Universal Periodic Review

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a mechanism of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council (HRC) that emerged out of the 2005 UN reform process.[1] Established by General Assembly resolution 60/251 of 3 April 2006, the UPR periodically examines the human rights performance of all 193 UN Member States. It is intended to complement, not duplicate, the work of other human rights mechanisms, including the UN human rights treaty bodies.

Contents

Principles and objectives

HRC Resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007 and HRC decision 6/102 of 27 September 2007 elaborated the UPR’s operation. HRC resolution 5/1 provides that the UPR should:[2]

The objectives of the UPR are:[3]

Procedure

UPR cycle

The UPR currently operates on a four-year cycle. Forty-eight States are reviewed each year during three sessions of the HRC’s Working Group on the UPR, with 16 States reviewed at each session. The HRC determined the order of review for the first UPR cycle (2008-2011) on 21 September 2007 through the drawing of lots.[4] This process was instructed by the resolution 5/1 requirements that:[5] all 47 member States of the HRC be reviewed during their term of membership; that initial members of the HRC, especially those elected for one or two-year terms, should be reviewed first; that a mix of HRC member and observer States should be reviewed at each Working Group session; and that equitable geographic distribution should be respected in the selection of countries for review.

Basis of country reviews

The basis of country reviews is: (a) the Charter of the UN; (b) the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; (c) human rights instruments to which a State is party; and (d) voluntary pledges and commitments made by the State, including those undertaken when presenting their candidature for election to the HRC. Country reviews also take into account applicable international humanitarian law.[6]

Documentation upon which country reviews are based

Country reviews are based on three documents:[7]

In decision 6/102, the HRC provided guidelines for the preparation of information under the UPR. It specifies that States, in preparing national reports, should address/provide:

Working Group on the UPR

The Working Group on the UPR, which is composed of the HRC’s 47 Member States and chaired by the HRC President, conducts country reviews. The Working Group, which met in Geneva for the first time in April 2008, allocates three hours to each review, one hour of which is given to the State under review to discuss its domestic human rights framework, measures taken to promote and protect human rights in country, human rights issues of particular national pertinence, and steps taken to address and redress violations. It is also an opportunity for the State to present voluntary human rights pledges and commitments. A two-hour interactive dialogue follows the State’s presentation, during which HRC member States question the State and make recommendations towards the improvement of its human rights situation and performance.

Issues addressed during country reviews have included:[9]

Each review is facilitated by a group of three States, known as a “troika”, which serve as rapporteurs. The troika is first responsible for receiving questions from UN member States in advance of the country review, clustering them, and transmitting them to the UPR Secretariat (OHCHR), which in turn transmits them to the State under review.[10] The second role of the troika is to prepare an outcome document on the review, which includes a summary of the review proceedings, recommendations presented by States, conclusions, and voluntary commitments presented by the State under review. The outcome document is prepared with the assistance of the UPR secretariat and with the full involvement of the State under review. A different troika is formed for each review. The selection of troika members is also confirmed through the drawing of lots.

Thirty minutes is allocated to the adoption of the outcome document at a later stage in the same Working Group session, during which the State under review is given a preliminary opportunity to indicate whether it supports the recommendations presented to it by States (known as ‘UPR outcomes’) as well as the conclusions reflected in the outcome document.[10] Once adopted, the outcome document is transferred to the HRC for discussion and adoption in plenary. In the intervening period between the Working Group and plenary sessions, the reviewed State is expected to confirm which UPR outcomes it accepts and does not accept.

HRC plenary session

The UPR is a standing item on the HRC’s agenda (item 6). At each HRC session, time is allocated to the consideration and adoption of the outcome documents transferred from the Working Group on the UPR. An hour is allocated to the adoption of each document, during which the reviewed State is offered the opportunity to present replies to questions or issues not sufficiently addressed during the interactive dialogue at the Working Group.[11] HRC member and observer States are also given the opportunity to express their views on the outcome of the review before the HRC takes action on it.[12] ‘A’ status NHRIs[13] and NGOs in consultative relationship with the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) have the opportunity to make ‘general comments’ before the adoption of the outcome report.[14]

Follow-up to UPR outcomes

States bear the primary responsibility for implementing UPR outcomes. However, other stakeholders, including NHRIs and NGOs, also have a role in outcome implementation.[15] The State’s progress in implementing UPR outcomes will be examined in subsequent reviews.[16]

State non-cooperation with the UPR

After exhausting all efforts to encourage a State to cooperate with the UPR mechanism, the HRC will address, as appropriate, cases of persistent non-cooperation with the mechanism.[17] At June 2011, the HRC had not taken any such action.

Stakeholder UPR contribution opportunities

The rules governing the participation of NHRIs and NGOs at the HRC, and therefore in the UPR mechanism, are prescribed by resolution 5/1, which states that their participation shall be based on the ‘practices observed by the [CHR], while ensuring the most effective contribution of these entities’.[18]

While the UPR is an intergovernmental process, there are a number of contribution opportunities available to non-governmental stakeholders. These include:

HRC review process

In resolution 60/251, the General Assembly required the HRC to review and report on its work and functioning after its first five years.[19] In October 2009, the HRC established the open-ended intergovernmental working group on the review of the work and functioning of the HRC (composed of the HRC’s 47 member States) to lead its review process.[20] Chaired by the then HRC President (Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow of Thailand), the Working Group met for two substantive sessions. The first Working Group session took place on 25-29 October 2010; the second session was held on 7, 17-18, and 23-24 February 2011.

On 25 March 2011, the HRC adopted as resolution 16/21 the outcome of its review of the work and functioning of the HRC. While it is yet to be confirmed by the General Assembly, the resolution provides that the second cycle of the UPR will commence in June 2012. It also proposes a number of changes to the UPR’s operation. These include:

References

  1. ^ ‘In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all’, Report of the Secretary-General (A/59/2005), 21 March 2005; World Summit Outcome, General Assembly resolution 60/1, 24 October 2005.
  2. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 3.
  3. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 4.
  4. ^ ‘Basic facts about the UPR’, OHCHR.
  5. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, paras. 8-11.
  6. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, paras. 1-2.
  7. ^ ‘Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme: A Handbook for Civil Society’, OHCHR (New York & Geneva, 2008) at 142.
  8. ^ ‘Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme: A Handbook for Civil Society’ at 148-149.
  9. ^ Refer to UPR-info’s UPR database for information on issues raised and recommendations presented during country reviews.
  10. ^ a b ‘Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme: A Handbook for Civil Society’ at 144.
  11. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 29.
  12. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 30.
  13. ^ NHRIs accredited by the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions(ICC) as compliant with the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (Paris Principles).
  14. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 31.
  15. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 33.
  16. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 34.
  17. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 38.
  18. ^ Annex to resolution 5/1, at rule 7. Resolution 5/1 also stipulates that NGO participation is to be informed by Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31 of 25 July 1996, and NHRI participation by CHR resolution 2005/74 of 20 April 2005.
  19. ^ General Assembly resolution 60/251 at operative para. 16.
  20. ^ HRC resolution 12/1 of 12 October 2009, ‘Open-ended intergovernmental working group on the review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council’.

External links