AFTERNOON - Human Rights Council Holds General Debate on the Universal Periodic Review and Concludes General Debate on Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms
The Human Rights Council this afternoon held a general debate on its agenda item six on the Universal Periodic Review, and concluded a general debate under its agenda item five on human rights bodies and mechanisms.
On the Universal Periodic Review, some speakers said it was the most effective mechanism for reviewing best practices and for intergovernmental cooperation to examine human rights issues in all countries on an equal footing. Some speakers said proposals on financial and time constraints should be considered, and suggested that Universal Periodic Review recommendations should be adopted at regular Council sessions. Some speakers called for a spirit of constructive dialogue to accompany the Universal Periodic Review of all countries, in accordance with the principles of equality and non-selectivity. Some speakers deplored that the Human Right Council was used to impose costly initiatives against sovereign States that were selective, interfering and politicised, driven by hegemonic countries, on the grounds of the alleged protection of human rights.
Federico Villegas, President of the Human Right Council, said that the Universal Periodic Review was the main mechanism for human rights of the Council when it came to discussing the human rights of each country and creating a strategy for cooperation that made it possible to implement the recommendations that were made for each report. He welcomed the fact that this mechanism would continue to be strengthened as much remained to be done. The Universal Periodic Review, if used intelligently, could serve as the main strategy for inclusive and sustainable development from a human rights perspective. He believed that the next step to be taken was to think how the Universal Periodic Review could be optimised to achieve this goal. Within the recommendations that countries accepted was a road map that was uniquely human rights oriented, but it was not enough to talk about this every three or four years. Between cycles it was necessary to ensure monitoring.
Speaking on the Universal Periodic Review were France on behalf of the European Union and a group of countries, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation, Azerbaijan on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Morocco on behalf of the Arab Group, India on behalf of a group of countries, China, Venezuela, Cuba, Libya, Malaysia, Malawi, Indonesia, Bolivia, Iraq, Bangladesh, Tunisia, Bahrain, Georgia, Algeria, Bhutan, Iran, UN Habitat, Tanzania, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Also speaking were the New Zealand Human Rights Commission, UPR Info, Asociacion HazteOir.org, Africa Culture Internationale, International Council Supporting Fair Trial and Human Rights, Association pour la défense des droits de L’homme et des revendications démocratiques/culturelles du peuple Azerbaidjanais-Iran - « ARC », Partners For Transparency, Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada, International Bar Association, Americans for Democracy, Human Rights in Bahrain Inc,Jeunesse Etudiante Tamoule, Association Culturelle des Tamouls en France, Article 19 - International Centre Against Censorship, and Asia Centre Co., Ltd.
At the beginning of the meeting, the Council concluded its general debate on agenda item five on human rights bodies and mechanisms.
Some speakers expressed concerns at the practice of some States that took every opportunity to attack mandate holders whose findings they did not like. These practices needed to end. Member States needed to make real the promise of putting human rights first and not miss the opportunities of the Secretary-General's Call to Action and Our Common Agenda to ensure better use of human rights mechanisms. Some speakers said that United Nations human rights bodies and mechanisms needed to undertake their mandate in consultation with the consent of Member States. Mandate holders, therefore, should carry out their duties in conformity with the Code of Conduct and their respective mandates. The need for the independence and impartiality of mandate holders was stressed.
Speaking on human rights bodies and mechanisms were Indonesia, Benin, United States, Côte d’Ivoire, Bolivia, Mauritania, France, Austria, Algeria, Togo, Bangladesh, Belarus, Tunisia, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Greece, Botswana, Georgia, Syria, Iran, Italy, Morocco, Iraq and Nicaragua.
Also speaking were Centre Europe- Tiers Monde, Villages Unis, Khiam Rehabilitation Center for Victims of Torture, The Organization for Poverty Alleviation and Development, Jeunesse Etudiante Tamoule, Friends World Committee for Consultation, Coordination des Associations et des Particuliers pour la Liberte de Conscience , Minority Rights Group, Advocates for Human Rights, World Muslim Congress, International Buddhist Relief Organization, American Association of Jurists, Interfaith International, Al Baraem Association for Charitable Work, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Mouvement contre le racisme et pour l’amitié entre les peoples, Sikh Human Rights Group, The Next Century Foundation, International Commission of Jurists, International Fellowship of Reconciliation, Platform for Youth Integration and Volunteerism, Maat for Peace, Development and Human Rights Association, Réseau Unité pour le Développement de Mauritanie, International Action for Peace and Sustainable Development, Amnesty International, iuventum e.V., Association pour la défense des droits de l’homme et des revendications démocratiques/culturelles du peuple Azerbaidjanais-Iran - « ARC » , Organisation internationale pour les pays les moins avancés (OIPMA), Alliance Creative Community Project, Commission africaine des promoteurs de la santé et des droits de l’homme , Global Appreciation and Skills Training Network, Réseau International des Droits Humains (RIDH), Mother of Hope Cameroon Common Initiative Group, Prahar, Human Is Right, Centre for Gender Justice and Women Empowerment, Organisation pour la Communication en Afrique et de Promotion de la Cooperation Economique Internationale - OCAPROCE Internationale , Africa Culture Internationale, Community Human Rights and Advocacy Centre (CHRAC), Global Welfare Association, and World Barua Organization (WBO).
China and Cuba spoke in right of reply.
The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s forty-ninth regular session can be found here.
The Council will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Friday 25 March, to hold an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, followed by the presentation of the reports submitted by the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights under agenda item seven on the human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories, and a general debate under this item.
General Debate on Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms
The general debate on agenda item five on human rights bodies and mechanisms started in the morning meeting and a summary can be found here.
General Debate
In the general debate, some speakers expressed concerns at the practice of some States that took every opportunity to attack mandate holders whose findings they did not like. These practices needed to end. Speakers supported the essential work of the independent United Nations Special Procedure mandate holders, who continued to shine a light on human rights abuses and violations. The impact of the United Nations mechanisms of independent experts or special rapporteurs might become limited if not coupled with the requisite technical assistance and capacity building. Human rights needed to be incorporated in the United Nations programming and planning with specific attention to resources towards building the capacity of Member States. Women must be fairly represented in United Nations’ human rights bodies and mechanisms. Member States needed to make real the promise of putting human rights first and not miss the opportunities of the Secretary-General's Call to Action and Our Common Agenda to ensure better use of human rights mechanisms.
Some speakers said that United Nations’ human rights bodies and mechanisms needed to undertake their mandate in consultation with the consent of Member States. Mandate holders, therefore, should carry out their duties in conformity with the Code of Conduct and their respective mandates. They should pay due consideration to the diversity of national perspectives, legal systems, and socio-cultural contexts and challenges; and respect the principles of constructive cooperation and dialogue aimed at strengthening the capacities of Member States. With this, Governments would be in a better position to take the necessary follow-up actions to resolve a particular human rights concern as well as prevent the erosion of trust towards particular mandate holders and the Special Procedures mechanism as a whole. Some speakers regretted the growing pattern of unconstructive and biased media releases by certain Special Procedure mandate holders, who consistently and selectively disregarded verifiable data and information submitted by Member States. The need for the independence and impartiality of mandate holders was stressed.
Many speakers referred to specific country situations and urged all States to allow entry to all human rights mechanisms. Concerns were expressed on the situation of human rights defenders. In 2021, more than 350 human rights defenders – from 35 countries – were murdered. Others increasingly faced harassment, intimidation, and unjust detention for their vital work. It was essential for the world to invest in the rule of law and access to justice; in the establishment of an accessible, independent, transparent and accountable judiciary; in the commitment to the protection of minority rights; and in the entrenchment of social protection that contributed, without any doubt, to social cohesion, to confidence in institutions and to the strengthening of the rule of law. Speakers welcomed the report from the Forum on Human Rights, Democracy, and Rule of Law, in particular its focus on making justice accessible to all, which was an essential component to ensuring peace.
A number of speakers referred to the COVID-19 pandemic, as it was clear that it had exacerbated long-standing social and economic inequalities between and within countries. Although the pandemic was a global crisis, developing countries, particularly least developed countries, had been the most affected. Vulnerable populations and groups, such as women, children, the elderly, people with disabilities and minorities faced the disastrous effects of the crisis. Speakers said it was both important and urgent to reform the debt structure and to prioritise social justice and equity in order to raise the level of respect for human rights. International cooperation and solidarity were indispensable tools to effectively combat the pandemic and its socio-economic consequences and to ensure the realisation of human rights. Some speakers said vaccines against COVID-19 must be considered global public goods. Equal access to vaccines was a fundamental human right. Systemic racism was denounced. Racially discriminatory police violence and criminalisation meant Black people were more likely than white people to be killed by police. Officers were rarely charged with a crime. Racial disparities extended far beyond encounters with police.
General Debate on the Universal Periodic Review
Speakers reiterated their strong commitment to the Universal Periodic Review as it provided an opportunity to review national legislation, laws and policies in order to develop the human rights systems of countries. It was the most effective mechanism for reviewing best practices between countries and the main mechanism for intergovernmental cooperation to examine human rights issues in all countries on an equal footing. Some speakers said proposals on financial and time constraints should be considered, and suggested that Universal Periodic Review recommendations should be adopted at regular Council sessions. Speakers further called on all States and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to promote the participation of civil society in the Universal Periodic Review process. Concerns were expressed at the reported instances of acts or threats of violence by States under review against civil society representatives, such as those presented in the Secretary-General's report. Speakers called on all States to take the necessary measures to ensure and strengthen cooperation between civil society representatives and the United Nations mechanisms without fear of reprisal or persecution, harassment or intimidation. They condemned and opposed any threats or acts of violence, intimidation, harassment and retaliation against individuals, civil society and groups cooperating or participating in the review process.
Some speakers called for a spirit of constructive dialogue to accompany the Universal Periodic Review of all countries, in accordance with the principles of equality and non-selectivity. The Universal Periodic Review needed to respect societal values, as the diversity of cultures was a source of enrichment for all members of the human family, which guaranteed their equal and inalienable rights. Some speakers deplored that the Human Right Council was used to impose costly initiatives against sovereign States that were selective, interfering and politicised, driven by hegemonic countries, on the grounds of the alleged protection of human rights. Further speakers encouraged Member States to consider the role of subnational governments as service providers, regulators and duty bearers. Their recognition and empowerment would be essential to the achievement of many of the recommendations that had been supported in the Universal Periodic Review. One speaker expressed concern at the limited consideration of the right to adequate housing in the Universal Periodic Review. Adequate housing was essential to human dignity and a large number of Member States were currently describing the challenges they faced in addressing the global housing crisis.
Ce document produit par le Service de l’information des Nations Unies à Genève est destiné à l'information ; il ne constitue pas un document officiel.
Les versions anglaise et française de nos communiqués sont différentes car elles sont le produit de deux équipes de couverture distinctes qui travaillent indépendamment.
HRC22.047E