x ■<A A.A+ ■i.:'' A:+ +
-
-
■
* -• ’
•*
■'+
+
.
.
a.
■+ ,■■’.- +
:
Working withstMJnited Nafions Human.Rights Programme
I
4 Handbooe^CivUSaaelv
,< ' '.■PAWS
wli r
I ■ ■
- A'
■
.
'
■
■
—r + -
'
't-.
..
' + ■+
9 To keep the situation under review and request the State concerned to provide further
information within a reasonable period of time;
® To keep the situation under review and appoint an independent and highly qualified
expert to monitor the situation and report back to it;
• To discontinue reviewing the matter under the confidential complaint procedure in
order to take up public consideration of the same;
« To recommend that OHCHR should provide technical cooperation, capacity-building
assistance or advisory services to the State concerned.
s
All material provided by individuals and Governments regarding a situation under
consideration, as well as the decisions taken at the various stages of the procedure,
remains confidential. This also applies to situations that have been discontinued.
%
%
*411 Where to send a complaint under the Human Rights Council’s
EAA
..
«or. --------------------------------
D-------- U
s"
>
■A....+A
*•
---------- .-.-X-------------
Office ot the United Nations Hish Commissioner for Humin Rights
Palais
A '■ <1'> ■ < ' • ' '
;•
". f:- .: ■ '
Palais des
des rQafinhs
Nation
'
A .:'A_.
A
;x?J8-14, avenuejeda Paix:
AV:-.?. •.
CH-1211 Geneva 10 - Switzerland'
Fax: +41 (0)22:917 90 11
E-mail: CP@^org
-
- >
i
§
:
: 1
■
f*-;r
.
-Aasa.c',x sA, a+:aa®a
a+a+;saaa+ - A ;■_
■
-............................................... —
-
i
I
I
I
VIII
i
i
i
t
»
Office of the United Nations High Coniniissionci for Human Rights
f
t
I5T-
f
®
8
-ii..... -....
8
'
g :
'
s--
'
#
:
8
. 'Oi
■
SUBMITTING A COMPLAINT ON A? I
.ALLEGED
tr
ru
HL A V R1GIITS VIOLATION
. . - a-T
N T . - < W|S
■ :
-a-: —
"■
Annex I - Model complaint form for communications under:
• The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
• The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment; or
• The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination
Please indicate which of the above procedures you are invoking
Date:
I. Information on the complainant:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Family name
First name(s)
Nationality
Date and place of birth
Address for correspondence on this complaint
Indicate whether you are submitting the communication:
- On your own behalf
- On behalf of another person.
[If the complaint is being submitted on behalf of another person-.]
• Please provide the following personal details of that other person:
• Family name
• First name(s)
• Nationality
• Date and place of birth
• Address or current whereabouts.
If you are acting with the knowledge and consent of that person, please provide that
person’s authorization for you to bring this complaint
or
If you are not so authorized, please explain the nature of your relationship with that person
and detail why you consider it appropriate to bring this complaint on his or her behalf.
II. State concerned/articles violated
• Name of the State that is either a party to the Optional Protocol (in the case of a
complaint to the Human Rights Committee) or has made the relevant declaration (in
the case of complaints to the Committee against Torture or the Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination);
• Articles of the Covenant or Convention alleged to have been violated.
►►
Office of die United Nations Higfi Coinmissioner for Human Kights
fe;’’
...... Working with the^nited Nations
AH^ook^rC^
Rights Programme
i
>
»
-
III. Exhaustion of domestic remedies/application to other international procedures
• Steps taken by or on behalf of the alleged victim(s) to obtain redress within the State
concerned for the alleged violation—detail which procedures have been pursued,
including recourse to the courts and other public authorities, which claims you have
made, at which times, and with which outcomes;
• If you have not exhausted these remedies because their application would be unduly
available to .you,. or for any other
prolonged, they would not be effective, they are inot
------reason, please explain your reasons in detail;
• Have you submitted the same matter for examination under another procedure of
international investigation or settlement (e.g., the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, or the African Commission on
Human and Peoples’Rights)?;
• If so, detail which procedure(s) have been or are being pursued, which claims you
have made, at which times, and with which outcomes.
IV. Facts of the complaint
• Detail, in chronological order, the facts and circumstances of the alleged violations.
Include all matters that may be relevant to the assessment and consideration of your
particular case. Please explain how you consider that the facts and circumstances
described violate your rights;
• Author’s signature.
V. Checklist of supporting documentation (copies, not originals, to be enclosed with your
complaint):
• Written authorization to act (if you are bringing the complaint on behalf of another
person and are not otherwise justifying the absence of specific authonzation);
• Decisions of domestic courts and authorities on your claim (a copy of the relevant
national legislation is also helpful);
• Complaints to and decisions by any other procedure of international investigation or
settlement;
.
,
• Any documentation or other corroborating evidence you possess that substantiates
your description in part IV (above) of the facts of your claim and/or your argument
that the facts described amount to a violation of your rights.
If you do not enclose this information and it needs to be sought specifically from you, or if
accompanying documentation is not provided in the working languages of the secretariat,
the consideration of your complaint may be delayed.
VIII
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
1
■ Bil
- -<.4^
■SB
•
-■
SUBMITTING A COMPLAINWN AW
ALLEGED HUMAN RIGHTS VIOIATIOb
Mil
B.K
-
..
I
"fe-
Annex II - Complaint guidelines for communications under:
o The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of AH Forms of
Discrimination against Women
1. Information concerning the author(s) of the communication
• Family name
• First name
• Date and place of birth
• Nationality/citizenship
• Passportfidentity card number (if available)
• Sex
• Marital status/children
’ EthnTbackground, religious affiliation, social group (if relevant)
I Postall IddreTfor confidential correspondence (if other than present address)
• Fax/telephone/e-mail
. Indicate whether you are submitting the communication as:
Xed vidU7); if there is a group of alleged victims, provide basrc mformat.on
oTtehXrtJe ahetd victim(s); provide evidence showi;g the "Such'"
victim(s), or reasons that justify submitting the communication wrthout such
consent.
2. Information concerning the alleged victim(s) (if other than the author)
•
•
«
•
•
Family name
First name
Date and place of birth
Nationality/citizenship
Passportfidentity card number (if available)
• Sex
• Marital status/children
• EthnTbackground, religious affiliation, social group (if relevant)
I PoTtal addJeTfor confidential correspondence (if other than present address)
• Fax/telephone/e-mail.
3. information on the State party concerned
» Name of the State party (country).
►►
Office of (he l. nited Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
^0
a
A Handbook fdr dvd Society
<
• ft"..-
If
■■
'ft;fe
,.,ft. 4■%
hg ' |;ft^
'
'4'
Working with the United J^tions Human ^ Programme,
••4
■■
- - .f ■
i
.• ?
-
ft-44- 44 >4'4 < ftft
■
■
'
.
5- --W
1
4. Nature of the alleged violation(s)
Provide detailed information to substantiate your claim, including:
3
J
• Description ofalleged violation(s) and alleged perpetrator(s)
1
• Date(s)
• Place(s)
. .
o Provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women that were allegedly violated. If the communication refers to more
1
1
than one provision, describe each issue separately.
1
1
5. Steps taken to exhaust domestic remedies
Describe the action taken to exhaust domestic remedies; for example, attempts to obtain
legal, administrative, legislative, policy or programme remedies, including:
• Type(s) of remedy sought
• Date(s)
• Place(s)
• Who initiated the action
• Which authority or body was addressed
• Name of court hearing the case (if any)
• If domestic remedies have not been exhausted, explain why
Note: Enclose copies of all relevant documentation.
6. Other international procedures
Has the same matter already been examined or is it being examined under another
procedure of international investigation or settlement? If so, explain:
• Type of procedure(s)
• Date(s)
• Place(s)
• Results (if any)
Note: Enclose copies of all relevant documentation.
7. Date and signature
__________
Signature of author(s) and/or victim(s):
Date/place:
8. List of documents attached (do not send originals, only copies)
VIII
Office of the United Nations High Commissionci for Human Rights
/^/
a
•?
Annex II SAMPLES OF META-DATA SHEETS ON ID>ENT[FIEP INDICATORS A
Indicator 1 International human rights treaties, relevant to the right to life, ratified by the State (see structural
indicators in the table on the right to life)
Definition Proportion of international and regional human rights treaties, with direct reference and/or relevance
to the realisation of the right to life, that have been ratified by the State. 'International human rights treaties is
used as a generic term embracing all instruments binding under international human rights law, regardless of
their formal designation (e.g. Covenant, Convention or Optional Protocol). The reference to the right to life
follows primarily the formulation used in article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 6 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its elaboration in General Comment No. 6 of the Human
Rights Committee.
Rationale Ratification of an international human rights treaty reflects a certain acceptance of concerned human
rights standards by a State and gives an indication, notably at international level, of a State's commitment to
undertake steps that help in the realisation of those rights. When the State has ratified a treaty it assumes a legal
obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights standards reflected in that treaty. The indicator is a
structural indicator that captures the 'commitment' of a State to implement its human rights obligations.
Method of computation The indicator is computed as a ratio of the actual number of treaties ratified by the
State to the reference list of treaties. A reference list of core international human rights treaties, including^
optional protocols, adopted and openedfrfo7~ratificatibn by thF General Assembly of the United Nations is
available at http://www2.ohchr.oTg7English/law/index.htm#instruments.
Data collection and source The main source of data on the indicator is administrative records at the depository
authority, namely the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs (see http://untreaty.un.org/ola/). The OHCHR
website also presents this information and updates it periodically.
Periodicity The indicator database is reviewed periodically and information can be accessed on a continuous
basis.
Disaggregation Disaggregation of information is not applicable for this indicator.
Comments and limitations The right to life finds its most general recognition in article 3 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognizes the
inherent right of every person to life, adding that this right "shall be protected by law and that no one shall be
arbitrarily deprived of life". The right to life of persons under the age of 18 and the obligation of States to
guarantee the enjoyment of this right to the maximum extent possible are both specifically recognized in article
6 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. UDHR, article 3, ICESCR, article 12(2-a), CERD, article 5, ICRMW,
article 9, CEDAW, article 12 and CRPD article 10 are other examples of provisions relevant to the right to life and
this indicator.
The indicator provides information on acceptance by a State of international human rights standards and its
intention or commitment to undertake steps to realise human rights in conformity with the provisions of the
relevant instruments. It does not, however, capture the actual process of implementation or the results thereof.
Ratification constitutes an act whereby a State establishes its consent to be legally bound by the terms of a
particular treaty. At the international level, it requires depositing a formal "instrument of ratification or
accession" to the depository authority. At the national level, ratification may require a State to undertake certain
steps, in accordance with its constitutional provisions, before it consents to be bound by the treaty provisions
internationally. The process of ratifying a treaty is normally initiated with a State signing a treaty as a means of
authentication and expression of its willingness to continue the treaty-ratification process. The signature qualifies
the signatory State to proceed to ratification. It also creates an obligation to refrain, in good faith, from acts that
would defeat the object and the purpose of the treaty. Accession is the term used in situations where the State
has not signed the treaty beforehand, but has directly expressed its consent to become a party to that treaty.
The indicator does not reflect possible "reservation" entered by a State on a treaty. A reservation is a declaration
made by a State by which it purports to exclude or alter the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their
application to that State. A reservation enables a State to accept a multilateral treaty as a whole by providing it
with the possibility of not applying certain provisions with which it does not want to comply. Reservations can be
made by a State when the treaty is signed, ratified or acceded to and in conformity with the objective and
purpose of the treaty itself and the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, 1969.
Indicator 2
Time frame and coverage of national policy on sexual and reproductive health (see structural
indicators in the table on the right to health)
Definition
The indicator refers to the date of adoption or the period for which the national policy statement
on sexual and reproductive health has been put into effect at the country level. The indicator also captures the
population coverage or the spatial administrative scope of the policy statement, such as in countries where there
is division of responsibilities between the national government and the sub-national/local governments.
Rationale A national policy statement on a subject is an instrument that is expected to outline a government's
objectives, policy framework, strategy and/or a concrete plan of action to address issues under that subject.
While providing an indication on the commitment of the government to address the concerned subject, it may
also provide relevant benchmarks for holding the government accountable for its acts of commission or omission
concerning that subject. Moreover, a policy statement is a means to translate the human rights obligations of a
State party into an implementable programme of action that helps in the realisation of the human rights. The
indicator is a structural indicator that captures the 'commitment' of a State to implement its human rights
obligations in respect of the 'sexual and reproductive health' attribute of the right to health.
Method of computation The indicator is computed separately for time frame or period of application and the
coverage or administrative scope of the policy. Time frame is the date of adoption (e.g. 1/1/2006) of the policy
statement by a country or the time period for which the policy should be implemented (e.g. 1/1/2006
1/1/2010). Coverage is computed as a proportion of sub-national administrative units or population covered
under the ambit of national policy.
Data collection and source The main source of data is administrative records at the national and sub-national
level.
Periodicity The indicator database can be normally reviewed and accessed on a continuing basis.
Disaggregation While disaggregation of information on the indicator is not conceptually feasible, a national
policy may focus on specific areas, regions or population groups, in which case it may be desirable to highlight it.
Comments and limitations The indicator provides information on a State's commitment to undertake steps,
outlining its policy framework and programme of action, to realise human rights in conformity with the provisions
of relevant human rights standards on sexual and reproductive health. It does not, however, capture the actual
process of implementation or the results thereof.
For many countries, national policy on sexual and reproductive health may not be a separate policy document,
rather it may well be a part of general policy statement on health or a human rights action plan. Accordingly, a
judgment may have to be exercised on the extent to which sexual and reproductive health issues and the
relevant human rights standards on reproductive health are reflected in the national policy on health or the
human rights action plan.
In its General Comment No. 14 (ICESCR Art. 12) on the right to the highest attainable standard of health, the
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights elaborates on the need to develop comprehensive national
public health strategy and plan of action to address the health concerns of the population, including reproductive
/43
health. It underlines that such a strategy should inter alia be devised on the basis of a participatory and
transparent process and include indicators and benchmarks relevant to monitor the right to health. The
Committee points out that '"Reproductive health means that women and men have the freedom to decide if and
when to reproduce and the right to be informed and to have access to safe, effective, affordable, and acceptable
methods of family planning of their choice as well as the right of access to appropriate health-care services that
will, for example, enable women to go safely through pregnancy and childbirth." Similarly, CEDAW Committee
General Recommendation 24 (1999) points out that access to health care, including reproductive health, is a
basic right under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
UDHR, article 25, ICESCR, articles 10(2) and 12, ICERD, article 5(e-iv), ICRMW, articles 28 and 43(e), CEDAW,
articles 12 and 14(2-b) and CRPD article 25 are examples of provisions relevant to the right to health.
Indicator 3
Date of entry into force and coverage of the right to education in the Constitution or other form
of superior law (see structural indicators in the table on the right to education)
Definition
The indicator refers to the date on which provisions of the Constitution or other superior laws
relating to the right to education became enforceable. The indicator also captures the spatial or population
coverage of the relevant provisions related to the right to education, such as in countries where there is division
of legal competencies between the national government and the sub-national or local governments.
'Constitutional or other form of superior law' refers to the system of fundamental laws that prescribes the
functions and limits of government action and against which other supportive legislation is assessed for its
validity. The reference to the 'right to education' follows primarily the formulation used in article 26 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights and its elaboration in General Comment No. 13 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The right to education is also developed in other core international human rights treaties, such as in articles 23,
28 and 29 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Rationale
Inclusion of the right to education in the Constitution or other form of superior law reflects a
certain acceptance of this right by a State and gives an indication, notably at the national level, of a State s
commitment to protect and implement this right. When the State has enshrined a right in its Constitution or
other form of superior law, it also assumes a legal obligation to ensure that other legislation (national and sub
national legislation) is in conformity with and not contradictory to the right. The indicator is a structural indicator
that captures the 'commitment' of a State to implement its human rights obligations in respect of the right to
education.
Method of computation The indicator is computed separately for the date of entry into force and the coverage
or administrative scope of the law. The date of entry into force is the date on which the law or provision became
enforceable. Coverage is computed as a proportion of sub-national administrative units or population coveted
under the law. Information on the date of entry into force should be provided with a direct and accurate link to
the relevant provisions.
Data collection and source The main source of data on the indicator is the legal records of the State.
Periodicity The indicator data can be normally reviewed and accessed on a continuing basis.
Disaggregation Disaggregation of information is not applicable for this indicator, however provisions under the
Constitution or other superior law may have particular reference to the protection of the right to education for
certain groups (e.g. minorities or girl child), in which case it may be desirable to highlight it.
Commentsand limitations
This indicator provides information on the extent to which a State protects the
right to education in its Constitution or superior laws, demonstrating its acceptance of international human rights
standards and its intention or commitment to legally protect this right. It does not, however, capture the extent
to which the legal protection of the right to education in the Constitution or superior laws is implemented and
upheld at other levels of the legal system, nor how broadly or narrowly the right is applied, or the degree to
which the right can be enforced and by whom. This indicator does not capture the actual process of
implementation or the results thereof.
This indicator could be difficult to assess if the right to education is not explicitly articulated in the Constitution or
superior laws. Moreover, provision for the right to education in the Constitution does not necessarily mean that
the right is being protected by law (for example, further judicial interpretations may have rendered the
Constitutional protection meaningless). Likewise, a lack of Constitutional protection may lead one to believe that
there is no recognition of the right when this may not be the case. For example, in some countries there are only
a few rights written into the Constitution or superior laws, and it is left to the judiciary to interpret the rights as
being implied. In this instance, a mere reading of provisions may yield an inaccurate conclusion on the
enforcement and coverage of the concerned right. A correct reading, in such cases, requires a detailed analysis of
relevant jurisprudence/case law or administrative decisions.
UDHR, article 26, ICESCR, articles 13 and 14, ICERD, article 5 (e-v), ICRMW, articles 30 and 43 (a-c), CRC, articles
23, 28 and 29, CEDAW, articles 10 and 14(2-d), and CRPD, article 24 are examples of provisions relevant to the
right to education and this indicator.
Indicator 4
Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel (see process indicators in the table on
the right to health)
Definition
The indicator refers to proportion of deliveries attended by persons trained to give necessary
supervision, care and counsel to women during pregnancy, labour and the post-partum period; to conduct
deliveries on their own; and to care for newborns.
Rationale
Health and well-being of the woman and the child during and after delivery greatly depends on
their access to birth delivery services, the quality of these services and the actual circumstances of delivery. All of
these are influenced by the State health policies, public provisioning of health services and regulation of private
health care. Indeed availability of professional and skilled health personnel to assist in child birth is essential for
reducing mortality - maternal as well as of the child - during and after delivery. The indicator captures efforts
being made by the State to promote and provide professional and skilled health personnel to attend to the
medical needs of pregnancy and birth. It is a process indicator related to 'sexual and reproductive health'
attribute of the right to health.
Method of computation
The indicator is computed as a ratio of births attended by skilled health
personnel (doctors, nurses or midwives) to the total number of deliveries.
Data collection and source
The main sources of data are country level administrative records maintained by
local authorities, registration system for population data, records of health ministries and household surveys,
including Demographic and Health Surveys.
c>
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) compile country data
series based on these sources. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) also provides country data series
through the implementation of its Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys.
Periodicity
In general, the indicator based on administrative records is available annually and the indicator
based on household survey every three to five years.
Disaggregation Disaggregation of indicator by region or areas, for example between rural and urban areas, is
useful in assessing disparities in the availability of health services. In addition, data should be disaggregated by
the age of women (at least for women under the age of 18 years) and, as applicable, by relevant demographic
groups (e.g. ethnic groups, minorities, indigenous and migrants) and socio-economic status (income or
consumption expenditure quintiles).
1^5
Comments and limitations Skilled health personnel include only those who are properly trained and who have
appropriate equipment and drugs. Traditional birth attendants, even if they have received a short training course,
are not included.
CEDAW, in its General Recommendation No. 24 (1999), requests States to inform about the "supply of free
services where necessary to ensure safe pregnancies, childbirth and post-partum periods for women. Many
women are at risk of death or disability from pregnancy-related causes because they lack the funds to obtain or
access the necessary services, which include antenatal, maternity and post-natal services. The Committee notes
that it is the duty of States parties to ensure women's right to safe motherhood and emergency obstetric services
and they should allocate to these services the maximum extent of available resources." The CESCR, in its General
Comment No. 5 (1994) on Persons with disabilities, states that "Women with disabilities also have the right to
protection and support in relation to motherhood and pregnancy."
UDHR, article 25, ICESCR, articles 10(2) and 12, ICERD, article 5(e-iv), ICRMW, articles 28 and 43(e), CEDAW,
articles 12 and 14(2-b) and CRPD article 25 are examples of provisions relevant to the right to health.
This is a Millennium Development Goal indicator.
Indicator 5 Proportion of received complaints on the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment investigated or adjudicated by the national human rights institution, human
rights ombudsperson and other mechanisms, and the proportion responded to effectively by the government in
the reporting period (see process indicators in the table on the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment)
Definition The indicator refers to the proportion of received individual complaints on the right not to be
subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that were investigated or
adjudicated by made to the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson and/or other officially
recognised independent mechanisms during the reporting period. Where the mechanism transmits complaints to
the government, or communicates in respect of the complaints, the indicator includes the proportion of such
transmissions or communications that have received an effective response from the government. Useful
guidance on what ought to be included in a complaint can be found on the OHCHR website, notably in the model
complaint form for communications to the Human Rights Committee, Committee Against Torture, Committee on
the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women.
Rationale The indicator captures to an extent the effort required of States to respect, protect and fulfil the right
not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in conformity with
article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the provisions of the Convention against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the provisions of other
international laws. States parties must ensure that individuals have access to effective remedies to vindicate their
right. States Parties should make appropriate reparation, take provisional or interim measures as necessary, as
well as measures to prevent a recurrence of violations of the right, and ensure that those responsible are brought
to justice (Human Rights Committee General Comment 31, CCPR/C//Rev.l/Add.l3). It is a process indicator that
reflects the willingness of States to take steps towards the realisation of the right.
Method of computation The number of complaints is calculated as the sum of individual complaints on the right
not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment received by all
relevant independent bodies at national level. The proportion investigated or adjudicated is calculated as the
ratio of the number of complaints received during the reporting period which were investigated or adjudicated to
the total number of complaints received. The proportion effectively responded to by the government is
calculated as the ratio of the number of complaints to which an effective response was made by the government
to the total number of complaints communicated to the government during the reference period.
Data collection and source The main sources of data are administrative records maintained by the national
human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson and other mechanisms.
IIrk
Periodicity The information is normally compiled and published annually.
Disaggregation To enable detection of the pattern of abuse against particular groups or in particular areas, the
indicator should be disaggregated by region and the characteristics of the alleged victim (sex, age,
ethnic/racial/national/ religious/political affiliation, disability, sexual orientation, profession, whether or not
detained at the time of the alleged abuse). Similarly, the indicator should be disaggregated according to whether
the abuse is alleged to have been committed by a State agent, with the complicity/tolerance/ acquiescence of a
State agent, or by a private individual or individuals.
To have an overall assessment of the effectiveness of investigation and adjudication procedures, data related to
this indicator should be disaggregated by the end result of the procedure.
Comments and limitations Where there is a communication with a government, the indicator will require a
judgment to be made on what constitutes an "effective" response. While an official denial without supporting
evidence or investigation of the alleged facts will not meet the criterion of effectiveness, the precise application
of the criterion may vary from case to case. An assessment of the effectiveness of the response is best carried out
by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson or other mechanism in a transparent
manner and may involve considerations like timeliness and completeness of the response, its adequacy in
responding to specific questions posed or suggestions for action, as well as the effectiveness of action initiated by
the government, which may include investigation, release or changes in the treatment of a detained or
imprisoned person, payment of compensation, amendment of legislation, etc.
The basic source of information for this indicator comes from events-based data on human rights violations. Such
data may underestimate (or sometimes, though rarely, even overestimate) the incidence of torture or cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, if used in a casual manner to draw generalised conclusions for
the country as a whole. Moreover, in most instances, the number of cases reported to independent bodies
depends on the awareness, access to information, motivation and perseverance of the alleged or potential
victim, his or her family and friends, or civil society organisations in the country concerned.
The Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment No. 20 (1992) states, in its paragraph 14, that "the right to
lodge complaints against maltreatment prohibited by article 7 must be recognized in the domestic law.
Complaints must be investigated promptly and impartially by competent authorities so as to make the remedy
effective. The reports of States parties should provide specific information on the remedies available to victims of
maltreatment and the procedure that complainants must follow, and statistics on the number of complaints and
how they have been dealt with."
UDHR, article 5, CAT, articles 1-16, ICERD, article 5(b), ICRMW, articles 10 and 11, CEDAW, articles 2 and 16, CRPD
article 15 and CRC articles 37 and 39, are examples of provisions relevant to the right not to be subjected to
torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Model
questionnaires
for
complaints
are
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/question.htm.
available
on
the
OHCHR
website
at
Indicator 6
Ratio of students to teaching staff in primary and secondary, public and private, education
institutions (see process indicators in the table on the right to education)
Definition
The ratio of students to teaching staff or the pupil-teacher ratio is the average number of pupils
per teacher at the level of education specified in a given school- year, based on headcounts for both pupils and
teachers. Teachers or teaching staff include the number of persons employed full time or part time in an official
capacity to guide and direct the learning experience of students, irrespective of their qualifications or the delivery
mechanism,
i.e. face-to-face and/or at a distance. This excludes educational personnel who have no active teaching duties
(e.g. headmasters, headmistresses or principals who do not teach) and persons who work occasionally or in a
voluntary capacity.
/4?
Rationale
The ratio of students to teaching staff is an important indicator of the resources that a country
devotes to education. To a limited extent, the indicator can also be interpreted as reflecting a qualitative aspect
of education infrastructure in a country. Teachers are the most important resource in an educational
environment, particularly at the primary and secondary levels. The student-teacher ratio provides a measure o;
students' access to teachers, and thus reflects an important element of the provisioning that the State may have
to make for meeting its obligations on the realisation of the right to education This indicator is a process indicator
related to the 'curricula and educational resources' attribute of the right to education.
Method of computation
The indicator is computed by dividing the number of full-time equivalent
students at a given level of education by the number of full-time equivalent "teachers" at that level and in similar
types of institutions, in a given school year. Some data collection methods include counts of all teaching staff, and
since all teaching staff includes start with administrative duties and both full- and part-time teachers,
comparability of these ratios may be affected as the proportion of part-time teachers may vary from one country
to another.
The main source of data at the country level is administrative records on school
Data collection and source
enrolments and staff strengths maintained by the relevant public agencies.
The UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) compiles and provides national level information on the pupil-teacher
ratio for both primary and secondary education, based on data reported by national education ministries or
national statistical agencies. The information is gathered through questionnaires sent annually to countries and is
made available by UIS with a two years lag with respect to the reference year.
While information on this indicator is not currently collated on a disaggregated basis for public and private
schools at the international level, it should generally be available at the national level and could be useful to
report in instances where there may be significant differences in the quality of public and private education at
the primary and secondary levels.
Periodicity
For most countries the pupil-teacher ratio is available annually.
Disaggregation Beyond the disaggregation referred to in the indicator itself (primary/secondary, public/private)
further disaggregation may be necessary for this indicator, for instance, by region or areas. A break-up for rural
and urban areas, is useful in assessing possible disparities across different regions. In addition, it may be useful to
disaggregate the data for teaching staff and students by sex and, as applicable, by relevant demographic groups
(e.g. ethnic groups, minorities, indigenous, migrant children, children with disabilities).
Comments and limitations Teachers are the most important resource in an educational environment, particularly
at the primary and secondary levels. The student-teacher ratio provides a measure of students' access to
teachers, and thus reflects an important element of the provisioning that the State may have to make for
meeting its obligations on the realisation of the right to education.
Because of the difficulty of constructing direct measures of quality of education being imparted, this indicator is
also used as a proxy for assessing the education quality, on the assumption that a smaller ratio of students to
teaching staff means better access by students to teaching resources. A lower ratio would generally imply that a
teacher can potentially pay more attention to individual students, which may, in the long run, result in a better
performance of students. There may be situations where such a conclusion may not be true due to accountability
issues and ineffective use of teaching resources. However, a very high ratio of students to teaching staff certainly
suggests insufficient professional support for learning, particularly for students from disadvantaged home
backgrounds.
"Teaching staff' refers to professional personnel directly involved in teaching students. The classification includes
classroom teachers; special education teachers; and other teachers who work with students as a whole class in a
classroom, in small groups in a resource room, or in one-to-one teaching inside or outside a regular classroom.
Teaching staff also includes chairpersons of departments whose duties include some amount of teaching, but it
Ilf?
does not include non-professional personnel who support teachers in providing instruction to students, such as
teachers' aides and other para-professional personnel.
The concept of a ratio of students to teaching staff is different from that of class size. Although one country may
have a lower ratio of students to teaching staff than another, this does not necessarily mean that classes are
smaller in the first country or that students in the first country receive more teaching inputs. The relationship
between the ratio of students to teaching staff and average class size is influenced by factors like differences
between countries in the length of the school year, the annual number of hours for which a student attends class,
the annual time teachers are expected to spend teaching, the grouping of students within classes, and the
practices related to team learning.
This indicator does not take into account differences in teachers' qualifications, pedagogical training, experiences
and status, teaching materials and variations in classroom conditions, factors which could affect the quality of
teaching/learning.
UDHR, article 26, ICESCR, articles 13 and 14, ICERD, article 5 (e-v), 1CRMW, articles 30 and 43 (a-c), CRC, articles
23, 28 and 29, and CEDAW, articles 10 and 14(2-d) are examples of provisions relevant to the right to education
and this indicator.
Indicator 7
Reported cases of forced evictions in the reporting period (see outcome indicators in the table on
the right to adequate housing)
Definition
This indicator refers to the number of reported individual cases of forced eviction during the
reference period. "Forced eviction" is defined as "the permanent or temporary removal against their will of
individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision
of and access to appropriate forms of legal or other protection" (General Comment No. 7, ICESCR).
Rationale
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has observed that all persons should
possess a degree of security of tenure which guarantees legal protection against forced eviction, harassment and
other threats. It has argued that forced evictions are prima facie incompatible with the requirements of the
ICESCR (General Comment No. 7). Moreover, given the interdependence of all human rights, forced evictions
frequently violate other human rights. Thus, while manifestly breaching the rights enshrined in the ICESCR, the
practice of forced evictions may also result in violations of civil and political rights, such as the right to life, the
right to security of the person, the right to non-interference with privacy, family and home and the right to the
peaceful enjoyment of possessions. It is an outcome indicator intended to analyze the degree to which States
protect the security of tenure.
Method of computation
in a specific period of time.
The indicator is computed as a head count of all reported cases of forced eviction
Data collection and source The main data source for this indicator is records maintained by national human
rights institutions, non-governmental organisations and in certain instances records of administrative agencies
responsible for or monitoring rehabilitation.
Periodicity Information on the indicator should be available on a periodic basis. It is often reported annually by
organisations monitoring security of tenure.
Disaggregation In order to be meaningful, the information on this indicator should be disaggregated by sex and
age (at least for children or young people under the age of 18 years) and, as applicable, by relevant demographic
groups (e.g. ethnic groups, minorities and migrants) and socio-economic status (income or consumption
expenditure quintiles).
Comments and limitations The indicator can be one good summary measure of the realisation of the right to
adequate housing. Yet like all indicators that are based on event-based data on human rights violations and
depend on multiple information sources, the indicator may suffer from reliability issues. It may underestimate (or
/49
sometimes, though rarely, even overestimate) the incidence of forced evictions, if used in a casual manner to
draw generalised conclusions for the country as a whole. Moreover, in most instances, the number of cases
reported would depend on the awareness, access to information, motivation and perseverance of the civil society
organisations agencies and the media in following the relevant events.
The term ''forced evictions" is, in some respects, problematic. This expression seeks to convey a sense of
arbitrariness and of illegality. For many observers, the reference to "forced evictions" is a tautology, while others
have criticized the expression "illegal evictions" on the ground that it assumes that the relevant law provides
adequate protection of the right to housing and conforms with the Covenant, which is by no means always the
case. Similarly, it has been suggested that the term "unfair evictions" is even more subjective by virtue of its
failure to refer to any legal framework at all. The international human rights community, especially in the context
of the UN human rights system, has opted to use "forced evictions", primarily because all suggested alternatives
also suffer from certain ambiguities. The prohibition on forced evictions does not, however, apply to evictions
carried out by force in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of the International
Covenants on Human Rights.
Women, children, youth, older persons, indigenous people, ethnic and other minorities, and other vulnerable
individuals and groups all suffer disproportionately from the practice of forced eviction. Women in all groups are
especially vulnerable given the extent of statutory and other forms of discrimination which often apply in relation
to property rights (including home ownership) or rights of access to property or accommodation, and their
particular vulnerability to acts of violence and sexual abuse when they are rendered homeless. The non
discrimination provisions of articles 2.2 and 3 of ICESCR impose an additional obligation upon Governments to
ensure that, where evictions do occur, appropriate measures are taken to ensure that no form of discrimination
is involved.
UDHR article 25, ICESCR article 11, CERD article 5, CEDAW article 14, CRC article 27, CMW article 43 and CRPD
article 28 have references of relevance to the indicator. The CESCR also recognizes legal security of tenure under
its General Comment No. 4 (1991) on the right to adequate housing: "Notwithstanding the type of tenure, all
persons should possess a degree of security of tenure which guarantees legal protection against forced eviction,
harassment and other threats".
Some institutions, such as the World Bank and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) have adopted guidelines on relocation and/or resettlement with a view to limiting the scale of and human
suffering associated with forced evictions. Such practices often accompany large-scale development projects,
such as dam-building and other major energy projects.
Indicators
Conviction rates for indigent defendants provided with legal representation as a proportion of
conviction rates for defendants with lawyers of their own choice (see outcome indicators in the table on the right
to fair trial)
«»
Definition
The indicator measures the ratio of conviction rate of defendants who were provided with free
legal representation to that of defendants who had legal counsel of their own choice, in the reporting period.
Though the indicator could be used separately for the two conviction rates, it is more useful when used as a ratio
of the two.
Rationale
Article 14(3)(d) ICCPR provides that defendants should have legal assistance assigned to them, in
any case where the interests of justice so requires, and without payment if they do not have sufficient means to
pay for it. The Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment 32, states that "Counsel provided by the
competent authorities on the basis of this provision must be effective in the representation of the accused".
Furthermore, blatant incompetence by assigned counsel may entail the responsibility of the State. The indicator
is an outcome indicator that relates to the access to and equality before the courts attribute of the right to a fair
trial. As such, it measures the extent to which equality is achieved in practice.
/so
Method of computation The indicator is computed separately for defendants provided with legal representation
and for defendants with a lawyer of their own choice before taking the ratio of the two. For each group, the
indicator is calculated as the ratio of the number of defendants in that group who were convicted to the total
number of defendants in that group who stood trial during the reporting period.
Data collection and source The main sources of data are court records and reports of the office of the
prosecutor at the national or sub-national level.
Periodicity The data, if compiled, should be available on an annual basis.
Disaggregation The indicator should be disaggregated by type of crimes (e.g. homicide, rape, assault, robbery,
etc.), stage of proceedings (first hearing or appeal), and by region or administrative unit. It should also be
disaggregated by characteristics of the defendant, in particular by sex, age (at least for children or young people
under the age of 18 years), and, as applicable, by relevant demographic groups (e.g. ethnic groups, minorities,
migrants, persons with disabilities, sexual orientation).
Comments and limitations The indicator is a good measure of the relative level of competence of assigned
lawyers, and thus of the effective implementation of the right to a fair trial regardless of economic status of the
defendant. However, particularly in regions or States with a small number of cases, the indicator should not be
over-analysed; each case must be assessed on its own merits. It may also be useful to use this indicator jointly
with an indicator on the nature and average length of sentences for indigent defendants and defendants with
lawyers of their own choice.
UDHR articles 10-11, ICCPR articles 14-15, ICERD article 5(a), CEDAW article 2, CRC articles 12(2), 37(d) and 40,
ICRMW articles 16(5-9) and 18, and CRPD article 13, are examples of references of relevance to the right to a fair
trial.
Indicator 9 Infant mortality rate (see outcome indicators in the tables on the right to life, the right to adequate
food and the right to health)
Definition The indicator refers to infants dying before reaching the age of one year per 1000 live births during
the specified period.
Rationale As a measure of child survival, the infant mortality rate is a key socio-economic statistic for many
human rights, including the right to life, the right to health and the right to adequate food. The level of this
indicator can be potentially influenced by a wide range of economic, social, political and environmental
determinants. As a consequence, the indicator will be particularly important in the monitoring of the results of
State parties' actions in fulfilling their obligations in creating favourable and necessary conditions in which infant
mortality rates are minimised. In the tables of indicators, it has been identified as an outcome indicator for the
right to life, the right to health and the right to adequate food.
Method of computation
The indicator is computed as number of deaths of infants under one-year of age
per 1000 live births in that year. The number of deaths is divided by the number of births and the result is
multiplied by 1000.
Data collection The main sources of data at the country level are national administrative and source records,
including the vital statistic registration system and records of statistical agency, sample surveys, population
censuses and household surveys, including Demographic and Health Surveys.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) compiles aggregate country data series based on administrative and
survey data. The United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) also provides country data series in its Multiple Indicator
Cluster Surveys.
Periodicity
In general, the indicator based on administrative records is available annually, and the indicator
based on household surveys every 3 to 5 years.
/S!
Disaggregation Disaggregation of indicator by geographic or administrative regions, for example between rural
and urban areas, is essential in assessing disparities in the infant mortality pattern across different regions. In
addition, the indicator should be disaggregated by cause of death, by sex and, as applicable, by relevant
demographic groups (e.g. ethnic groups, indigenous, minorities, migrants) and socio-economic status (income or
consumption expenditure quintiles).
Comments and limitations The indicator is widely used and can be a good summary measure of the realisation of
the right to life, the right to highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and the right to adequate
food. The infant mortality rate is considered to be a more robust estimate than the under-five mortality rate if
the information is drawn from vital statistics registration covering at least 90 per cent of vital events in the
population. For household surveys, infant mortality estimates are obtained directly (Demographic and Health
Surveys) or indirectly (Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys). When estimated indirectly, the under-one mortality
estimates must be consistent with the under-five mortality estimates.
Girls have a survival advantage over boys during the first year of life, largely based on biological differences. This
is especially so during the first month of life when perinatal conditions are most likely to be the cause or a
contributing cause of death. While infant mortality is generally higher for boys than for girls, in some countries
girls' biological advantage is outweighed by gender-based discrimination. However, under-five mortality better
captures the effect of gender discrimination than infant mortality, as nutrition and medical interventions are
more important after age one.
In its General Comment No. 14 (ICESCR Art. 12) on the right to the highest attainable standard of health, the
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights interprets that "the provision for the reduction of the
stillbirth rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child" (Art. 12.2(a)) may be
understood as requiring measures to improve child and maternal health, sexual and reproductive health services,
including access to family planning, pre- and post-natal care, emergency obstetric services and access to
information, as well as to resources necessary to act on that information.
In its General Comment No. 6 (ICCPR Art. 6) on the right to life, the Human Rights Committee noted that the right
to life has been too-often narrowly interpreted. The expression "inherent right to life" cannot properly be
understood in a restrictive manner, and the protection of this right requires that States adopt positive measures.
In this connection, the Committee considers that it would be desirable for States parties to take all possible
measures to reduce infant mortality and to increase life expectancy, especially in adopting measures to eliminate
malnutrition and epidemics.
Administrative and household survey data may underestimate infant mortality. It is also important that the main
causes of mortality be carefully investigated to ascertain the extent to which it is caused by poor healthcare
services, poor health conditions of infants and health problems of their mothers and/or due to some other
extraneous reasons that are difficult to anticipate so that policy measures may be suitably formulated to address
the problem.
UDHR articles 3 and 25, ICESCR articles 10-12, ICCPR articles 6, ICERD article 5, CEDAW article 2, 12 and 14, CRC
articles 6, 27 and 24, ICRMW article 9, 28 and 43, and CRPD article 10, 28 and 25 are examples of references of
relevance to the indicator.
This is a Millennium Development Goal indicator.
p / ko ram a nga la
\\%XBangai°,'e -
;
h
/$2
Statement of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders,
Margaret Sekaggya, as she concludes her visit to India
NEW DELHI, 21 January 2011 - From 10 to 21 January 2011, I carried out a fact-finding mission to assess the
situation of human rights defenders in India, and traveled to New Delhi, Bhubaneswar (Orissa). Kolkata (West
Bengal), Guwahati (Assam), Ahmedabad (Gujarat), Jammu and Srinagar (Jammu and Kashmir).
I met with the Foreign Secretary; the Union Home Secretary; the Additional Secretary (International Organisations
and Environment Diplomacy); the Joint Secretary (Human Rights), Ministry for Home Affairs: the State Chief
Secretary, State Home Secretary and Director-General of Police in states visited; the Chairperson of the National
Human Rights Commission; Members of the Statutory Full Commission; Chairpersons and Members of State
Human Rights Commissions; and Judges from the High Court in Delhi. However, I regret I was unable to meet the
Prime Minister, nor with members of the Parliament.
I met as well with members of the diplomatic community and United Nations agencies in the capital. Finally,
throughout my mission, I met a very wide and diverse segment of the civil society through national and regional
consultations.
I thank very much the Government of India for extending an invitation to me and for its exemplary cooperation
throughout the mission. I further want to thank all human rights defenders with whom I had meetings, some of
whom had to travel long distances to meet me. Finally, I want to express my appreciation to the Office of the United
Nations Resident Coordinator in India for its invaluable support in preparation of and during the mission.
While I must now take some time to review and analyse the considerable amount of information I have received,
and to follow up on further exchanges of information with the Government, human rights defenders and other
stakeholders, I would like to provide a few preliminary observations and recommendations.
I first want to commend the Government for opening its doors to my mandate. Previous requests to visit India were
made by my predecessor in 2002, 2003 and 2004. This is an important development, and I hope that the invitation
requests of other Special Procedures mandate-holders will be similarly honoured in the near future.
I further commend the Government for enabling me to visit five states, which assisted me in gaining a clear
understanding of the local specificities in which human rights defenders work. Given the duration of the mission and
the size of the country, I regret I could not access all parts of the country, but I invite those who wish to do so to
provide me with information now or in the near future.
I note with satisfaction that India has a comprehensive and progressive legal framework which guarantees human
rights and fundamental freedoms, as enshrined, inter alia, in the Constitution, the Protection of Human Rights Act,
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and the Right to Information Act. I
welcome the commitment expressed by Indian authorities to uphold human rights.
I furthen/velcome the draft Bill on the Prevention of Torture with a view to ratifying the Convention Against Torture in
the near future.
Besides the National Human Rights Commission and existing State-level Human Rights Commissions, I note the
existence of a wide range of Statutory Commissions mandated to promote and protect the rights of, inter alia,
women, children, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.
However, despite the aforementioned laws aimed at promoting and protecting human rights, I note widespread
deficiencies in their full implementation at both central and state levels, adversely affecting the work and safety of
human rights defenders. Similarly, I have observed the need for the National and existing State Human Rights
Commissions to do much more to ensure a safe and conducive environment for human rights defenders throughout
the country.
Throughout my mission, I heard numerous testimonies about male and female human rights defenders, and their
families, who have been killed, tortured, ill-treated, disappeared, threatened, arbitrarily arrested and detained,
falsely charged, under surveillance, forcibly displaced, or their offices raided and files stolen, because of their
legitimate work in upholding human rights and fundamental freedoms.
153
These violations are commonly attributed to law enforcement authorities; however, they have reportedly also shown
collusion and/or complaisance with abuses committed by private actors against defenders. Armed groups have also
harassed human rights defenders in some instances.
In the context of India’s economic policies, defenders engaged in denouncing development projects that threaten or
destroy the land, natural resources and livelihood of their community or of other communities, have been targeted
by State agents and private actors, and are particularly vulnerable.
I am particularly concerned at the plight of human rights defenders working for the rights of marginalized people, i e
Dalits, Adavasis (tribals) religious minorities and sexual minorities, who face particular risks and ostracism because
of their activities. Collectivities striving for their rights have in fact been victimized.
Women human rights defenders, who are often at the forefront of the promotion and protection of human rights, are
also at particular risk of persecution.
Right To Information (RTI) activists, who may be ordinary citizens, have increasingly been targeted for. among
others, exposing human rights violations and poor governance, including corruption of officials.
Other defenders targeted include those defending women’s and child rights, fighting impunity for past human rights
violations, seeking accountability for communal pogroms, upholding the rights of political prisoners, journalists,
lawyers, labour activists, humanitarian workers, and church workers. Defenders operating in rural areas are often
more vulnerable
While I acknowledge the security challenges faced by the country, I am deeply concerned about the arbitrary
application of security laws at the national and state levels (in Jammu and Kashmir and in the North-East of India),
most notably the Public Safety Act and the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, the Jammu and Kashmir Public
Safety Act and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, which direly affects the work of human rights defenders
I am troubled by the branding and stigmatization of human rights defenders, who are labeled as “naxalites
(Maoists)", "terrorists”, “militants", “insurgents", "anti-nationalists", “members of underground". Defenders on the
ground, including journalists, who report on violations by State and non-State actors in areas affected by
insurgency, are targeted by both sides.
Freedom of movement of defenders has also been restricted under these security laws; for instance, applications of
passport or renewal have been denied, as well as access for defenders to victims in some areas.
Illegitimate restrictions to freedom of peaceful assembly were also brought to my attention: for example, I was
informed of instances of protests in support of a human rights defender in detention which were not allowed to take
place.
Finally, I am concerned about the amendment to the Foreign Contribution Regulations Act which provides that non
governmental organisations must reapply every five years for the review of their status by the Ministry of Home
Affairs in order to receive foreign funding. Such a provision may be used to censor non-governmental organisations
which are critical of Government's policies.
In view of the above, the space for civil society is contracted.
Although the judiciary is the primary avenue for legal redress, I have observed that its functioning is hampered by
backlog and significant delays in administrating cases of human rights violations.
The National Human Rights Commission and the existing State Human Rights Commissions is an important
additional avenue where human rights defenders can seek redress. However, all the defenders I met during the
mission voiced their disappointment and mistrust in the current functioning of these institutions. They have
submitted complaints related to human rights violations to the Commissions, but reportedly their cases were either
hardly taken up, or the investigation, often after a significant period of delay, concluded that no violations occurred.
Their main concern lies in the fact that the investigations into their cases are conducted by the police, which in
many cases are the perpetrators of the alleged violations. While I welcome the establishment of a human rights
defenders focal point within the National Human Rights Commission, I regret that it was not given sufficient
prominence within the Commission.
/54
n
Based
on
the
above,
wish
to
make
the
following
preliminary
recommendations:
To the Central and State Governments:
*The Prime Minister and the Chief Secretaries should publicly acknowledge the importance and legitimacy of the
work of human rights defenders, i.e. anyone who “individually and in association with others, [. ..] promotefs] and
[...] strivefs] for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and
international levels “ (article 1 of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, A/RES/53/144). Specific attention
must be given to human rights defenders who face particular risks (as identified above).
*Security forces should be clearly instructed to respect the work and the rights and fundamental freedoms of
human rights defenders, especially human rights defenders who face particular risks (as identified above).
‘Sensitization training to security forces on the role and activities of human rights defenders should be delivered,
with technical advice and assistance from relevant UN entities, non-governmental organizations and other partners.
‘Prompt and impartial investigations on violations committed against human rights defenders should be conducted,
and perpetrators should be prosecuted.
*The Supreme Court judgment on police reform should be fully implemented in line with international standards, in
particular at the State level.
Tull implementation of laws and policies which guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms of human rights
defenders should be ensured.
*A law on the protection of human rights defenders developed in full and meaningful consultation with civil society
and on the basis of technical advice from relevant UN entities should be enacted.
*The Foreign Contribution Regulation Act should be critically reviewed.
*The Draft Bill on Prevention Against Torture should be adopted without further delay.
*The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women should be
ratified. The ratification of the complaints procedure will provide women human rights defenders an opportunity to
access another procedure to address any violations of rights under the Convention.
‘The Armed Forces Special Powers Act and the Public Safety Act should be repealed and application of other
security laws which adversely affect the work and safety of human rights defenders should be reviewed.
‘The functioning of the National Human Rights Commission should be reviewed with a view to strengthening the
Commission by, inter alia: broadening the selection criteria for the appointment of the Chairperson; diversifying the
composition of the Commission; extending the one-year limitation clause; establishing an independent committee in
charge of investigating complaints filed; elevating the status of the human rights defenders focal point by appointing
a Commissioner. The Protection of Human Rights Act should be amended as necessary in full and meaningful
consultation with civil society.
‘State Human Rights Commissions should be established in states where such commissions are not yet in
existence without further delay.
‘Central and State Governments should continue collaborating with Special Procedures of the Human Rights
Council, including by extending invitations for country visits.
To National and existing State Human Rights Commissions:
‘The supportive role of the commissions for human rights defenders should be strengthened by inter alia,
conducting regular regional visits; meeting human rights defenders in difficulty or at risk; and undertaking trial
observations of cases of human rights defenders wherever appropriate.
‘The visibility of the commissions should be ensured through regular and proactive engagement with civil society
and the media.
*A toll-free 24-hour emergency hotline for human rights defenders should be established
‘The commissions should monitor the full implementation of recommendations made by UN human rights
mechanisms, including Special Procedures mandate-holders, Treaty Bodies, and the Universal Periodic Review..
To the judiciary:
‘In the absence of a witnesses and victims protection Act, the judiciary should take measures to ensure the
protection of human rights defenders at risk, witnesses and victims.
‘The judiciary should ensure better utilization of suo motu whenever cases of violation against human rights
defenders arise
‘The importance of the role of human rights defenders in the vibrant and active functioning of the judiciary should be
recognised.
To human rights defenders
‘Platforms or networks aimed at protecting defenders and facilitating dialogue should be devised or strengthened
‘Defenders should better acquaint themselves with the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders
‘Efforts should be made to continue making full use of United Nations Special Procedures and other international
human rights mechanisms when reporting on human rights violations.
To the international community and donors
‘The European Union Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders and local strategies on India should be implemented
on a systematic basis.
‘The situation of human rights defenders, in particular the most targeted and vulnerable ones, should be continually
monitored, and support for their work should be expressed through, inter alia, interventions before central and state
institutions.
‘Efforts should be intensified in empowering civil society.
To all stakeholders:
‘The Declaration on Human Rights Defenders should be translated in main local languages, and disseminated
widely.
. . .
.
‘Efforts should be continued to raise civic awareness among the general public, and the spirit of dialogue and
cooperation in society fostered.
I will present my full report with final conclusions and recommendations to the UN Human Rights Council in March
2012.
Margaret Sekaggya, a lawyer from Uganda, was appointed Special Rapporteur in March 2008 by the UN
Human Rights Council. She is independent from any Government and serves in her individual capacity.
Website of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders:
OHCHR Country Page - India :
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/AsiaRegion/Pages/INIndex.aspx
For further information and media enquiries, please contact:
In Geneva: Ms. Dolores Infante-Canibano (Tel: + 41 22 917 9730 / Email: dinfante@ohchr.org).
n
Statement of the Special Rapporteur on Toxic waste concludes his visit to India
The Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council on the adverse effects of the movement
and dumping of toxic and dangerous products and wastes on the enjoyment of human rights, Mr. Okechukwu
Ibeanu, today concluded his visit to India. During his 10-day mission, from 11 to 21 January 2010. the Special
Rapporteur assessed the progress made by the country in minimising the adverse effects that hazardous
activities, such as shipbreaking and the recycling of electronic waste (e-waste), have on the human rights of
countless individuals working in these sectors or living close to the places where these act ivies take place
Apart from the capital, Delhi, the Special Rapporteur visited an e-waste recycling facility in Roorkee, informal
small-scale laboratories for the dismantling and recycling of electronic products in the suburb of the capital, a
facility for the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes in Ankleshwar, and a number of ship
breaking yards in Alang and Mumbai.’
"I welcome the significant progress India has made in improving health and safety conditions in the ship
breaking yards, as witnessed by the considerable decrease in the number of work-related injuries resulting in
death or permanent or temporary disabilities, but a number of serious concerns remain to be properly
addressed", Mr. Ibeanu said.
“First and foremost, I urge the owners of the yards to comply with the existing labour and social security
legislation, and on the Government to monitor its effective implementation", he added. Training opportunities
need to be improved, and personal protective equipments (PPEs) should be provided to, and used by, all
workers in the yards. Medical facilities do not possess sufficient human, technical and financial resources to
provide any treatment other than first aid for minor injuries, and there are no schools or formal education
facilities for the children of those employed in the yards, 20 per cent of whom are accompanied by then
families.
In India, ships are currently dismantled on the beach, a method commonly referred to as “beaching”, and its
actual impact on the surrounding environment and the livelihood of local communities relying on agriculture
and fishing for their subsistence continues to be debated. “In order to ascertain the environmental impact of
the ship breaking industry, I recommend that an independent study be carried out to assess the actual and
potential adverse effects that may be caused by the discharge of hazardous material into the natural
environment, as well as the level of risk”, Mr. Ibeanu said.
The Special Rapporteur finally noted that he was “shocked by the extremely poor conditions in which most
workers live in Alang and Mumbai”. Semi-skilled and unskilled workers live in makeshift facilities lacking basic
sanitation facilities, electricity and even safe drinking water. “I call on Governmental authorities to provide
appropriate plots of lands, and facilitate the construction of adequate housing facilities for those who work in
the yards. Adequate sanitation and drinking water facilities should also be put in place".
With regard to e-waste, the Special Rapporteur noted that 97 per cent of the 400,000 metric tonnes of ewaste generated in India is dismantled and recycled in small-scale, informal laboratories where individuals
are constantly exposed to over 50 hazardous chemicals or heavy metals that can cause serious health and
environmental risks if not disposed in an environmentally safe manner. “The main challenge ahead is that of
creating appropriate incentives to ensure that obsolete electronic equipment are recycled in certified facilities
that can dismantle and recycle them in an environmentally sound way that prevents the risk of health
consequences for the workers involved or others and to ensure appropriate information is available on the
hazards associated with e-waste, both for recycling workers and to the broader population”, Mr. Ibeanu said.
Based on the information collected during the visit, the Rapporteur will prepare a report and make
recommendations on how to protect the human rights against the threats posed by the unsound management
and disposal of toxic and dangerous products and wastes. His report will be presented to the UN Human
Rights Council in 2010.
Okechukwu Ibeanu, Professor of Political Science at the University of Nigeria, was appointed Special
Rapporteur in 2004 by the Human Rights Council. As Special Rapporteur, he is independent from any
government or organization and serves in his individual capacity.
For further information on the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, please visit the website:
http://www2.ohchr.org/enqlish/issues/environment/waste/index.htm
o
b
Working Group on Human Rights
PRESS RELEASE
WGHR reaffirms UN’s call for urgent attention to the state of
human rights defenders in India
New Delhi 25 January 2011 - The Working Group on Human Rights in India and the UN (WGHR)
commends’the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders Margaret Sekaggya
for the successful completion of her fact-finding mission to India, which took place from 10 to 21 Ja
y
2011 WGHR welcomes the Special Rapporteur’s recently released statement wh.ch summarises her
main'interim findings concerning the alarming situation of human rights defenders in India, and gives
preliminary recommendations to relevant stakeholders.
defenders as expressed by Babloo Loitongbam, Director, Human Rights Alert. This is the first ever visit
of a UN Special Rapporteur to the North East. Ms. Sekaggya s empathetic listening to the struggles of the
human rights defenders of this isolated region has generated a lot of hope .
The Special Rapporteur’s statement brings to light the severe assault on hu^a^igh's desf®^®'S’
state and private actors, in India today. During her 12-day mission in India, Ms. Sekaggya heard
testimoniesPfrom defenders of killings, torture, ill-treatment, enforced disappearances, threats, arb'trsi y
arrests and detention filing of false charges against defenders, surveillance, forcible displacement raiding
defenders6offices'and9stealing of documents and files, and illegitimate restnct.ons on freedom of
peaceful assembly.
While Ms Sekaoava notes that India is home to a comprehensive and progressive nghts-based legal
“‘X .ndexistence o. ™e™s beman rigb.s
deficiencies” in implementation of laws and failings in institutional responses with serious adverse .mpact
on the safety and security of human rights defenders.
on a range of
The Special Rapporteur expresses serious concern over the plight of defenders working
issues, including:
,
.
.
. , .
.
Defenders engaged in denouncing development projects that threaten or destroy the land, natural
.
resources and livelihoods of communities
Defenders working for the rights of marginalized people (Dalits, adivasis), religious minorities and
■
.
sexual minorities
Right to Information activists
Defenders working on women’s and child rights, particularly women human rights defenders
■
Defenders fighting impunity for human rights violations
•
.
Defenders seeking accountability for communal pogroms
Defenders upholding the rights of political prisoners, journalists, lawyers, labour activists,
■
.
humanitarian workers, and church workers
Defenders working in insurgency and conflict affected areas
Defenders working in rural India (who according to the Special Rapporteur are “often more
vulnerable")
Henri Tiphagne, Convenor of Human Rights Defenders Alert - India ob^7®s’''XeXXereTJre
fighting for their rights”.
<>
Ms. Sekaggya points to the “arbitrary application" of security laws, particularly in conflict affected areas of
the country such as Jammu & Kashmir and the North East states. These laws are used to target and
brand human rights defenders (including journalists) as anti-national, terrorists, Naxalites, and other
perceived enemies of the state. The Special Rapporteur recommends the repeal of the Armed Forces
Special Powers Act and the Jammu & Kashmir Public Safety Act, and also calls for a review of other
security laws in force. Based on her observations at the Special Rapporteur's consultation with civil
society in Kashmir, Advocate Vrinda Grover states: ‘‘Parents of victims, human rights activists, the
Srinagar Bar Association and journalists all underscored the rampant violations of human rights and the
impunity enjoyed by the security forces in Kashmir. Moved by the accounts of young persons killed and
detained under draconain laws, fhe Special Rapporteur observed that Kashmir should be understood
through the human rights violations suffered by the people".
WGHR expresses deep concern for the safety and security of human rights defenders under severe
assault across the country, and calls on the Central and state governments to consider and implement the
Special Rapporteur’s preliminary recommendations without delay.
WGHR also calls attention to what the Special Rapporteur’s findings reveal about the larger situation of
human rights protection in India, which is seriously and alarmingly lacking. The deliberate and often violent
targeting of human rights defenders is facilitated by failing institutional responses, particularly of the
National and state human rights commissions. The Special Rapporteur clearly identified the systemic
problems in the performance of human rights commissions, which have led defenders to lose all faith in
these institutions. This was reaffirmed at a roundtable meeting hosted by the National Human Rights
Commission for civil society representatives and the Special Rapporteur, at which speaker after speaker
identified the need for a strong, independent, effective and transparent Commission. WGHR urges central
and state governments, and the commissions themselves, to urgently take steps to rectify these failings.
“We hope this mission signifies that the Government of India will now regularly invite Special Procedures
mandate holders to the country. We trust this step indicates a new era of collaboration with the UN human
rights programme and demonstrates India's firm resolve to respect its international human rights
commitments, including timely implementation of Special Rapporteur and UN treaty body
recommendations", says Miloon Kothari, Convenor of WGHR. ■
For more information, contact: Henri Tiphagne: +919894025859, Miloon Kothari +919810642122 or
Vrinda Grover: +919810806181
The Statement of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders is
ayaitable at: www.ohchr.orq/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplaYNews.aspxTNewslD=1066Q&LanqID=E
The Working Group on Human Rights in India and the UN - a national coalition of fourteen human rights
organisations and independent experts - works towards the realisation of all civil, cultural,, economic, political and
social human rights in India and towards holding the Indian government accountable to its national and international
human rights obligations. For information on WGHR, please visit: www.wqhr.org
IBS
o
8 r-| [
Consultative Workshop on the UPR Process
4th and Sth April 2011 - New Delhi
Report
Introduction
The Consultative Workshop on the Universal Periodic Review Process (UPR) took place in New Delhi
on 4th and 5th April 2011. It brought together 55 participants, including representatives from the
Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), various UN
agencies, diplomats and civil society.
The workshop was organised by the Working Group on Human Rights in India and the UN (WGHR), a
coalition of fourteen NGOs and independent experts. WGHR is a coalition focused on ensuring better
engagement of Indian civil society and government with all UN mechanisms for the promotion and
protection of human rights. It is in this capacity that WGHR has organised the UPR workshop and
taken the lead in working towards India's next review. WGHR will ensure that it brings in the process
as many other civil society actors as possible to make the process far ranging and inclusive.
The MEA was represented by:
■
Mr. Dilip Sinha - Additional Secretary (International Organisations & Environment Diplomacy), MEA
■
Mr. Harsh Vardhan - Joint Secretary (UN Political Division), MEA
■
Ms. Rohita Mishra - Under Secretary (UN Economic and Social Division), MEA
■
Ms. Thelma John David - IPS (Probationer), MEA
The United Nations Economic and Social Division (UNES) is the division of the MEA in charge of UPR
reporting1.
The NHRC was represented by Mr. J. P. Meena, Joint Secretary at the NHRC, in charge of
Administration, Coordination, Research and Projects.
The workshop fulfilled three main objectives, namely: (1) providing training and capacity building
opportunity on how best to engage with the UPR process, (2) examining critical human rights issues in
India today and (3) providing a forum for dialogue between various stakeholders (government, national
human rights commission and civil society) on the UPR process both in terms of implementation of the
recommendations made to India by the UPR in 2008 and preparation for the next UPR in 2012.
The workshop was a rare opportunity for open, constructive and in-depth dialogue and will hopefully
represent a milestone towards better engagement of all stakeholders with the UPR process. This
report reflects some of the main discussion points and outcomes.
I. The UPR Process
The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a unique human rights mechanism of the United Nations (UN)
Human Rights Council aiming at improving the human rights situation on the ground of each of the
192 UN Member States. Under this mechanism, the human rights situation of all UN Member States is
reviewed every four year (48 States are reviewed each year during three UPR sessions dedicated to
16 States each).
The result of each review is reflected in an “outcome report" listing the recommendations made to the
State under review (SuR) including those that it accepted and which it will have to implement before
the next review. The UPR is a full-circle process comprising three key stages:
1 The UNES division was headed, at-the time of the UPR Workshop by Mr. A.R. Ghanashyam (Joint Secretary)
and is composed of one Deputy Secretary and two Under-Secretaries. The current Joint Secretary (UNES) is:
Mr. T. S. Tirumurti.
Working Grc-jp on Human Rignts
•
Review of the human rights situation of the SuR
■
Implementation between two reviews (four years) of the recommendations accepted and
voluntary pledges and commitments by the SuR
■
Reporting at the next review on the implementation of those recommendations and pledges
and on the human rights situation in the country since the previous review
India was part of the first series of States to be reviewed by the Human Rights Council in April 2008. It
will be reviewed again in June 2012. As with all states under review, the Government of India
submitted its national report to the Human Rights Council in March 2008. Civil society organisations
also submitted a parallel report. Following India’s review, the Government of India accepted 18
recommendations made to it by other states5.
II. Lack of consultation and inadequate reporting by the GOI during the first UPR
In the preparation of the content of the State report, according to Human Rights Council resolution 5/1,
"States are encouraged to prepare the information through a broad consultation process at the
national level with all relevant stakeholders". This clearly puts the onus on the State to initiate and
carry out truly broad-based consultation. Civil society speakers at the workshop stated that there was
no broad consultation process to prepare India’s first report to the UPR. They reported that the 2008
UPR process was hurriedly organised leading to poor participation on both sides. The meeting was
held with very short notice, the government prepared no documentation in advance and there was no
fixed agenda to guide the content. This minimal consultation took place only in Delhi, the national
capital. The government made no attempt to take the process to the rest of the country.
From a civil society perspective, India’s State report suffered in its substance and relevance due to the
lack of substantive consultation. The 2008 State report does not go beyond a listing of the
constitutional, legal and institutional instruments, which have been established to protect and promote
human rights. While this is needed, one of the objectives of the UPR is to assess the challenges faced
by states in implementation of their human rights obligations. In India’s first state report, there was no
mention or analysis of the problems, gaps, and challenges in state response and implementation,
which is the ultimate test of how far the Indian state is realising its human rights obligations and
commitments.
Consulting civil society will provide the government with first-hand information of gaps in
implementation at the ground level. It was pointed out by one speaker that other states (the United
Kingdom as one example) have used the UPR process to openly and honestly recognize the gaps in
human rights protection and seek advice on how to address these gaps. This is particularly important
for India, as there are many serious gaps in human rights protection in the country.
III. Overview of the human rights situation in India
The presentations by expert speakers on the situation of human rights in India provided broad
overviews of key human rights concerns in the country today. Many of these are1 linked to the
recommendations made to the government during India’s first review. One speaker spoke at length of
the exclusion of the most vulnerable - Dalits, adivasi communities, the rural poor - being perpetuated
by the current economic growth model. Participants were reminded that the vast majority of India's
working population are employed in the informal sector as “flexible labour”. As a result of this, the vast
majority of India’s working population has been reduced to further poverty - about 77% (850 million) of
the working people of India subsist on Rs. 20 per day. With no social protection, their rights are totally
denied to them. The “social cost" of India’s growth was also discussed, particularly the mass
displacement of millions of families due to purported “development” projects. With the displacement,
traditional livelihoods are being destroyed on an unprecedented scale.
It was mentioned that there is an urgent need for the State to acknowledge and address current
human rights violations, including: large-scale displacements resulting from development projects and
communal violence; enforced disappearances in conflict areas; deaths through encounters; the
2 Documents pertaining to India’s first review, including a chart prepared by WGHR on the status of
implementation of the 18 recommendations can be found at: www.wghr.org/universalperiodicreview.html
Ifh
Working Group on Human Rights
widespread use of torture and increasing attacks against human rights defenders. The curtailing of
human rights in the state's response to terrorism, and the need to interrogate this response and its
impact on human rights, was also discussed.
IV. Main topics addressed by stakeholders
All the stakeholders - MEA, NHRC, and civil society - were united in their commitment to a more
inclusive and participatory UPR process, beginning with a planned and effective process of
consultation. There was also discussion on reviving the drafting of a national action plan on human
rights; and strong appeals to the Government of India to issue a standing invitation to UN Special
Procedures to conduct country visits to India.
Wide-ranging views and commitments were expressed by the main stakeholders on these topics in
the course of the workshop. These are summarised below.
A. On effective and inclusive consultation as part of the UPR process
The MEA welcomed the opportunity to interact with civil society and to have a constructive and
meaningful exchange during the workshop. The Ministry encouraged holding more such interactions
amongst all stakeholders, stating that: "they can go a long way in making the process wide ranging
and genuinely inclusive". The MEA representatives at the workshop clearly stated the genuine and
serious commitment of the Government of India (GOI) to the UPR process. There is a strong
willingness from the MEA to engage with civil society in the run up to the June 2012 review, including
in the preparation of the national report for the second cycle of the UPR. To note, MEA
representatives did request all participants to bear in mind the shortage of staff in the Ministry and the
challenges this poses in drafting the state report for the UPR and inviting Special Procedures for
country visits.
The NHRC echoed the inclusive spirit of the MEA. Mr. Meena, the NHRC representative, shared his
expectation that from now on, the entire UPR process should be "much more open, transparent, and
inclusive" and that all the stakeholders will find ways to contribute to the process. Mr. Meena reiterated
that one way to achieve this goal is to hold consultations well in advance to avoid the same pitfalls as
during UPR I.
After pointing to the numerous gaps in the first UPR, civil society representatives called for a new
era of genuine collaboration and dialogue with the government towards implementation of the
recommendations of the first UPR and preparation for the second UPR.
Following on from this collaborative and action-oriented spirit, all the stakeholders stated firm
commitments in preparation for effective consultation and a more collaborative UPR process.
Commitments made by stakeholders
The Ministry of External Affairs will:
■
Consider posting the draft national report for India’s second UPR on the MEA website to
receive comments from all relevant stakeholders.
The National Human Rights Commission will:
■
Track the implementation of the 2008 UPR recommendations with both the MEA and the
Ministry of Home Affairs to ensure that follow-up actions are taken on all the
recommendations.3
Organise a national consultation and two regional consultations with civil society to help the
NHRC draft its strategy on the follow-up of UPR I and in preparation of its report for UPR II.
Help to ensure that the outcome of the first UPR becomes a public document; with a request
to involve civil society in the process of dissemination particularly at the grassroots level.
3 The NHRC has already been informed that the UPR recommendations have been circulated to each concerned
Ministry. Status papers are being collected on the actions taken and the NHRC will very soon be apprised of what
progress has been made.
. .
n
Working Group on Human Rights
As the main representative of civil society at the workshop, WGHR will:
■
Present an interim report to the Human Rights Council in June 2011 on the status of
implementation of the 18 recommendations.
■
Facilitate and participate in a broad participatory process to draft a civil society parallel report
for UPR II.
■
Organise five regional consultations (North-East, East, West, South and North) in the run-up
to UPR II, with a final national consultation to take place in Delhi in December 2011 in which
civil society’s parallel report will be finalised. These consultations will be for civil society, but
government representatives will also be invited. Civil society will also consider drafting subject
specific reports on some of the main human rights issues.
■
Work towards translation of the outcome of the first UPR, particularly the 18
recommendations, into as many regional languages as possible. WGHR will seek the help of
the MEA for translation.
B. On country visits by UN Special Procedures
Civil society representatives repeatedly highlighted the importance of allowing UN Special
Procedures to make country visits to India. Recommendation n° 14 of the 2008 UPR asks the Indian
Government to “extend standing invitation to special procedures" and recommendation 15 specifically
calls the GOI to “Receive as soon as possible the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture".
While civil society very much welcomed the openness and collaboration demonstrated by the GOI
during the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders in January 2011, it also noted
that some crucial mandate holders (for ex. SR on Torture, SR on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary
Executions, SR on Sale of Children, SR on Racism and WG on Arbitrary Detention) have made
numerous requests for country visits and have not yet received any response for the GOI. A chart with
all the pending requests for country visits to India is attached (Annexe 1). WGHR called the GOI to
extend a standing invitation to special procedures or, at the very least, respond positively to the nine
Special Procedures who have made requests for country visits.
When asked why the GOI has not yet issued a standing invitation to special procedures, the MEA
representatives pointed out that the UNES division of the MEA has a very small team and that
possible “procedural” issues due to shortage of staff could be holding back the extension of a standing
invitation.
The NHRC was unequivocal in its position on visits of special procedures in stating that “the
government should not hold back and should^nvite Special Rapporteurs to the country and let them
make their reports on which government can take follow-up actions". The NHRC appealed to civil
society to help raise awareness on the positive aspects of country visits by special procedures. While
there might still be some hesitations by some bureaucrats to invite special procedures, civil society
should help clear these doubts by creating an atmosphere where it will become clear that such visits
are meant to be constructive and are helpful towards creating a better human rights situation in the
country.
C. On the national action plan on human rights
The NHRC has been tasked with drafting a national action plan for human rights (NAP). In 2008, the
NHRC stated that the NAP was under preparation and that a draft would be circulated to members of
the NHRC core group of NGOs for comments. However, the process seems to have been abandoned,
with no visible outputs. It is strongly suggested that the GOI and the NHRC prioritise the drafting of a
NAP.
During the workshop, WGHR committed to contributing to reviving the process by drafting its own
suggested NAP, which will then be submitted to the NHRC and other relevant agencies for their
perusal. ■
- New Delhi, 24 May 2011
n
Pending requests by UN Special Procedures to make country visits to India*
3rd request
4th request
2005
2006
2008
2004
2008
2009
WG on Arbitrary Detention
2004
2005
2006
WG on Enforced or Involuntary disappearances
2005
SR on Racism
2006
SR on Adequate Housing
2008
SR on Indigenous People
2008
IE on Water
2009
1st request
2nd request
SR on Torture
1993
2007
SR on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions
2000
SR on Sale of Children
Mandate Holders
2007
5th request
2009
2008
* Source OHCHR website, http //www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/special/countryvisitsf-m.htm#india
Update February 2011
This chart reflects that more than twenty requests by ten Special Procedures Mandate Holders for a country visit to India have been left
unanswered by the Indian government.
Ulf
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS
MADE TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN ITS FIRST UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
This chart presents a bnef assessment of the government's implementation of the recommendations that came out of India's first Universal Periodic Review in 2008. The recommendations and the responses of the Government of India have been lifted
verbatim from the Report of Vie Working Group on India (UN document: A/HRC/8/26/Add. 1 dated 25 August 2OO8).The current status of implementation and further measures required have been compiled by the Working Group on Human Rights in
India and (he UN (WGHR). This is not an exhaustive account of implementation, but provides a preliminary assessment and identities gaps to the extent possible based on public information available from avil society and government sources. To note,
several recommendations are very broad, and require extensive and long-term measures for implementation which are too lengthy tor a chart. These have been commented on very briefly. This assessment has been prepared as a background docu
ment to assist discussions at the national workshop on India and the UPR to be held in Delhi on 4 and 5 April 2011.
S.No.
| Recommendation
______________
Response of India
____________ | Current status:
Expedite ratification of the Convention The ratification of the Convention against Torture is being processed by Domestic legislation. (The Prevention of Torture Bill 2010) has
been drafted by the government. The Bill was passed by the
against Torture (United
Kingdom Government of India.
Lok Sabha (Lower House) in May 2010. Once the Bill came to
France,
Mexico,
Nigeria,
Italy,
tlie Rajya Sabha (Upper House) in August 2010, it was referred
Switzerland, Sweden) and its Optional
to a Parliamentary Select Committee in August 2010 for further
Protocol (United Kingdom);
scrutiny, following civil society campaigning that the Bill did not
conform to the UN Convention against Torture (CAT). The Select
Committee submitted its report in December 2010 in which it
pointed out several gaps in the Bill, and has also drafted an
alternate Bill based on consultation and input received from civil
society and human rights groups. The Committee's alternate Bill
more closely aligns to CAT than the original Bill drafted by the
| Further measures required:__________
The Select Committee has to present its re-drafted Bill
to the Rajya Sabha. As the Bill has been totally altered, it
has to be placed before and passed by both Houses of
Parliament. It is crucial that there is no dilution of the Bill
as amended by the Select Committee. Any dilution will
compromise India's obligations under CAT and undermine
meaningful ratification.
government.
Continue to fully Involve the national Government of India accepts this recommendation
civil society in the follow-up to the
UPR of India, as was done for Its
preparation (United Kingdom);
There have been no follow-up consultations after the first review
in 2008. . The government has not announced the holding of
follow-up consultations with crvil society on the implementation of
the recommendations adopted in 2008 or on preparations for the
next UPR cycle. The government can also take proactive steps
to help increase awareness and knowledge of the UPR process
Public efforts by the government to initiate and hold
broad-based consultations on the JPR with civil society
beginning this year, well in advance of India '$ next review. It
is recommended that these consultations are held in all the
regions and are not limited only to Delhi.
with civil society.
3.
Continue
energizing
existing Government of India accepts this recommendation
mechanisms
to
enhance
the
addressing of human rights challenges
(Ghana);
This is a broad recommendation which requires a sustained In brief. WGHR suggests that any further action to "energize"
existing mechanisms is geared towards strengthening
approach on many levels.
institutional responses.
Encourage enhanced cooperation with Government of India is committed to continue its constructive engagement This is a broad recommendation which requires a sustained In brief. WCHR recommends that the government
strengthens the level and quality of engagement with
human rights bodies and all relevant with international human rights bodies and relevant stakeholders in its approach.
both domestic and international human rights bodies, and
stakeholders in the pursuit of a society pursuit of realization of all human rights for all.
increases consultation on human rights issues with all
oriented towards the attainment of
internationally
recognized
rights goals(Ghana);
5.
relevant stakeholders.
human
Maintain disaggregated data on caste Extensive disaggregated data, including on caste, are available in ttie
and related discrimination (Canada, public domain.
Belgium, Luxembourg);
General population data is reported in the public domain, but
this is not disaggregated on the basis of castes and tribes, nor
does it go into issues of discrimination. There is reporting on the
extent of crimes committed against Scheduled Castes (SC) and
Scheduled Tribes (ST), but this does not include crimes against
SC and ST women. There is no proper analysis of this reporting,
and no mention of the extent of crime complaints which are
not registered by the police. There is superficial reporting on
The government can consider conducting periodic surveys
to identify the extent of caste-based discrimination, to
collect disaggregated information on the geographical
distribution, and economic and social conditions in full
of communities affected by caste-based discrimination,
including a gender perspective. The government can also
consider providing disaggregated data for the situation of
women affected by caste-based discrimination.
the implementation of special protective legislation in place for
these communities. There is absolutely no disaggregated data
on the basis of caste regarding education, health, civic amenities,
employment, entrepreneurship, and other important soda!
indicators.
6.
Consider signature and ratification of
the Optional Protocol to the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women (Brazil);
The Constitution of India provides for direct access to the Supreme Court There is still no move from the government to sign and ratify the
and High Courts for redressal ol violations of any fundamental right, for CEDAW Optional Protocol (OP).
any individual or group of individuals. In addition, we have several other
statutory mechanisms to address such violations including the National
Human Rights Commissions and the State Human Rights Commissions.
There is also a separate National Commission and State Commissions
for Women which inter alia have a mandate to address cases of violations
of women rights. There exists, therefore, effective legal and constitutional
framework to address individual cases of violations within India.
T
WGHR fully supports signature and ratification of the
CEDAW Optional Protocol (OP)
The OP provides
mechanisms to enhance state compliance to CEDAW.
It is a remedy available where justice remains wanting
despite exhaustion of all domestic remedies, and not
prematurely or in substitution of domestic remedies. The
recommendations of CEDAW under the OP typically
provide structural solutions, and cannot be viewed as
being parallel to or substituting the domestic mechanisms
available for addressing discrimination against women.
/■
S. No.
:__________
| Further measure* required
| Current status
| Response of India
| Recommendation
Consider signature and ratification Government of India fully subscribes to the objectives and purposes of the The government has yet .to .rati^-ILd:Conventions No. 138 and Current inconsistencies within all child-related laws need
of ILO Conventions No. 138 and 182 Convention on the Rights of the Child (to which India is a party) as well as 182. Not only is there is very;poor implementation of the law in to be addressed immediately. The government needs to
(Brazil, Netherlands, Sweden);
the ILO Conventions No. 138 and 182 (which India is yet to ratify). India the newly prescribed 'hazardous' sectors, but the current child invest in child labour elimination programs, better chid
fuly recognizes ttiat the chid has to be protected from exploitation of .J labour law itself stands in direct violation of Hie Constitution and a tracking systems, inter-departmental coordination and
forms mdudmg economic exploitation. Towards this end. Government of child's fundamental right to education. The National Commission convergence of services, legislative provtsions to regulate
■ India has taken a wide range of measures including prescribing minimum fa the Protection of Child Rights is a Commission, not a court; placement agencies and other such measures. There
age
needs to better functioning of Child Welfare Committees.
ago of 14
14 years fa
for employment in hazardous occupations, as domestic and hence does not have the power to conduct speedy trials.
tnals.
hefos,
proper rehaMtation of rescued children, and prosecution
helps, at eateries
eatones as well as in certain other areas. Regulatory provisions
of the accused employers.
regarding Ikxjts and conditions of employment have also been made.
■
Recently, a National Commission for the Protection of Child s Rights tias
.
'
i ;■
been set up for speedy trial of offences against children or of violation
’of chld's nghts. The present socio-economic conditions m India do not
allow prescription of minimum age for admission to each and every area
of employment or to rase the agO bar to 18 years, as provided In the ILO
- .
Conventions. Government of India remans committed Io progressively
•mplement the provisions of Article 32 of the Convention on the Rights
.. of tne Child, particularly paragraph 2 (a), m accordance with its national
■ teg-slation and nternational obligations.
WGHR has no information on this.
WGHR has no information on this.
Share best practices in the promotion; Government of India accepts this recommendation
w.___ __ -
-
-
Sip:
■
8.
:
and protection of human rights taking
9.
•
Review the reservation to article 32 of Government of India fully subscribes to the objectives and purposes The government has not indicated willingness to review the In recent years. India has adopted economic policies geared
to move the country towards becoming an economic
the Convention on the Rights of the of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. India fully recognizes that reservation to Article 32,* •
'super power'. The statement of the government that it
Child (the Netherlands);'
the child has to be protected from exploitation of all forms including ■ • ■ ■ •
;
remains
committed to "progressively implement’ Article 32
■
economic exploitation. Towards this end. Government of India has taken
, /
■
:'
of the CRC is welcome. There is. however, no indication on
. \ v
’a wide range of measures including prescribing minimum age of 14
the part of the government that it will review its reservation
.. years for employment in hazardous occupations, as domestic helps,at .A.
to Article 32.
eateries as well as in certain other areas. Regulatory provisions regarding
hours and conditions of employment have also been made. Recently, a
■ National Commission fa
for the Protection of Child's Rights has been set up
Ilor
kA OptTOXJy
speedy trial
U ICM VI
of VH
offences
Vt rvco ay
against
CUI lOV V»
children
I'lVI V* I V«
or V*
of violation
vn-naux-n I of XA
child'sO Irights.
>yi ill?.
..
.. The present socio-economic conditions
conditions in India do not allow prescription
■•
of
of minimum
minimum age
age for
fa admission
admission to
to each
each and
and every
every area
area of
of employment.
employment.
. Government of India remains committed to progressively implement
the provisions of Article 32 of Convention on the Rights of the Child,
particularly paragraph 2 (a), in accadance with its national legislation and
r. international obligations.
Consider new ways of.
of. addressing
addressing India
urgent
need
India isis committed
committed to
to the
the realization
realization of
of the
the nght
nght to
to development
development of
of all
all its
its While
Wtiileit-itisistrue
truethat
thatthe
thegovernment
governmentisisaware
awareofofthe
the
urgent
need The root causes of exclusion are embedded inthe current
growing economic and social inequities people and is pursuing this by providing an environment for inclusive and forinclusive development, the government has not addressed economic growth model. Thegovernment must consider
_
.
__
_•
j
tho
rrv-.f
rniicoe'Hiof
arc
mcrvvicihtis
fnr
avHi
icinm
Thic
ic
laartinn
arising out of rapid economic growth accelerated growth and social progress within the framework of a secular the root causes that are responsible fa exclusion. This is leading mvMtinn
revisiting the
the riirrent
currentmndpl
model. The
Thealternative
alternative/sis tn
toachieve
achieve
to deepening“
growing
social ~~~
inequities
even while
growth
through social justice which has
never--been
and share experiences/results of and liberal democracy.
•A-- economic and zz^z'
M-----------------------•*"
-----------------given
•—
any serious consideration.
best practices in addressing poverty
a strong economic growth rate is sustained.
(Algeria);
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) is tasked WGHR strongly recommends that the NHRC monitors the
Take into account recommendations Government of India accepts this recommendation
with drafting the national action plan for human rights. To date, implementation of recommendations made by UN treaty
made by treaty bodies and special
the NHRC has not circulated a draft of an action plan. The bodies and special procedures. The NHRC also needs
procedures, especially those relating
development of national action plan for human rights has been to expedite the development of a national action plan for
to women and children, in developing
pending since the NHRC’s inception in 1993.
human rights. The finalisation of this plan, however, has to
a national action plan for human rights
be based on broad-based consultations with civil society
which is under preparation (Mexico);
across India.
iiio
10.
11.
12.
Ratify the Convention on Enforced India signed the Convention for Protection of All Persons from Enforced There are no signs of a process of ratification. Since India signed The Government of India has not taken any measures so
Disappearances (Nigeria);
Disappearance on the day it opened for signature last year. The process the Convention, there have been no efforts to codify enforced far that demonstrate it is honouring its commitments under
of its ratification is underway.
disappearance as a domestic criminal offence, although the the Convention.
occurrence of enforced disappearances is widely known in
Kashmir and other conflict areas. The present law is not being
used to penalize those tmplicateo in enforced disappearances,
even when the perpetrators are named. In cases which progress
through the legal system' after herculean efforts, the government
does not or on1 sanction to proseo/i.e security forces personnel.
l
S. No.
13.
| Recommendation
Strengthen human rights education,
specifically in order to address ;
effectively the phenomenon of
gender-based and caste-based
discrimination (Italy);
■■
""
;
_______ •
| Current status
| Further measures required
Government of India recognizes the role of human rights education in
combating discrimination. India has adopted a National Action Plan for
Human Rights Education to promote awareness about human rights
among all sections of the society. Specific target groups, such as
schools, colleges and universities, have been identified and human rights
education has been made part of curricula. Government officials, armed
forces, prison officials and law officers are also being sensitised to the
protection of human rights. Regular training programmes are organized
by the National Human Rights Commission as well as State Human
Rights Commissions. Awareness campaigns are also run by NGOs.
There is no official proof of a national action plan of action for
human rights education being in place. The government did not
respond to the evaluations after the UN decade for human rights
education, as well as after the implementation of the first phase
of the UN World Programme on human rights education in 2010.
The development of a national policy and action plan
for human rights education in schools and universities
Is urgently required. The Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment needs to incorporate human rights
education as a component in all its special schools and
India has been regularly receiving and will continue to receive Special
Rapporteurs and other Special Procedures mechanisms of Human
Rights Council taking into account its capacity, the priority areas for the
country as well as the need for adequate preparations for such visits.
A standing invitation has not been issued as yet. Over the years.
more than twenty requests by Special Procedures mandate
holders for a country visit to India have been left unanswered by
Ute government.
of India
hostels.
14.
Extend standing invitation to special
pr<x^un» (Latvia. SwtaertodlC
15.
Receive as soon as possible the
India has been regularly receiving and will continue to receive Special To date, as far as we are aware, the Special Rapporteur on torture WGHR strongly recommends that the Special Rapporteur
Special Rapporteur
on **
the question off Rapporteurs and other Special Procedures mechanisms of Human has made two requests for a country visit to India, in 1995 and on torture is Invited to visit India at the earliest Custodial
.
Rights Council taking into account its capacity, the priority areas for the 2007. There has been no response as yet from the government, torture remains endemic in India
country as well as the need for adequate preparations for such visits.
16.
. Fully Integrate a gender perspective
in the follow-up process to the UPR
(Slovenia);
Government of India accepts this recommendation
WGHR strongly recommends that the government extend
a standing invitation to special procedures at the earliest.
The government has been widely commended for allowing
the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rigtits Defenders to
visit India In January 2011. This new and welcome spirit of
openness will be amply reinforced through the granting of
a standing invitation. -
It is crucial to integrate a gender perspective in the UPR
process, so that women's concerns are well represented,
and thereby addressed. WGHR strongly recommends
that the government prioritises the holding ot consultations
with civil society organizations, and women's groups in
particular, at the earliest.
Follow up on CEDAW
. With regard to Article 16(1) of the Convention on the Simination of All It must be noted that this recommendation is tied to India's As stated by the CEDAW Committee in 2007, the GO!
recommendations to amend the
the
Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Government of India deciares reservations to articles 5 (a) and 16 (1) of CEDAW. There has is strongly recommended to withdraw its reservations to
Special Marriage Act in the lightly.,
light,
that it shall abide by,and ensure these provisions
in...conformityz with been no follow-up on these recommendations to date.
articles 5 (a) and 16 (1) of CEDAW. and also review its
of article 16 and the Committee's
its policy of non-interference in the personal affairs of any community
policy of non-interference in personal laws. II is clanfied
'general recommendation 21 Jon giving without its initiative
-------------- *
•*«
“-------• *-■
and>consent.
With
regard
to Article 16(2) of
here that the Special Marriage Act 1954 is a secular law.
equal rights to property accumulated the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
not a personal law. Thereby, the policy of non-interference
during marriage (Slovenia);
Women, Government of India declares that it agrees to the principle of
does not apply to the Act
compJsory registration of marriages. However, failure to get the marriage
registered wilt not invalidate the marriage particularly in India with its
On compulsory registration of marriages, it is agreed that
....
..
.<■
variety of customs, religions and level of literacy.
it is undesirable, because it would exclude women whose
marital status is not clear such as live-in and common law
partners. We express concern and call the government's
attention to the spate of state level regulations pursuing
compulsory registration of marriages that has been
underway (in accordance with the Supreme Court
judgment, Seema vs. Ashwani Kumar (2006) 2 SCC 578).
Continue efforts to allow for a
The Constitution of India seeks to secure to all its citizens “justice (social, This is a broad recommendation which requires a sustained Die extensive range of measures needed to fulfill this
harmonious life in a multi-religious,
economic and political); liberty (of thought, expression, belief, faith and approach on many levels.
recommendation require a comprehensive ‘indivisibility of
multicultural, multi-ethnic and multi
worship); equality (of.status and of opportunity); and to promote among
human rights approach' at all levels of government. Given
lingual society and to guarantee a
them fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and
India's disturbing socio-economic realities, a sustained
society constituting one-fifth of the
integrity of the Nation". Legislative and administrative measures of the
effort to implement economic, social and cultural rights,
world's population to be well fed,
Government of India are guided by this objective. In this context, the
including the right to food, housing, education and health,
well housed, well cared for and well
Government of India accepts the recommendation made.
is required. Details of measures needed to achieve this
educated (Tunisia).
enormous task are to extensive to be summarized here.
Although the government has accepted this recommendation.
no consultations or reviews with civil society organisations to
discuss the process of integrating a gender perspective have
been organised following India's first review.
■
17.
18.
- Document upauietl <ia ot ' >;f At’iii 20 /
United Nations A/HRC/17/NGO/50 Distr.: General 25 May 2011 English only
General Assembly Human Rights Council Seventeenth session Agenda item 6 Universal Periodic Review
Joint written statement* submitted by the Habitat International Coalition, the Asian Centre for Human
Rights, the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, nongovernmental organizations in special consultative
status
The Secretary-General has received the following written statement which is circulated in accordance with
Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31. [16 May 2011]
* This written statement is issued/unedited, in the language(s) received from the submitting non-governmental
organization(s).
India: Hope of a more inclusive second UPR**
The ''Working Group on Human Rights in India and the UN" (WGHR) - a national coalition of 14 NGOs and
independent experts from India - would like to commend the Government of India for its commitment towards
an inclusive second Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process.
1. National workshop on the UPR
During a high-level national workshop on the UPR held in New Delhi in April 2011, the Indian Ministry of
External Affairs (MEA) committed to:
Making the UPR process wide ranging and genuinely inclusive;
•
Engaging constructively with civil society and all other relevant stakeholders in the run-up to India's
second review (June 2012), including in the preparation of its national report;
Considering to post on its website its draft national report and invite comments from all stakeholders.
This national workshop was the first time various stakeholders (Government of India [GOI], National Human
Rights Commission, NGOs and civil society) came together to openly discuss the UPR process, both in terms of
implementation of the 18 recommendations made to India through its first UPR, and preparation for its second
review.
2.
India's first UPR
India's first UPR in 2008 lacked any serious form of consultation with NGOs and civil society. The government
held only minimal consultation, hurriedly organised and barely advertised, leading to weak participation. As a
consequence, India's national report suffered in its substance and relevance.
WGHR welcomes the commitment of the MEA to make significant changes in the run-up to India's second UPR.
3.
Status of implementation of recommendations made to India during first UPR
WGHR's mid-term assessment (see chart on WGHR's websitel) points out that, while some progress has been
made in a few areas, much more needs to be done at the national policy and legislative levels - if India is to
comply with the 18 recommendations prior to its second cycle. The GOI must note and address the factors of
identity, which block people's fair and equal access to rights.
Below is a short list of further measures required from the GOI on some select recommendations, for which
implementation is possible through specific action, achievable in the shorter term.
Ratifications
On Recommendation n° 1: Expedite Ratification of the Convention against Torture (CAT)
- Domestic legislation (The Prevention of Torture Bill, 2010) was drafted by the government and passed by the
Lower House of Parliament in May 2010 without any open consultation. Human rights groups held that the Bill
did not conform to CAT and launched a campaign aimed at rectifying this. Consequently, in August 2010, the
Upper House referred the Bill to a Parliamentary Select Committee. The Committee took into consideration
submissions by human rights experts and drafted an alternate Bill that more closely aligns with the Convention.
The re-drafted Bill is yet to be passed by both Houses. It is crucial that there is no dilution of the Bill as
amended by the Select Committee. Any dilution would undermine meaningful ratification of CAT.
On Recommendation n° 6: Consider signature and ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) - Since 2008, there has been no move
from the government to sign and ratify the CEDAW Optional Protocol (OP). WGHR stresses that
recommendations of CEDAW under the OP provide structural solutions, and cannot be viewed as being parallel
to or substituting domestic mechanisms. Therefore, the GOI should seriously consider signing and ratifying the
CEDAW OP, which will provide mechanisms to enhance state compliance to CEDAW.
On Recommendation n° 12: Ratify the Convention on Enforced Disappearances-Although the GOI stated that
the process of ratification was "underway", there are no signs of a process of ratification, despite large-scale
enforced disappearances in the country. The government is also yet to undertake an attempt to codify
enforced disappearance as a criminal offence in domestic law. Existing provisions are not being used to
penalize those implicated in enforced disappearances. In cases where initial progress is made, the government
does not grant the required sanction to prosecute security forces personnel. Echoing recommendations by UN
treaty bodies and national commissions, WGHR joins the demand of civil society for the repeal of the Armed
Forces Special Powers Act.
Invitations to special procedures
On Recommendation n014: Extend standing invitation to special procedure - Shortage of staff within the MEA
was put forth as one of the reasons making it difficult for India to extend a standing invitation to special
procedures. In the minimum, the government should receive an average of two special procedures per year,
which would be manageable even for a small team. The GOI demonstrated commendable openness and
support during the recent visit of the UN Special Rapporteur (SR) on the situation of human rights defenders to
India. However, as many as nine other Special Procedures remain waiting for a positive response from India for
country visits. Among them, some have already made numerous requests: Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention (5 requests); SR on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions (4); SR on Sale of Children (3); and
SR on Racism (2).
On Recommendation n° 15: Receive as soon as possible the Special Rapporteur (SR) on the question of torture
- The SR on torture made a request in 1993, followed by a reminder in 2007. Given the fact that custodial
torture remains endemic in India, it is crucial for the GOI to allow the SR to visit India and demonstrate the
same openness that was shown to the SR on human rights defenders.
Follow-up process to the UPR
On Recommendation n° 2: Fully involve civil society in the follow-up to the UPR - During the national workshop
on the UPR, the GOI expressed its willingness to engage with all stakeholders. WGHR will prepare a suggested
"roadmap" to aid the government demonstrate this willingness by planning and executing its preparation for
the second UPR in widest possible consultation with all stakeholders.
/w
On Recommendation n° 16: Fully integrate a gender perspective in the follow-up process to the UPR - It is
crucial to integrate a gender perspective in the UPR process so that women's concerns are well represented
and thereby addressed. There have been ho government attempts so far to integrate a holistic gender
perspective. This will be addressed in the roadmap that WGHR will prepare.
Declaration on article 32 of the CRC
On Recommendation n° 9: Review the declaration to Article 32 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child
(CRC) -The GOI admits child labour is undesirable, but claims poverty and ignorance perpetuate it. It also
admits child labour-related laws are poorly enforced. Current official thinking holds it is "not realistic" to ban all
child labour. However, the legal scenario has changed as being at school and not at work is now a Fundamental
Right for all children (Art. 21A) backed by a powerful "Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009". The
logical corollary to this far-reaching change in the legal regime is for the GOI to revisit its earlier declaration and
follow it up by amending "The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986" in order to make it fully
compliant with the new Fundamental Right.
Nation action plan for human rights
On Recommendation n° 11: Take into account recommendations made by treaty bodies and special procedures
in developing a national action plan for human rights-The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has
been tasked with drafting a national action plan for human rights (NAP). In 2008, the NHRC stated that the NAP
was under preparation and that a draft would be circulated to members of the NHRC core group of NGOs for
comments. However, the process seems to have been abandoned, with no visible outputs. It is strongly
suggested that the government requests the NHRC to prioritise the drafting of a NAP.
Disaggregated data on caste
On Recommendation n° 5: Maintain disaggregated data on caste and related discrimination
- Some of the key areas where disaggregated data on caste is missing are: (i) Crimes committed against
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes women; (ii) Employment in the private sector and entrepreneurship;
and (iii) access to health and civic amenities. It is strongly recommended that the GOI monitors through its
surveys the current practices of caste-based discrimination (CBD) as well as economic and social conditions of
communities affected by CBD, disaggregated gender wise.
4. Role of civil society in the run-up to the second UPR
WGHR, along with other major human rights organizations, is committed to assisting the government in the
run-up to the second UPR. It will also organise civil society consultations across the country, leading to a joint
stakeholder submission in December 2011.
Conclusion
Signatory organizations to this statement and WGHR request India to:
Take concrete measures to implement the recommendations of the first UPR before the next review;
•
Address and not repeat the gaps and shortcomings of the previous UPR process, with the aim of
enabling a comprehensive view of the human rights situation in India.
** Working Group on Human Rights in India and the UN (WGHR), an NGO without consultative status, also
shares the views expressed in this statement.
1 Available at: www.wghr.org/universalperiodicreview.html
17!)
n
Programme of Work for the 18th session of the Human Rights Counch (12-30 Sept 2011) - version as of 12 September (subject to change)
I
0
WEE* 2
'.VtEK J
19 September
2SSeptember
Item 1 and Item 2
Item 2 starts at 09 00 g m.
- ID by HC on Yemen (dec/17/117)
Opening of the session
09.00-12.00
Annual discussion on integration of gender
Item 4
- ID with COI on Libya
Item 2
Update by the HC
perspective (res 6/30)
General debate
O
N
WEEK 1
UScptember
1 5 Ov
Item 7 -12.00-15.00
- Report of SG on Gaza FFM
Item 4 (cont'd)
- ID by HC on Syria- follow-up to the 16,h SS
Break
15 OD
- HC Report
General debate
Item 2 (cant'd) - General Debate (cant'd)
15.90
____________
18 00
Item 7 (cant'd -15.00-18.00)
Item 4 (cont'd)
Item 3__________
ID with IE on Sudan
ID with SRSG on Children and Armed
______
I Conflict
13 September
20 September
Item 4 (cant'd) starts at Q9.Q0 a.m.
Item 8
Item 3 (cont'd) starts at 9 a.m.
General debate
- ID on the HC oral report on Belarus
Clustered ID with:
- IE on international solidarity
Item 5 (cont'd)
- WG on mercenaries
General debate
Item 3 jnd 5
s
Item 3 (cont'd)
D
Item 9
Clustered ID with:
Clustered ID with:
ID with SR on indigenous peoples
ID with Exp. Mechanism on indigenous
. WG on African descent
.SRon racism
peoples
A
V
Panel on promotion and protection of
culture in the protection of well-being and
protests (dec/17/120)
identity of indigenous peoples
lU September
13.00
H 00
15 00
Complementary Standards
(resl5/7)
General debate
21 September .
Item 3 (cont'd)
10 00
Item9 (cont'd)
Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on
Half-day Panel on the role of languages and
human rights in the context of peaceful
E
Complaint Procedure
.ag$epi!tmber^
Item 6 starts at 09-00 Q-m.
Item 9 (cont'd) starts at 09.00 a.m.
Consideration of UPR reports
Clustered ID with:
- SR on contemporary slavery
High-level panel discussion for the
- Belgium
promotion and protection of HRs through
tolerance and reconciliation (dec/15/117)
- Denmark
- Palau
- SR on HR and toxic waste
Item 10
Break
Hem 5 (cont’d) - General debate
. ID with SR on Cambodia
. ID with IE on Somalia
15 00
Panel on the realization of the right to
18.0'j
Item 6
SG/HC country reports
Consideration of UPR reports
General debate
- Somalia
- Seychelles
development
Item 1
- Solomon Islands
15 September
10.00
22 September
Decisions and conclusions
■fS-l :
29 September
Item G(cont'd)
Item 3 (cont'd)
- ID with: SR on right to water &
Consideration of UPR reports
sanitation
- SG/HC/OHCHR thematic reports
-Sierra Leone
Item 1
-Latvia
General debate
K
Decisions and conclusions
-Singapore
Break
Break
Break
Item Bfcont'd)
Item 3 (cont'd) 15.00-18.00
O
18 UO
General debate (cont'd)
Consideration of UPR reports
Item 1 (cont'd)
-Suriname
Decisions and conclusions
-Greece
-Samoa
16 September
1
23 September
j
30 September
Item 6 (cont'd)
0 00
R
1 > 00
D
l 3.00
Panel discussion on the right to health of
older persons (resl5/22)
Consideration of UPR reports
-Saint Vincent and Grenadines
Item 1 (cont'd)
-Sudan
Decisions and conclusions
-Hungary
Break
Item 2 & 3 (cont'd)- GD (cont'd)
A
Y
1 !> Ot
Item 5
is 00
Complaint Procedure
Break
Break
Item 6 (cont'd)
Consideration of UPR report
-Papua New Guinea
- Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
. Decisions and conclusions (cont'd)
. Appointment of special procedures mandate
holders
General debate
/?/
n
AzAO CAUrb^C? Jam dtr^^etx.^
II
l\A^
Ihwi^
j]^Vvvk^
•A tU^^
8t'rwUd
L^
^wc «
Vem
hu-vvx^ i4/^ !Wlt^
oZpO^
Pu^^4>^v^--v
'}C^
.■vWrJ^X
[spm jlfe-jHy^ ■
" &t>4€4 i ^inAUj *>
XXw^/n'?^^
jW^AU [mw^s '^r1^
5mU^ < ^V^cXc
511s
A
)
(^lAZV
V
yiX7^
i^2'
-J
)0j- pHkH>
-Ciu, JW1/
^UvnJ
^(^nxxXfV
V.
•
f Tew
lijMd A
/y/Vv<VVt
zl A/V^ uAp
tj(ile/vu^
^^|^t“~uU'i'’
'
WM
ItJ^^a)^
K^^vv, 1
hl^s,
/wueUjO^
F4^’
1 *'
gt)^
^£2^25^
UD H K
Vi/Lo ffl/yv
uW
/Ueu^J^A^
t vw^VMA^£v_AAy^ <>
|
I cm
let
d
c^r
6W
ctW^ ‘Wo4-
/v /Ar^
CK^
A^iue fr^^Uo K^)
■
!
^1k
4
buev/j
^XAvl
, Xt X-
yl
i/VUM
J)
1
^f'
4 ■^ i^vK^
t/ytAzotv
I MX^> 'M'M
I’^’*■'v,
jijo- a
j ^a 6^^- kva-^I
n
i,
.
^y\«vvfc *4
/l^b^LvuvU
(W
. _ i^L t4/*p^ 4
()
J^exA/vA-1]
OcX < t^
/jVcOAJ
-
■^Y’-^Avv,,
li^
'jleoWh
•'
1
io
ey\^K/^X ZV*^1 •
dkv ^avMa4
rt A
□p^ - j^L
^TuX^J- (-Uv“~ yi/jvw ia>^v<
^vdxizd A,
y^Ug^rjzi
^)a^/
|W4^/])
K uwJ^
j
I ^o2_
^whmaR*^'
_____
^wV d/V^
------- -----------i
iL^i^iit-? ____ ____
---- -i
-1
i
l[^~l
lwt>i&xp4*1'
Hz
lu^tlj A
S^lo^T'l
^vyU c^~ W^
/V< ^15v^o
uT+i^
fVUU^Wl p-^J
A^Wr
szM^”
_ Al^
, fU^^Ksov^
t)lU{ rf
<K MAaaW t^'»
j
ACr-U^t’
^^UAFicJ-dH^
^jhMiuiA
_ ^0 Cjc^'y
, |)[uj <H_'*^afy^vn^
jVvv'~^ 4
’
j?ce
.^c/P^^T
7
trvwwu
v^
,
i4B'
'
', ■
L-^
'--------o
lo
'r
y^ty'aj^
r
* -^.0^4 {^11
^AWwa^ ^OC.
Kk. r\ ,K
.
4^.1^
^^wcC°^
k
ko-V)
w i4;t<x tyup
r-
S ’
\C(A^_
opr 6’)
ppr ex)
[MlA {k ^WVlA4l'^vtcjj
/
J^C
V/iUc{ Co^i^f
M\M^ >ZrA ^^^7
Lc>frc
I ^WXM I ,/M UO^WJM.
I—
/pIa S (Aa UU 4
J
--------c
I(
C^e-Q ___Jj
*t’2iS&
FVV^FVKX I'&U.VWv^ frw AA-^uV^
I ^yvKlUly^CK^^ L
ia^l
^cJ^jaA^
_
yo fe7u-i>u_^
--)r^
-A
Jt^ CZKLO~vXi <^x I
/V\
Ifll y^Q/vw^^
1
<
^vL€^
K
</vwtU't
K'H
//^"a
I
.
'
^TV/V^W/'^'
grrj E
cMtj' 4v'^vtu%.
z
—
jIaXi
_
f LO
/*<
k
Jx*—l/
^U4' AtS^UvuI^Xv
M,
?
a
yVVX
j
4-VWw^
PII
4JX' ^v
|
-
l^
'-"
4
V
r-
4
^r
.
^VvO/l'
W '
'
\
I
Avl&vu^I
•w^'
‘ j
*-1^^
LV\
1^v
Iw'^ju-1^
/kH
X^'tVvd^
x^pU,
M-^rr^
4,^1 f^Uc_
^ptwr
r,w 1
____ —---------------- —------ \, t
p^w^Ay
QAT^An&-^■cKiV-A^
(VVCw-'Ar<A lPk)
\
^V1 ^v/tt vi
mzv/Al^
YzZ'jWi Mt.
LUMi^X
^VA^l/vO^
*A
f
r^v\|fr\£<~.^ if^i ^- ^eTe^e^y I
(^v ^S-^sv^ j
I olMt
^vUh/Vizv V M AA^zt~l^ZJ
(S£5C^
L?oo (
\C/O
C^P^(1 a)
0c[-^\°
oLo 11
urW-^
Lh^J
CtC)
\W
kUTr^1^l
...r. .t,.4-Htel*-5-t
,^cp~ 1
It i 1°'
£>
Jt JtnR^" </ nK
2, , ^lv '
)
iCfi.^V^
^J>^' C^X/
/ (Vfvo^ ^u-
IbAl
"u
15^'
^pvA,-r^AY
.1. r- -'■ •■
JT ^2.......
st^ ?)
AvW>Vl»
^4
l^r Yfy-
scJ-. e-fH3
, 7o*
AL )
^(W'e
W&VI
^Texvu^ >
^J-
/yvuM
A^-;
' lAxAy
< be ^va^v
k |£
Viwb
iAAA^s>J/V^
" !K
M'* ,Jfc“ ’ritoi
.,. n
'
I.
^a3^<vVVC
jUu— -XvqfVv
,7/-t
Xl/^M/i^) '
' Ixv.
e
'
gu u^ kH^
l^\ I /e4-wiw7A/
X^irt sTr|£)?ri
J-TUftOe) ; HMflMci?
11^\ [^ P) K1 IlmUJ P)^Ak)
wro
1^U>'-^I') /V\ fiiVbtOvv^v^
(k^CulthJiclUv^zv
*^rh-
- fe
A
JUvUv-
UK \gm> -
5^
iy7^
iJdU in^_____ -------------------- ‘---------------
Wt. ^■i ^^'pl^i>J7
2^2”/^ /uvwt^v*-
ppJv^m Ib^1 ~~
IaKmxA
■’
H'
l^jJL
^Xv^ u^vu^yvX^
(^PUB •
------- '
teb/vwv?-^
M
»
C
fc^U;
-|4 (M/vt^
Up)
9«'oc^cLllV-3
e
a
0 VuL uUvU
Cu?^)
E^UotpL c
^XH^VVvtVU^CCi^^^ '
6
V
betyi^
^Ctlyt^v
pi^'s/'-^IA^VV-v-
- / »~
zlVu-w^' .'UMJo
_
b'irtvuJ Ixy
)AXLuU^ Iwaa^-^P3
^) Un p yj^ fkoJ^
iz^rrA
4x71' u
^JCL
J
■r
^(W) ^t^vvtrwcC
^vVl^ I
^'^‘■‘U
"■
_ 4JUl
^LfV
^'AAAxUt^3
awG
px^k
<X>)
[^^***^
v^z
;
A/tt4nu_^vi
i^wa4v^
.udJ
l'?n^"'
. ,
t
Ufil^ ck • ^L
a
Lu-^^JJ
r
tuM-
^UklS-
1
auw^/l-
„
•
JM^ (hz €^tax>va
1
. fek k. €^fcl
WfcC .s
_ Mff"7
J$Z
, 6’Zcve,tv“
vXfh^AtK
^Cu^
/^Urx? ^^4
*
v
Az
71^ Uvuv-iAviSh^ Utzt^
,//ctuv\^ /UyW'-» •
^6(M€VUAC ^/^L Socc^
Jiz
ILO _ tfi - iu u ji2-jri-1'1 u u-
ImJC
-i
.
j^eKk £W«M
., wcWr^w
d’■
t;^ uv,
l-tuix^-
kuM^<^ Mf-^’ m
i|w Vli ,f7 -, fUJa itufc Ki«^
hvUvvO^v
t>v^xu^y^ ^ywyvCt^
vh/util ekx’6
,.. J3 A^vtUv,
I
iamJ^
MnXm> - A<we3x 9-6
^T”1
^e)—
KF
f/uvCb^v)
[-^VVU^Vv
, f)l^
ptjvd^
JVkticcA'
^Umvx
,
K /lie
I^LC'Vi^
jVlm Uaawa-<v
.
•- (^AAS^Vx,
Me UW
A—
^-
hbU^^ I
■- ^'M/I/Lt^ 1-l"
i
}uvi4^
tlUcAi^
zteek pt^t-v
•Ct^A.^'
lUt'W'lCtVv
IzVLUv AaZ^J Al Jtv CAl41U1X^ 4
J
Ta,^v^
i>N
; .w—
,tXh«L
!-~;i*S'
a
cl^A' W U#
(Iv^y £^4'^9.
. ^JX i
<WwL<
(£/w
r^/cH3
I4UVU0.VV 5^/^
LtJe i
| u l^1"
1
Xvlt^p*7
|/WbV<
__!/-----^-T'-^A^dd^vLO
cr/ytvtfvtt rAr'v'rJ
^ji^wvA.^-
Xu.>-q,.
/UiJz^djh^
. ^cLiky
^Aljt'CiiX.^''^ <'/uA kip4v^///y
L<l
/fad.^ ^'^Vv-Jttv-, — ClAOl A. M
\i>\^
l-h^
f)(x^
/» V
^4 &
I^V'I/vUa^')
FtUi V- M ^kv/ui^ cMu^ .
hxi twvu^ ^V>1'v'> •
'^SMavv*''^
fdk^VLti^r-)
H£6
k
-^iu
p^fgUy,
TmzcUttc^
Ju^ZAvt
Lt>
i
—
x4 IU^ J JL ^
ZM
viV^i_^TZ
c h
j
e/tlvvj^^«^
Pz<J5txAtLtui •
g)
VHclciiukv
._ y -co ->
/2\ Zz-vwcv^' c^
A Ju^ ClBk — .Lj AlZ^A Jwj.
j,L
hA^A •ZftvtzvAtt't^
^.x^e-wL^
"
/UTt^tz
p AkaZv/H
C
piWLvv
Qko
/wk -
-
WA ■£'^<-‘--1
^^g\j2^tvu-'
<U^A 4C vt>4^-
[•ZXaI 9^64*vv^'11
^Wkj
; -tkku
jzK^
■ ' , <kA
/ ./K^vvo^A
wZ~zJZ|Za
—-—-—77 7)
"
■
U^vd
T^aM"
•
'Y-r^'^'1
_
g[J3 k^vt-
lr
A
Z JwW1^
^dVl/U 1>V^
* Zco4 Ma^
koeT.
^xKAvv'z-
I ^LfeXkkK
b
/t^vg^V
—-—
<A
\
^A' f\A^x
\
(I
W^vAj^d6Av A\ tL'jj
i77t‘
1^
I JvAa^v^^1^
, (wli^b «‘--
'fU. U»U'x Hi^b^
n _
r^
J/lnvb, iv. JiylbAA
d-M
_ fJZCVo
"
---- K 1“
II^CvvtAvV
KPiT^
yy?jj
j
~CT^VCZjJW.vyr-M
fjo 2-
^Vv /I oAzCVv-v ^y
\aaxI^ H~
1tTJ -. (VUnz^vil^
M^ib*'
I
t AaaA^vx^V'
lxt^|
__ - /xMy''*^
yy\
LC > b V
r- W£^ l ’'11'-
iU-vM
nI^aA
^tW,(2b>A^
VvUsA^
It-W^
RKtMv-A ■
pM^A r I
t IA Lb
A vt A-J
HR
VvUvuX/rc^
|
yUrM^
/^C'O'VUi'Vv I^U'WV0^<Z
a' »-
b
f^VXVVU--^>*v
.
M-jx-
_
4AaaAft-V^
’
Xv\'
. zU^
Ai^VvQaXA
/
^r5^^^AiU J
r
ci c/ tzW^-
^P)C>i (tImmJztry)
I </VU_
PaAa^X^- Ty^v^J-?
_ pjflLWVUA^
' r^_
:
'
u-^ ^^4"
^-j"
S'
i\kt^
7
ai
jmZU
- fc v'n —
/W^
b
b^A^^Cl-'
>
.ivsZ^ p^T
T^ 4I
//
^.aIlL- Af—}
t'ii-XtU-'T^L
Uv^)
■
l7
"—'
"
-M/W/Vv>i
y lX.
^(jvCU^^
T^ ft
^uJ^. Jk
[ fl^xAvvv^^
K(VO
Y^Jk.
VfJ
|
* ^7^
r
c
r
.Vvw^
I
p.. X ^Uv-
H
<
r
zxVl^
fi
---- ---
Jt> __________ ___ _
pjno’s
iTT
4uc ^Vv I
TFZXt^
)
^f\
/^
L^^oJ Z
/VivfxY^I
I r
zt-vcJ
l^< ^vTU-i/
^07
■
Auu^tZ^
^yA
/^cv’
^Llk^l
^M/^CcV^av
^lAek^
^V4
'
C^L^cd-i
\ ^Lc VfJ
4a
I
4l<rVLt If//"
A A. pn ^y
A/^oS . <
<d
V-uJ^- /(X/Jvte// /& f(9
I -
j
^ce^AZA-^^
f)K
^J;'/w
Wuiv ''feM^
•
am^4^
Mk-tsJfr'
F1^
Ulf-
twfd 1 ^IJtlAvv^v
Vl^14- l
1—TV
]^A/vvi/0^v
/)hu^ 4
eud"
u^\l
^v^vivt/
j^u; - I
j]v^-v Cfnnm^^
XU(/A,rflu^L<f
V)X^'z
F^r
l,^
n
k 4
/-
t
___ ,
Andhra Pradesh
Conducted Programme with Promoting Organisations
from Sth to 16th May 2007 with 230 NGOs with 359
Signatures in 11 Districts (Cuddapah, Chittoor
(Srikalahasti), Nellore, Prakasam (Ongole), Guntur,
Krishna (Vijayawada), West Godabari (Laxmipuram),
Srikakulam
(Palakonda),
Vizianagaram
(Verasagaram), Vishakhapatnam (Narsipatnam), East
Godavari (Pithapuram) of Andhra Pradesh.
Bihar
Conducted 10 Programmes (1 State level & 9 District
level) with Promoting Organisations from 22nd to 31st
May 2007 with 216 NGOs with 299 Signatures in
10 programmes (Patna, Nalanda (Rajgir), Nawada,
Jehanabad, Arwal, Bhojpur (Ara), Patna, Muzaffarpur,
West Champaran (Chanpatia), Gaya of Bihar.
Networking
The idea of forming a Network of Right Based and
Democratic Organizations in the Eastern Region took
shape at the end of the two days Zonal conference on
“Governance in Crisis : Developing a strategy for active
participation of Civil Society Organizations" held on
24-25th May, 2003 at Youth Hostel Puri in collaboration
with like minded organizatons of the state.
OUR PARTICIPATION INTERNATIONAL EVENTS
1996
• Participated the South Asia Training Workshop on
Human Rights Education on 16th - 22nd December,
1997^96 at Rajoir’ MadariPur' Bangladesh.
• Participated the Regional workshop II for the Regional
Facilitating Team meeting (3-7 March, 1997) a ACFODTraining Center, Cholburi, Bangkok, Thailand.
• Participated the Exploratory meeting on 500 years of
Domination The Second War of Independence for
Global South May- June 1,1997, at Hotel Orchid,
Kathmandu, Nepal.
1998
• Participated meeting on “Cross Border Cooperation For
Prevention on Child and Women Trafficking" 19-20
December, 1998, Dhaka, Bangaldesh.
1999
• Participated an International Seminar on “South Asia
at Cross Road, Ethnicity, Communalism and Human
Rights" March 17-19, 1999, Department of
Anthropology, Calcutta University.
® Participated 6th training course on “Understanding the
Art of Advocacy and Building Advocacy skills for
sustainable Development” 17-29 April 1999, at Institute
for Development Policy Analysis and Advocacy (IDPAA)
and Proshika : Bangladesh.
2000
• Participated in an international Seminar on “EthnicityCommunalism, Development-Globalization and Human
Rights” March 24-26, 2000, Department of
Anthropology, University of Calcutta,
2002
• Participated as a Mentor of One World week (OWW)
programme 2002 under Reaching Out and Reaching
South (ROARS) from 29th September, 2002 to 28th
January, 2003 at Christians Aware, Leicester, United
Kingdom.
2004
• Participated in “ Asia-Pacific People’s Convention on
Food Sovereignty” November 25-27, 2004, Osmani
Memorial Auditorium, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
• Participated in “ First Assembly of Asian Peasant
Coalition " held on 28th November, 2004, (Institute of
Mother & Child Health Hospital), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
• Participated in “ Communication and Media Advocacy
Training for South Asians", November 29-30, 2004, at
Hotel Sundarban, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
2005
• Participated in International Training Workshop for
Trainers on “Food Sovereignty from September 1921, 2005 at Hotel Kenilworth, Kolkata.
• Participated in IFHHRO Annual Conference 2005
“Engendering Health and Human Rights” 30th
September and 1” October 2005 at YMCA, Mumbai
Central, Mumbai.
• Participated in Regional Workshop on “DenXmystifying
Non-Discrimination for effective Child Rights
Programming in South & Central Asia” from 24th to
28th October 2005,at Hotel Himalaya, Kathmandu,
Nepal.
2006
• Participated in International Conference for the Reform
of International Institutions : Dialogues between
different levels of Governance and Civil Society Actors,
20 & 21 November, 2006 at ILO Headquarters,
Geneva, Switzerland.
• Participated in 7th International Conference of Chief
Justices of the World (World Judiciary Summit-2006)
on Article 51 (C) of the Consitution of India, 8-11
December 2006, CMS, Lucknow.
2008
• Participated in International Peace Seminar held from
29th Nov. to 6th Dec., 2008 at Dhulikhel, Nepal.
2009
• Attended I LBS Community Meeting from 15th to 17th
May, 2009 at Heiligkreuztal convent in Southern
Germany sponsored by International Leadership and
Business Society, Tuningen, Germany.
41)0
“We realise that injustice
anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”
-Martin Luther King, Jr.
MARTIN LUTHER KING
CENTRE FOR DEMOCRACY
&
HUMAN RIGHTS
:
PO Box No. 185, GPO
Bhubaneswar-751 001
Orissa, India
:
MIG-1, Block No. 4.
Qrs. No. 45(4#45)
2nd Floor, BDA Colony, Phase - I
Chandrasekharpur.
Bhubaneswar - 751016,
Orissa, India
:
livelydemocracy@yahoo.com
shanti_ranjan@rediffmail.com
l:
©:
00 91 94 371 44245
00 91 06792 252526
Background
Gross violation of Human Rights, torture, social
injustice which we mostly deplore in the developing
countries are not necessarily due to “bad laws”
enacted by the Parliaments/Legislature. On the
contrary, most of these countries have really citizen
friendly, modern, progressive laws, legislation, rules
& regulations. But unfortunately most of the people
have not been also to assert their rights. Practically
speaking most of them even do not know, their
fundamental rights or even when they do know, can
not afford to resort to the costly legal battle in the
courts. It is true that the rich, well educated, urban,
elite obtain their rights more often than the poor,
ignorant, oppressed and marginalised.
Compared to the geographical size of the country,
number of population, the number of qualified pro
people human rights lawyers are much too small. The
courts are overburdened & lack of trained staff, proper
space, legal texts and equipments. Ongoing cases take
up inordinate length of time, as a result of which the
common people/ordinary citizen suffers most.
Martin Luther King Centre for Democracy and Human
Rights (MLKCDHR), trust is a non Governmental
Organization, run by the trustees & comprises a group
of highly competent, extensively experienced
educators, most respected advocates and activists. A
team of full time professional workers and a panel of
lawyers are working for the center in different divisions.
Mission Statement
Advancement of Democracy for international peace,
political stability and human progress through
protection of Human Rights & Judicial system by non
violent & peaceful means.
Objectives
01. Protect the Human Rights and promote
Democratic Development : (including Minority
Groups, Immigrants and Refugees):
02. Strengthening the Social, Economic, Civil and
Cultural Rights of the Indigenous people under
the constitution and law.
03. Ensure Public Education, Legal Literacy,
advance the status and right and Indigenous,
Dalit, socially disadvantages groups of women
into leadership positions both nationally and
internationally.
04. To involve in the study of Non-violence and
Peace, Development, Research and Policy
Analysis.
05. Develop effective Legal Defence, Legal Aid
(Conduct litigation) Legal Support, service and
technical assistance programme.
06. To monitor, help ensure Free, Fair and
meaningful election in the State/Country; monitor
and investigation of complaints of Human Rights
violations;
Focus group
Attention is on the socially and economically
marginalised people with a focus on women, children
and minority community.
Areas of Concentration
Issues of Peace and Security, Reform of Police, Prison,
Child Soldiers, National Gun Laws, Food Sovereignty
(Right to Land & Food ), Disappearance & Right to
Infromation etc.
Activities and Programmes
Training & Seminar
Small Arms & Light Weapons :
To organize training, seminars, promote, conduct review
and prepare for an annual human rights education and
training course.
• Participated the International Workshop on “Small
Arms and the Humanitarian Community : Developing
a strategy for Action” Nairobi, 18th - 20th November,
2001, convened by the Humanitarian Coalition on
Small Arms at Kenya School of Monetary Studies,
Keyna.
• Participated in Nairobi Consultation on “Small Arms
Resource Manual” on 21^t November (Wednesday),
2001 at Kenya School of Monetary Studies, Kenya.
• Participated two days South Asian Meeting on Follow
up to the UN Conference on Small Arms Feb. 19th 20th, 2002, India International Center Annex, New
Delhi.
• Participated an International Seminar on “Campaign
Against Small Arms" February 21-23, 2003 at the Blue
Oceanic Hotel in Negambo (Colombo), Sri Lanka,
• State Level Seminar on Small Arms and Public Security :
An Effort for Peace on Sunday Sth June, 2003 at
Bhubaneswar.
• Round Table on “Control of Small Arms-Million Faces
Petition" on Wedesday 10th December, 2003 at Konark,
Orissa.
• State Level Seminar on “Control of Small Arms : Key to
Development & Establishment of Peace" on Saturday
12th June, 2004 at Y.M.C.A. Kantatoli Chowk, Ranchi
(Jharkhand).
• State Level Seminar on “Control of Small Arms : Key to
Development & Establishment of Peace” on Thursday
17th June, 2004 at' Hotel Aditya, Raipur (Chhaatisgarh).
•
Participated in International Seminar on “Small Arms :
a big problem in South Asia", “Gun Control" and
“Control Arms Campaign” from 16th January to 21st
January 2004 at World Social Forum, NESCO
grounds, Goregaon, Mumbai.
Food Sovereignty
• Regional level planning meeting “People’s Caravan
2004 for Food Sovereignty : Asserting our Rights to
Land & Food” on Monday 19th July, 2004 at Youth
Hostel, Puri for participants of Jharkhand, Orissa and
West Bengal.
• Martin Luther King Centre for Democracy and Human
Rights in collaboration with SAMARPAN, Sambalpur
and WRTO, Bargarh organized a seminar on
“Starvation Death and Food Sovereignty” on Tuesday
14th September, 2004 at Pantha Nivas, Sambalpur.
• Martin Luther King Centre for Democracy and Human
Rights, Reception Committee of PEOPLE’S CARVAN
2004 Orissa Chapter, in collaboration with Institute for
Motivation Self Employment (IMSE) organized a one
day Public Hearing on ‘Starvation Death and Food
Sovereignty : Asserting our Rights to Land and Food"
on Wednesday 15th September, 2004, at Rabindra
Mandap, Bhubaneswar.
Campaign
Orissa
In depth Reform of International Institutions and
Disaappearence of Women & Children
• Involved in World Campaign for in-depth Reform of
the Systems of International Institutions for carrying
out awareness-raising and promotion activities
regarding campigri objectives (June-December, 2005)
led by UBUNTU, World Forum of Civil Society
Networks.
• Conducted programme with school students in 20
schools and collected 2066 (1085 boys +981 girls)
individual signatures.
• Conducted programme with youths in 52 youth clubs,
2 Degree colleges and collected 186 individual
signatures.
• Conducted programme with women in 211 Self Help
Groups (SHGs) and collected 1879 individual
signatures in 3 districts.
• Conducted programme with media in 21 Media
organizations(print + electronic) and collected 21 +
individual signatures from media people.
•
Conducted programme with NGOs, 210 organizations
with 262 individual signatures in 11 districts of Orissa.
• In brief, Conducted programme with school students,
youths, women (Self Help Groups), Media and NGOs
of Orissa in 13 districts (covered 43%) and collected
4414 individual signatures.
Jharkhand
Conducted Programme with Promoting Organisations
from 18th to 27th February 2007 with 170 NGOs with
266 Signatures in 10 Districts (Daltongang, Latehar,
Garwa, Gumla, Giridih. Bokaro, Dhanbad, Deoghar,
Hazaribagh, Koderma) of Jharkhand state.
overview ot r h e
HR Pros ection : /stem
sis
192 member States
State-Parties
f
-•3«-
General Assembly
ICESCR (1966)
\/
I
I
Human Rights Council
(HRC)
Security Council
160
2
Yes
167
113
73
Yes
ICERD (1965)
174
Yes
CEDAW (1979)
CEDAW-OP (1999)
186
100
Yes
CAT (1984)
147
ICESCR-OP (2008)
ICCPR (1966)
ICCPR-OP1 (1966)
ICCPR-OP2 (1989)
• Special Procedures
Economic and Social
• Universal Periodic Review
• Advisory Committee
• Expert Mechanism on IPs
Council (ECOSOC)
• Forum on Minority issues
• Social Forum
CAT-OP (2002)
• Complaint Procedure
CRC (1989)
International Court of
Justice
Office of the High
Commissioner for Human
Rights (OHCHR)
Secretariat
I
I
[
i
CRC-OPAC (2000)
193
139
Yes
CRC-OPSC (2000)
142
Yes
ICMW (1990)
44
I
CRPD (2006)
96
Yes
CRPD-OP (2006)
ICED (2006)
Document source: Forum Asia
Status of Ratifications updated as of January 2011
57
60
18
Yes
Human Rights Architecture at the United Nations
; International
| Criminal Court
I International Court •
UNITED
NATIONS
of Justice
I
i Security Council
Tribunals
• ICTY
• ICTR
General Assembly
Committee
• Third
Commitee
(Social,
Humanitarian
and Cultural)
Human
Rights
Council
T’
sr
rv/
e
Treaty Bodies
• CCPR
• CAT
• CERD
• CEDAW
• CRC
• CMW
• CRPD
• C6D
—
Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC)
------- ------ 1-------------
-------------------------------------------------------- J
UN Secretariat
-------- ;------------
Office of the
High Com
missioner for
Human Rights
Treaty Body
Commissions
• CESCR
• Commission on
the Status of
Women
KEY
ICTY - International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia
ICTR - International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
CCPR - Human Rights Committee
CAT - Committee Against Torture
CERD - Committee on the Elimination of Racial Dis
crimination
CEDAW - Committee on the Elimination of Discrimina
tion Against Women
CRC - Committee on the Rights of the Child
CMW - Committee on Migrant Workers
CRPD - Committee on the Rights of Persons with Dis
abilities
CESCR - Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights
_______________________________________________
16
&
6.
Identity of the person or organization submitting the report (*):
Annex II
(a) Family name:
(b) First name
PRACTICAL INFORMATION:
(c) Relationship to the disappeared person:
THE UNITED NATIONS WORKING GROUP ON
ENFORCED OR INVOLUNTARY DISAPPEARANCES
IN A NUTSHELL
(d) Organization (if applicable):
(e) Address (telephone, fax, e-mail):
What is the United Nations Working Group on
Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances?
(f) Please state whether you would like your identity to be kept
confidential
Yes, keep my identity confidential:
No request for confidentiality:
Additional information on the case
Please indicate any other relevant information that has not been covered
by the previous questions. If one of the mandatory elements noted (*) in
this report could not be answered, please indicate why
Signature of author:
Date:
In cases of intimidation, reprisals, harassment of relatives of disappeared
people, human rights defenders or advocates and lawyers working on
cases of disappearance, the Working Group calls on the Governments
concerned to take steps to protect all the fundamental rights of the
persons concerned.
Furthermore, the Working Group monitors the implementation of
the 1992 Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced
Disappearance.
Address to submit cases:
E-mail: wgeid@ohchr.org
Fax: +41 22 917 9006; attn: Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary
Disappearances
Post:
The Working Group was established in 1980 by the Commission on
Human Rights. Its mandate is to assist families in determining the fate
and whereabouts of their relatives. The Working Group is a channel of
communication between the families and the Governments concerned,
aiming to ensure that individual cases which families have brought to its
attention are investigated by domestic authorities with the objective of
clarifying the fate or whereabouts of disappeared persons.
Working Group ' Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances
OHCHR, Palais ci Nations
8-14 Avenue de m Paix_____________________ ______
CH-1211 Geneva i0 (Switzerland)
The Working Group does not:
Directly investigate individual cases;
Directly adopt measures of protection against reprisals.
- Establish individual or State responsibility in cases of enforced
27
26
*
f
Nr:
(e) Identity document:
Place of issue:
Date of issue:
(b) If identification as State agents is not possible, why do you believe that
Government authorities, or persons linked to them, are responsible for
the incident?
(f) Address of usual residence:
(g) Pregnant: yes
2.
(c) If there are witnesses to the incident, indicate their names. If they wish
to remain anonymous, indicate if they are relatives, passers-by, etc. If there
is evidence, please specify:
/ no
Date on which the disappearance occurred (*):
Day:
Month(*):
of disappearance
Year(*):
5.
3.
Place of arrest or abduction, or where the disappeared person
was last seen (*):
Location (if possible, street, city, province or other relevant indications):
4.
Forces (State or State-supported) believed to be responsible
for the disappearance (*):
(a) If the perpetrators are believed to be State agents, please specify
(military, police, persons in uniform or civilian clothes, agents of security
services, unit to which they belong, rank and functions, etc.) and indicate
why they are believed to be responsible. Be as precise as possible:
24
Action taken by relatives or others to locate the person
(enquiries with police, jail, human rights commission, habeas
corpus petition, etc.) (*):
(a) Indicate if complaints have been filed, when, by whom and before
which organ.
(b) Other steps taken:
(c) If action was not possible, please explain why
25
Annex I
The Working Group encourages the ratification of the Convention and
the acceptance by States of the Committee's competence to receive and
consider individual and inter-State communications.
FORM TO SUBMIT A COMMUNICATION ON A VICTIM
OF AN ENFORCED OR INVOLUNTARY DISAPPEARANCE
Important: Elements indicated with an asterisk (*) are mandatory.
Note: If any information contained in the report, besides the mandatory
requested elements, should be kept confidential, please write
"CONFIDENTIAL" beside the relevant entry.
CASES SUBMITTED BY ORGANIZATIONS:
Please note that if a case is being submitted to the Working Group by an
organization, it is necessary for that organization to follow up on it by
conveying Government information from the Working Group to the family
and from the family to the Working Group until the fate or whereabouts
of the person are determined. In this regard, please indicate whether
the reported victim's family has given its direct consent for your
organization to submit this case to the Working Group on its behalf and
whether your organization will be able to liaise between the family and
the Working Group.
* Consent of victim's family given directly to your organization to submit
this case?
Yes, direct consent received from family
No consent from family
"If this case is being submitted by an organization, will the organization
be able to follow up by conveying information between the family and the
Working Group? Yes No
0
1.
Identity of the disappeared person:
<a) Family name (*):
(b) First name (*):
(c) Sex: male
/ female
(d) Date of birth:
22
23
III.
Di-.tf \tion~
V.
Indicate internal steps, inc luding domestic remedies, taken
ESPECIALLY WITH THE LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES,
1.
PARTICULARLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING THE DETENTION
Date of detention:
AND, AS APPROPRI ATE, THEIR I 'SULTS OR THE REASONS WHY SUCH
STEPS OR REMEDIES WERE INEFFECTIVE OR WHY THEY WERE NOT
Duration ot de-ciition (if not known, probable duration):
3.
TAKEN
Forces holding the detainee under custody:
4
Places of detention (indicate any transfer and present place of
detention):
VI.
s
Authorities that ordered the detention:
6.
Reasons for the detention imputed by the authorities:
7
Relevant legislation applied (if known):
IV.
Describe the circumstances of the arrest and/or the deten
Full name and address of the person(s) submitting the
INFORMATION (TELEPHONE AND FAX NUMBER, IF POSSIBLE)4
Date:
Signature:
AND INDICATE PRECISE REASONS WHY YOU CONSIDER THE.
ARRESTOR DETENTION TO BE ARBITRARY3
tion
4 If a easels submitted to the Working Group by anyone other than the victim or his
family, such person or organization should indicate authorization by the victim or his
family to act on their behalf. If. however, the authorization is not readily available, the
Working Group reserves the right to proceed without the authorization. All details con
cerning the person(s) submitting the information to the Working Group, and any authori
zation provided by the victim or his family, will be kept confidential.
’ Copies of documents that prove the arbitrary nature of the arrest or detention, or
help to better understand the specific circumstances of the case, as well as any other
relevant information, may also be attached to this questionnaire.
46
This questionnaire should be addressed to the Working Group on Arbitrary Deten
tion, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. United Nations Office at
Geneva. 8-14, avenue de la Paix. 1211 Geneva 10. Switzerland, fax No. (022) 917.90.06.
47
II.
ANNEX V
Arrest2
1.
Date of arrest:
2.
Place of arrest (as detailed as possible):
Model questionnaire to be completed by persons alleging arbitrary
arrest or detention1
1.
Identity
3. Forces who carried out the arrest or are believed to have carried it
out:
1.
Family name:
2.
First name:
3.
Sex:
4.
Birth date or age (at the time of detention):
5.
National ity/nationalities:
6.
(*) Identity document (if any):
(Male)
(Female)
4.
Did they show a warrant or other decision by a public authority?
(Yes)
(No)
5.
Authority who issued the warrant or decision:
6.
Relevant legislation applied (if known)
W Issued by:
(c) On (date):
(^) No.:
7. Profession and/or activity (if believed to be relevant to the arrest/
detention):
8.
Address of usual residence:
1 A separate questionnaire must be completed for each case of alleged arbitrary ar
rest or detention. ATTar as possible, all det;;7 . requeinecfshoulcrbc given. Nevertheless,
failure to do so will not necessarily result in 1 e inadmissibility of the communication.
44
“ For the purpose of this questionnaire, “arrest” refers to the initial act of appre
hending a person. "Detention” means and includes detention before, during and after trial.
lirIll may be applicable Nonetheless, whenever
possible, both sections should be filled in.
45
Human Rights Fact Sheets:
vent similar acts in the future. If a complaint has been filed, include informa
tion about the action taken by the authorities, the status of the investigation at
the time the communication is submitted and/or how the results of the investi
gation are inadequate.
.
UvuJ" . L ? M • klA
.— Z PA/V
■
---------------- L-y
Date: Time: Location/country:______ >.2____
u
u
The International Bill of Human Rights (Rev. 1)
No. 3
Advisory Services and Technical Cooperation in the Field of Human
Rights (Rev. 1)
No. 4
Methods of Combating Torture (Rev. I)
No. 5
Programme ofAction for the Second Decade to Combat Racism and
Racial Discrimination
”
Number of assailants: Are the assailant(s) known to the victim? 5
Name of assailant(s):
No. 2
|-|
Does the victim have a relationship with the assanant(s)? If so what is the .
nature of the relationship?
Pv\ /El
No. 7
Communic ations Proc edures
Description of the assailant(s) (include any identifying features):
No. 8
World Public Information Campaign for Human Rights
DESCRIPTION OF THE INCIDENT
°- 6
,,
' t-Frr d
a
yCd i»k
Does the victim believe shew^specifically targeted because of gender? If so,
\
UL'
Has the rncid^m been reported to the^le^nf State authorities? If so, which
.
authorities\and when?
X fe* wluUAuAdJ-t ZoJitJ
Have the authorities taken anwaction after the ^incident?
Of
fcylc- 4 jt. iA-i
„
What action?? Tj
_. ,_____
When?
3
UuCCvQalvtui.
)-nUc( w tfa.
(L& IV
Please bring to the attention of the Special Rapporteur any information that
becomes available after you have submitted this form. For example, please
inform the Special Rapporteur if your human rights concern has been ade
quately addressed, or of a final outcome has been determined in an investiga
tion or trial, or an action which was planned or threatened has been carried
out.
PLEASE RETURN TO
THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
OHCHR-UNOG, 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND
Enforced or In voluntary Disappearances (Rev. 2)
No. 9
The Rights of Indigenous People (Rev. 1)
No. 10
The Rights of the Child (Rev. 1)
No. 11
Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions (Rev. 1)
No. 12
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
No. 13
International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights
No. 14
Contemporary Forms of Slavery
No. 15
Civil and Political Rights: The Human Rights Committee
16
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Rev.))
No. 17
The Committee against Torture
No. 18
Minority Rights (Rev. 1)
No. 19
National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human
Rights
20
Human Rights and Refugees
No. 21
The fluman Right to Adequate Housing
No. 22
Discrimination against Women: The Convention and the Committee
No. 23
Harmful Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and
Children
J*'24
The Rights of Migrant Workers
No. 25
Forced Evictions and Human Rights
No. 26
The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
No. 27
Seventeen Frequently Asked Questions about United Nations
Rapporteurs
No. 28
The Impact of Mercenary Activities on the Right of Peoples to SelfDetermination
(Fax: 00 41 22 917 9006, e-mail: csaunders.hchr@unog.ch)
49
48
fs.CE -
Annex 4
CONFIDENTIAL
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
INFORMATION FORM
I
INFORMER- The name and address <>/ the per.ton/organization submilting
l/idential. Please
the information will remain conf^-l
r’l^e also mention whether we can
' i means.
contact vou for additional information, and if/ so' by what
I
I
MvaI/Vv
Name of R^'orgamzation: __W.---------4—.---------------- 7--------;
^a/TIv tgU., jwJU
Fax/tel./e-mail:
W
--------------------------------
VICTIM(S): Information about the victim(s) including full name age, sex,
residence professional and/or other activities related to the alleged violation,
and anv other information helpful in identifying a person (such as passport or
identity card number). Please mention whether the victim is willing to have the
case transmitted to the Government concerned.
------------- -----------------------------------------
Name:
Address:
Date of birth:
Nationality:
Sex:
(^✓vv-cU^^-.--------- -------- -----------
£
Occupation:
v.
■
Ethnic background, religious, social group (irrelevant):
HIE INCIDENT: Including dates, place and the harm suffered or Io be pre
vented Ifvoufisubmission concerns a law or policy rather than a specific inci
dent. summarize the law or policy and the effects of its implementation on
women s human rights. Include information about the alleged perpetrators
their names (ifknown), anv relationship they may have to the victims and/or Io
the Government, and an explanation oj the reasons why you believe thev are
the perpetrators. If you submit information about violations committed by pri
vate individuals or groups (rather than government officials), include any
information which might indicate that the Government foiled to exercise due
diligence to prevent, investigate, punish and ensure compensation for the vtolatffms. Include information about the steps taken by the victims or Ihetr fomilics to obtain remedies, including complaints filed with the police, o c
officials or independent national human rights institutions. // no complaints
have been filed, explain why not. Include information about steps taken by offi
cials to investigate the alleged violation (or threatened violation) and to pre47
E.
F.
Nationality
Occupation
G.
Identity card number (if applicable)
H. Activities (trade union, political, religious, humanitarian/solidarity, press, etc.)
I. Residential and/or work address
II.
Was appropriate treatment received for injuries sustained as a result
of the torture?
1.
Was the medical examination performed in a manner which would
enable the doctor to detect evidence of injuries sustained as a result of
the torture? Were any medical reports or certificates issued? If so.
what did the reports reveal?
J.
If the victim died in custody, was an autopsy or forensic examination
performed and what were the results?
Circumstances surrounding torture
A.
Date and place of arrest and subsequent torture
B.
Identity of force(s) carrying out the initial detention and/or torture
(police, intelligence services, armed forces, paramilitary, prison offi
cials, other)
C.
Were any persons such as a lawyer, relatives or friends permitted to
see the victim during detention? If so, how long after the arrest?
D.
Describe the methods of torture used
III.
E.
What injuries were sustained as a result of the torture?
F.
What was believed to be the purpose of the torture?
G.
Was the victim examined by a doctor at any point during or after
his/her ordeal? If so, wh ■ ' Was the examination performed by a
prison or government doct i ?
Remedial action
Were any domestic remedies pursued by the victim or his/her family or repre
sentatives (complaints to the forces responsible, the judiciary, political organs,
etc.)? If so, what was the result?
IV.
44
H.
Information concerning the author of the present report:
A.
Family name
B.
First name
C.
D.
E.
Relationship to victim
Organization represented, if any
Present full address
45
3.
Annex 3
Information on the State party concerned
SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR
OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
ON TORTURE
Name of the State party (country)
•
Nature of the alleged violation(s)
4.
Provide detailed information to substantiate your claim, including:
•
•
•
•
5.
Description of alleged violation(s) and alleged perpetrator(s)
Date(s)
Place(s)
Provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women that were allegedly violated. If the
communication refers to more than one provision, describe each issue
separately.
Steps taken to exhaust domestic remedies
Describe the action taken to exhaust domestic remedies; for example, attempts
to obtain legal, administrative, legislative, policy or programme remedies,
including:
•
Type(s) of remedy sought
•
•
•
•
•
•
Date(s)
Place(s)
Who initiated the action
Which authority or body was addressed
Name of court hearing the case (if any).
If domestic remedies have not been exhausted, explain why.
Model questionnaire to be completed by persons alleging torture
or their representatives
Information on the torture of a person should be transmitted to the Special
Rapporteur in written form and sent c/o Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights, United Nations Office at Geneva, CH-1211 Geneva 10,
Switzerland. Although it is important to provide as much detail as possible, the
lack of a comprehensive account should not necessarily preclude the submis
sion of reports. However, the Special Rapporteur can only deal with clearly
identified individual cases containing the following minimum elements of
information:
a.
Full name of the victim;
b.
Date on which the incident(s) of torture occurred (at least as to
the month and year);
C.
Place where the person was seized (city, province, etc.) and loca
tion at which the torture was carried out (if known);
d.
Indication of the forces carrying out the torture;
e.
Description of the form of torture used and any injury suffered as
a result;
f.
Identity of the person or organization submitting the report (name
and address, which will be kept confidential).
Please note: Enclose copies of all relevant documentation. -
6.
Other international procedures
Has the same matter already been examined or is it being examined under
another procedure of international investigation or settlement? If yes, explain:
•
Type of procedure(s)
• Date(s)
• Placets)
• Results (if any)
Please note: Enclose copies of all relevant documentation.
7.
Date and signature
Date/place:
_____________
Signature of author(s) and/or victim(s):
8.
42
List of documents attached (do not send originals, only copies)
Additional sheets should be attached where space does not allow for a full ren
dering of the information requested. Also, copies of any relevant corroborating
documents such as medical or police records should be supplied where it is
believed that such information may contribute to a fuller account of the inci
dent. Only copies and not originals of such documents should be sent.
I.
Identity of the person(s) subjected to torture
A.
B.
Family name
First and other names
C. Sex: Male
D.
Female
Birth date or age
43
Annex 2
Complaint Guidelines
for communications under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
1.
Information concerning the author(s) of the communication
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Family name
First name
Date and place of birth
Nationality/citizenship
Passport/identity card number (if available)
Sex
Marital status/children
Profession
Ethnic background, religious affiliation, social group (if relevant)
•
•
Present address
Mailing address for confidential correspondence (if other than present
address)
Fax/telephone/e-mail
Indicate whether you are submitting the communication as:
- Alleged victim(s). If there is a group of individuals alleged to be
victims, provide basic information about each individual.
•
•
-
2.
On behalf of the alleged victim(s). Provide evidence showing the
consent of the victim(s), or reasons that justify submitting the com
munication without such consent.
Information concerning the alleged victim(s) (if other than the author)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Family name
First name
Date and place of birth
Nationality/citizenship
Passport/identity card number (if available)
Sex
Marital status/children
Profession
Ethnic background, religious affiliation, social group (it relevant)
•
•
Present address
Mailing address for confidential correspondence (if other than present
address)
Fax/telephone/e-mail
»
41
?
i
25. What national measures exist to investigate and prosecute human rights violations
and abuses9
26 What judicial and other remedies are available for victims of human r qhts
violations? Has the effectiveness and adequacy of these remedies been evaluated?
If YES, what have been the results9
27 If your State party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights?.
\
28. What measures have been taken to make its provisions fully justiciable in your
country?
29. What are the mam Government’s/ institution’s achievements, good practices, gaps
and obstacles in ensuring that victims attain effective remedies?
Way forward
30. In your view, what concrete measures should be adopted and implemented to
ensure the prevention of human rights at the national, regional and international
level?
31. In your view, are there new emerging issues in your country related to the protection
and promotion of human rights, or the prevention of human rights violations which
need to be addressed at the national, regional or international level? Please
elaborate.
Annex I
m
• J International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and ‘its Optional
Protocol,!
• / International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights(ICESCR) and
its Optional Protocoly
y Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and its two Optional Protocols,
• k Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment (CAT) and its Optional Protocol,
•/ Convention on_the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW) ancV its Optional Protocol
• <• Convention omthe Rights of Persons with Disabilities (ICRPD) ancjjts Optional
Protocol,)
. international Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
Z (ICERD) and' its Optional Protocol, ]
•< International'Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workei S
and Members of their Families (ICPRMW)
• , International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced
" Disappearance (ICCPPED)
-
Regional: Africa
• African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR)
• African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
5
The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights on the Rights
of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol)
Regional: America
• American Convention on Human Rights
• Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture
• Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons
• Inter-American Convention on the Prevention. Punishment, and Eradication of
Violence against Women
• Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Persons with Disabilities
Regional: Europe
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
• Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings
• European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (ECRML)
• European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
• European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (CPT)
• European Social Charter (ESC), and Revised Social Charter
• Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM)
•
6
Annex II
INTERNATIONAL INSTRUMENTS
A. THE INTERNATIONAL BILL OF HUMAN RIGHTS
1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
2 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
4 Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
5 Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
aiming at the abolition of the death penalty
B. WORLD CONFERENCE AND MILLENNIUM ASSEMBLY
6. Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action hs.
7 United Nations Millennium Declaration.' k c
C. THE RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION
8. United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries
and Peoples
9. General Assembly resolution 1803 (XVII) of 14 December 1962, “Permanent
sovereignty over natural resources"
10. International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of
Mercenaries
D. RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND MINORITIES
11. ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169)
i-^
12. Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and
Linguistic Minorities
13. Declaration of the rights of indigenous peoples i - c <
V.
V.
V -
E. PREVENTION OF DISCRIMINATION
14. Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100)
{ J
715. Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111)
16. International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination
17. Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice
18. Convention against Discrimination in Education
19. Protocol Instituting a Conciliation and Good Offices Commission to be responsible
for seeking a settlement of any disputes which may arise between States Parties to
the Convention against Discrimination in Education
r>20. Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination
Based on Religion or Belief
21. Declaration against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related
Intolerance
F. RIGHTS OF WOMEN
^2. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
23. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Dis^ rimii\.
against Women
24. Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed
Conflict
25. Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women
G. RIGHTS OF THE CHILD
y 26. Convention on the Rights of the Child
27. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children,
child prostitution and child pornography
28. Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of
children in armed conflict
29. Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138)
* 30. Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182)
H, RIGHTS OF OLDER PERSONS
31, United Nations Principles for Older Persons
-
I. RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
32. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
33. Declaration on the Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons
34. Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons
35. Principles for the protection of persons with mental illness and the improvement of
mental health care
36. Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities
J. HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE: PROTECTION
OF PERSONS SUBJECTED TO DETENTION OR IMPRISONMENT
37. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners
38. Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners
39. Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or
Imprisonment
40. United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty
41. Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
$ 42. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment
43. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
44. Principles of Medical Ethics relevant to the Role of Health Personnel, particularly
Physicians, in the Protection of Prisoners and Detainees against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
45. Principles on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
46. Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty
47. Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials
48. Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials
49. United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (The Tokyo
Rules)
50. United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice
(The Beijing Rules)
51. Guidelines for Action on Children in the Criminal Justice System
52. United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (Tha R’yadh
Guidelines)
53. Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse c
54. Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary
55. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers
56. Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors
57. Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and
Summary Executions
58. Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
8
K. SOCIAL WELFARE, PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT
59 Declaration on Social Progress and Development
60 Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition
61 Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in the In!
Peace and for the Benefit of Mankind
62. Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace
63. Declaration on the Right to Development ■
64. Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights
65. Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity
of
L. PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
66. Principles relating to the status of national institutions (The Paris Principles) i
67. Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of
Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms
,y:’'
.
M. MARRIAGE
68. Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and Registration of
Marriages
69. Recommendation on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and
Registration of Marriages
N. RIGHT TO HEALTH
70. Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS
O. RIGHT TO WORK AND TO FAIR CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT
71. Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122)
P. FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION
72. Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention. 1948
(No. 87)
73. Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98)
Q. SLAVERY, SLAVERY-LIKE PRACTICES AND FORCED LABOUR
74. Slavery Convention
75.. Protocol amending the Slavery Convention signed at Geneva on 25 September 1926
76. Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and
Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery
«?
77. Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29)
78. Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105)
79. Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of
the Prostitution of Others
80. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especial^ /vomen
and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational
Organized Crime
R. RIGHTS OF MIGRANTS
81. International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and
Members of Their Families
82. Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, supplementing the
United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime
S. NATIONALITY, STATELESSNESS, ASYLUM AND REFUGEES
83. Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness
9
84. Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons
85 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
86. Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees
87. Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country
in which They Live
T..WAR CRIMES AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, INCLUDING GENOCIDE
38. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
89. Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and
Crimes against Humanity
90. Principles of international co-operation in the detection, arrest, extradition and
punishment of persons guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity
91. Statute of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia 661
92. Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda
93. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
U. HUMANITARIAN LAW
94. Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
95. Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
96. Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to
the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)
97. Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and reiatmg to
i
the Protection of Victims of Non- International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II)
io
- Media
15483.pdf
Position: 1400 (6 views)