COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION REVIEWS RESULTS OF RECENT MEETINGS ON WORKING METHODS OF HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY BODIES

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination this afternoon heard presentations from several of its members on the outcomes of three meetings, namely, the second meeting of the Working Group on the Harmonization of the Working Methods of Treaty Bodies; the sixth Inter-Committee Meeting; and the nineteenth Meeting of the Chairpersons of Human Rights Treaty Bodies.

Presenting the report of the Working Group on the Harmonization of the Working Methods of Treaty Bodies (HRI/MC/2007/2/Add.1), Committee Expert Raghavan Vasudevan Pillai said that the report had been issued following the second meeting of the Working Group on 17 and 18 April 2007. There had been no consensus on the Committee's recommendation for a single body on communications. What had been decided was that there should be enhanced exchange of information on communications among treaty bodies; that seminars and workshops should be held to discuss harmonization; that the secretariat should analyse the working methods of communications to see if there was scope for harmonization; and that the secretariat should develop a communications strategy to deal with those procedures.

Committee Expert Linos-Alexander Sicilianos, introducing the report of the sixth Inter-Committee Meeting of human rights treaty bodies, held from 18 to 20 June 2007, said that among recommendations had been approval of the recommendations that the Inter-Committee Meeting should meet twice annually, that it should remain an advisory body, and that the concluding observations of human rights treaty bodies should form part of the basis of the Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights Council.

Presenting the results of the nineteenth Meeting of Chairpersons of Human Rights Treaty Bodies, held following the Inter-Committee Meeting in June, Committee Chairperson Régis de Gouttes said consensus had been achieved on the separate and complementary roles of the treaty bodies and the Universal Periodic Review process, and that the concluding observations of the treaty bodies should form, at least in part, the basis of the Review. The usefulness of holding two Inter-Committee Meetings had also been agreed. While the High Commissioner's proposal for a single unified treaty body had been met with reserve, it had been noted that States parties had shown a clear preference for streamlining the work of the treaty bodies.

The Committee also separately addressed the issue of reporting guidelines, in particular a new procedure for using State parties’ responses to the list of issues submitted by Experts in lieu of periodic reports, which the Committee against Torture had already adopted. That procedure had the obvious benefit of reducing reporting burdens on State parties while at the same time providing a report that was more targeted and focused according to the Committee's wishes. The Committee’s upcoming meeting with States parties was also discussed.

When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Monday, 13 August, it is scheduled to discuss the results of the Working Group on reservations, as well as its own working methods and other organizational matters, in particular revised draft guidelines for submission of Committee-specific documents by States parties.

Statements

RAGHAVAN VASUDEVAN PILLAI, Committee Expert, presenting the report of the Working Group on the Working Methods of Treaty Bodies (HRI/MC/2007/2/Add.1), said that the report had been issued following the second meeting of the Working Group on 17 and 18 April 2007. The report of that meeting had been submitted to the Inter-Committee Meeting held in June. There had been no consensus in that document on the Committee's recommendation for a single body on communications. What had been decided was that there should be enhanced exchange of information on communications among treaty bodies; that seminars and workshops should be held to discuss harmonization; that the secretariat should analyse the working methods of communications to see if there was scope for harmonization; and that the secretariat should develop a communications strategy to deal with these procedures.

There had been general agreement at the meeting that a mechanism to encourage harmonization of working methods was required to ensure a more coherent and integrated approach by all treaty bodies to streamline reporting and assist States parties, Mr. Pillai said. That mechanism could serve as a vehicle for information exchange and could make recommendations on specific areas where a common approach might be desirable, such as practices related to lists of issues, targeted reporting, and formulation of general comments or recommendations. The mechanism could also reflect on the relationship between the treaty bodies and the Human Rights Council, as well as the new gender agency. The mechanism should not duplicate existing structures. The possibility of the Inter-Committee Meeting itself acting as such a mechanism had been discussed, as well as its effectiveness, and whether it should meet more often.

LINOS-ALEXANDER SICILIANOS, Committee Expert, introducing the report of the sixth Inter-Committee Meeting of human rights treaty bodies, held from 18 to 20 June 2007, said that, on the first day of the meeting, they had held a round table in which each Committee representative had made a presentation of their working methods and made recommendations. On behalf of the Committee, he had recommended that the concluding observations of treaty bodies should be the starting point for the Universal Periodic Review. The Committee on the Rights of the Child had been of the view that, in the context of follow-up, country visits and regional seminars should be organized, and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights followed that procedure as well. There had also been suggestions as to how to handle backlog in consideration of reports, including through the use of parallel chambers, as had been done in the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

It was felt that, in the future, there should be two five-day meetings of the Inter-Committee Meeting, with the ex officio participation of the Chairpersons of the treaty bodies, Mr. Sicilianos said. Most of the members had been in favour of the Inter-Committee Meeting remaining as an advisory body. Participants had discussed the final recommendations of the Working Group on reservations, and had held a dialogue with specialized agencies, funds and programmes and other entities of the United Nations system. In that connection, it had been suggested that a focal point be established to liaise with the specialized agencies. In the context of a dialogue with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), participants had highlighted the need for broader representation of NGOs, and the importance of input from NGOs in formulating concluding observations. Among issues discussed in a dialogue with the High Commissioner had been possible ways and means of interaction between the treaty bodies and the Human Rights Council with regard to the Universal Periodic Review process. Other dialogues had been held with the Bureau of the International Coordinating Committee of national human rights institutions; on business and human rights with John Ruggie, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises; and on the topic of statistical information.

Among recommendations to the Meeting of the Chairpersons of Treaty Bodies, Mr. Sicilianos highlighted the decisions taken on the working methods of the Inter-Committee Meeting –essentially, that it should meet twice annually and that it should remain an advisory body – and that the concluding observations of human rights treaty bodies should form part of the basis of the Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights Council.

RÉGIS DE GOUTTES, Committee Chairperson, presented the results of the nineteenth Meeting of Chairpersons of Human Rights Treaty Bodies, held on 21 and 22 June under the Presidency of Philippe Texier. That meeting had gone over much of the same ground that had been covered at the Inter-Committee Meeting. The Chairpersons had also met with the former Chairperson of the Human Rights Council, Luis Alfonso de Alba, who informed them of the results of the Council's fifth session, notably the decisions it had taken on institution-building, and in particular the establishment of the Universal Periodic Review mechanism.

In addition, the Chairpersons had held a meeting with Special Rapporteurs to discuss synergies and complementarities between their work, Mr. de Gouttes continued. The Chairpersons had also held a meeting with States parties, in which 75 States parties had participated. Each representative had presented the working methods of their Committee, along with progress achieved in harmonizing and streamlining working methods.

Consensus had been achieved on the separate and complementary roles of the treaty bodies and the Universal Periodic Review process, Mr. de Gouttes said. The usefulness of holding two Inter-Committee Meetings had also been agreed. In the context of reform, the High Commissioner's proposal for a single unified treaty body had been met with reserve. However, it had been noted that States parties had shown a clear preference for streamlining the work of the treaty bodies.

Finally, participants took note of the move to focus reporting by States parties on replies to the list of questions submitted by Experts, as had been instituted already by the Committee against Torture. Furthermore, the Chairs of the treaty bodies had welcomed the Human Rights Council resolution setting up the Universal Periodic Review, but had noted the many challenges facing it. They had also stressed the complementarities between the Review and the work of the treaty bodies and the need for an ongoing dialogue between the Council and the treaty bodies. Most importantly, Mr. de Gouttes noted, they had held that the concluding observations of the treaty bodies should form, at least in part, the basis of the Review.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CERD07024E