1. THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
A Quick Guide
by the International Service for Human Rights

2. Reforming the Commission
2001: USA not elected for first time
2003: Libya chairs the Commission
December 2004: High Level Panel report recommends replacement
March 2005: Secretary General’s report recommends replacement but on a different model
September 2005: World Summit and Summit Outcome Document
15 March 2006: General Assembly passes resolution to replace Commission with Council
19 June 2006: First session of the new Council

3. Human Rights Council General Assembly resolution 60/251
Status: subsidiary organ of General Assembly
Status to be reviewed within 5 years
Composition and election:
47 member States
elected by absolute majority of the General Assembly
Individual secret ballots
Eligible for two consecutive terms only
Gross violators can be removed by two thirds majority vote of General Assembly

4. Membership criteria Take account of contributions to human right
Voluntary pledges and commitments to be considered when standing for election
But no disqualification criteria
Members must uphold the “highest standards” in human rights and fully cooperate with the Council

5. Membership
Africa 13
Asia 13
Eastern Europe 6
GRULAC 8
WEOG 7
Total 47

6. Meetings At least three meetings a year totalling at least 10 weeks
2006/07 schedule:
19 to 30 June
18 September to 6 October
27 November to 8 December
Possibly one week in January
12 March to 5 April 2007
Able to hold special sessions on request of one third of members

7. Functions Broad mandate to discuss human rights issues
Address situations of violations of human rights, including “gross and systematic violations”
Universal periodic review of all States

8. Functions
All “mandates, mechanisms, functions and responsibilities” of the Commission transferred to Council for review, rationalisation and improvement within one year:
A system of special procedures to be retained
A system of expert advice to be maintained (Sub-Commission)
A complaints procedure to be maintained (1503 procedure)
Modalities:
Informal consultations;
Inter-sessional working groups.

9. 1. Universal Periodic Review
Universal periodic review of the fulfilment by each State of its human rights obligations and commitments:
Based on reliable and objective information;
Universality of coverage (all States);
Cooperative, based on interactive dialogue (not a judgement);
Not duplicative of treaty bodies work.
Issues to be decided:
Terms of reference (standards to be used in the review):
UN Charter;
UDHR;
Treaties?
Other commitments and pledges;
National human rights laws?

10. Universal Periodic Review
Procedure:
Working Group vs. Plenary
States vs. Experts
Periodicity (3 to 5 years)
Preparation:
Reports by State under review?
Report by High Commissioner?
Questionnaire?
Simple oral statement?
OHCHR database.

11. Universal Periodic Review
Outcome:
Country-specific resolution?
Mere interactive dialogue?
Recommendations?
If review undertaken by WG, outcome forwarded to HRC?
Decision by consensus?
Only technical assistance? Referral to 1235?
Follow-up:
Next UPR round?
Annual report on implementation of recommendation?

12. Universal Periodic Review
Other issues:
Participation of civil society:
“full involvement of the country concerned”, including civil society;
Link with other mechanisms
Treaty bodies;
Special procedures.

13. 2. Special procedures
Individual experts or group pf individuals (working groups)
mandated to address specific country situations or
thematic issues.
There are currently 41 special procedures mechanisms:
15 dealing with country situations;
26 dealing with thematic issues;
Special procedures:
Carry out country visits;
Receive individual complaints from victims;
Report to the Council and the General Assembly about their findings, conclusions and recommendations.

14. Special procedures Issues to be decided by the Council:
Example: Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus (Mr Adrian Severin)
CHR 2002: debate
CHR 2003: resolution
CHR 2004: country mandate
CHR 2005: renewal country mandate
Issues to be decided by the Council:
Rationalisation of mandates
Overlap, number of mandates;
Country mandates;
Review used to terminate undesired mandated?

15. Special procedures Working methods
Interaction with the media;
Admissibility criteria for individual communications;
“Code of conduct” for accountability in case of experts overstepping their mandate;
Selection and appointment of experts
Role of regional groups;
WG with regional representation instead of individual experts;
Disqualifying situations;
OHCHR roster;
Need to preserve expertise and independence.

16. 3. Expert advice to the Council
Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
26 independent experts elected by the Commission for 4 year terms (half elected every 2 years)
Think tank for the Commission: studies, standard setting
But was increasingly restricted: no country specific consideration, no initiation of projects without Commission approval, TNC Norms
Met annually in Geneva for four weeks
Council required to develop a system of expert advice

17. 4. Complaints procedure ECOSOC resolution 1503 (1970):
Gross violations of human rights;
Pattern of widespread violation of human rights;
Confidential procedure, it may result in:
Public debate under ECOSOC Resolution 1235;
Appointment of special procedure with country specific mandate.
Council is required to maintain a complaints procedure.
So far, during the Council session and informal consultations:
Focus on other issues, not on 1503;
Quest for more transparency;
Clearer admissibility criteria.

18. Standard setting
Standard-setting Working Groups were responsible for negotiating new legal standards in the area of human rights – i.e. declarations or treaties
Standard-setting Working Groups of former Commission
Draft Convention on Enforced Disappearances
Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People
Consideration of a possible Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

19. Role of NGOs at the Commission
ECOSOC accredited NGOs:
Direct access to Commission and Sub-commission unparalleled in UN system
Written submissions: unlimited number
Oral statements: limited number at Commission
Parallel or side events
Lobbying and persuasion:
General
Related to specific resolutions
Related to specific delegations

20. Role of NGOs at the Council
During the reform process: fears that NGO access could be limited.
However, arrangements and practices established under the Commission are carried forward to the Council.
The Universal Periodic Review as new avenue of participation:
To submit info on countries, highlight violations, ask for concrete action;
Particularly important if country mandates are suppressed.

21. Accreditation 3 categories of NGO accreditation:
General consultative status;
Special consultative status;
NGOs on the Roster;
Applications to ECOSOC Committee on NGOs, meeting annually.
Consultative status suspended or withdrawn:
Abuse of the status;
Funds from criminal activities;
No contribution to UN work within any three-year period.
Quadriennial reports on activities and contribution to NGO Committee.

22. Accreditation
Politicisation of the accreditation process: example of LGBT organisations.
Some form of participation for non-ECOSOC accredited NGOs? Example: Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues; Ad Hoc Committee on the Disability Convention

23. The Council’s first year
Receive and respond to the outstanding reports of the Special Procedures
Develop and establish the system of universal periodic review
Review, rationalise and improve all mandates of Special Procedures
Review the system of expert advice and establish its own system
Review the system of individual complaints and establish its own system
Develop its own rules of procedure, agenda and operating system
Act on situations to avoid any protection gap