HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL CONCLUDES GENERAL DEBATES ON HUMAN RIGHTS BODIES AND MECHANISMS, AND ON THE UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW

The Human Rights Council this morning concluded its general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms, and its general debate on the Universal Periodic Review.

In the debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms, speakers reminded of the obligation of States to protect the rights of all citizens, especially of the most vulnerable ones, namely children and those affected by conflicts.

Speaking this morning were: Alliance Creative Community Project, International Buddhist Relief Organization, Africa Culture Internationale, and International-Lawyers.org.

Armenia and Azerbaijan spoke in a right of reply.

The first part of the general debate was held on Friday, 16 June, and a summary of the statements can be found here.

The Council then held a general debate on the Universal Periodic Review. In the discussion, speakers stressed the importance of the Universal Periodic Review for the exchange of best practices and constructive dialogue with the Human Rights Council. The Universal Periodic Review had enormous potential to bring real improvements on the ground. They underscored the active role of civil society in the Universal Periodic Review process, and its role in the implementation of the recommendations. They regretted the recent reprisals against persons who cooperated with Universal Periodic Review mechanisms. Some speakers strongly supported the principles of peer review and universality of the Universal Periodic Review, and they strongly opposed efforts in some quarters to politicize and instrumentalise the Universal Periodic Review as that would divert its purpose and weaken its effectiveness.

Speaking were Tunisia on behalf of the African Group, India on behalf of a group of countries, Malta on behalf of the European Union, Georgia, China, Bolivia, Tunisia, Ecuador, South Africa, Slovenia, Portugal, United States, Tanzania on behalf of a group of countries, Maldives, Bahrain, Israel, Seychelles, Armenia, Syria

Also taking the floor were the following non-governmental organizations: Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, Colombian Commission of Jurists, International Catholic Child Bureau, Geneva International Catholic Centre, International Service for Human Rights, Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain, Iraqi Development Organization, Alsalam Foundation, Conseil international pour le soutien à des procès équitables et aux Droits de l’Homme, International-Lawyers.org, United Nations Watch, CIVICUS – World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik, International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Human Rights Law Centre, World Barua Organization, Liberation, UPR Info, Tourner la page, Association des étudiants tamouls de France, Le Pont, Association Bharathi Centre Culturel Franco-Tamoul, Tamil Uzhagam, Association Solidarité Internationale pour l’Afrique, Alliance Creative Community Project, Rencontre Africaine pour la defense des droits de l’homme, Conseil de jeunesse pluriculturelle, and Conectas Direitos Humanos.

The Council will next hear the presentation of the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the occupied Palestinian territory, followed by a general debate on the human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories.

General Debate on Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms

Alliance Creative Community Project asked the international community to demand an independent and international investigation of genocide crimes against the Tamils in Sri Lanka. Women and children had been the first victims of the Sri Lankan security forces. The Government had not fulfilled its promise of an independent investigation of those crimes, which undermined the United Nations itself.

International Buddhist Relief Organization noted that the assertion of the High Commissioner that the Sri Lankan judiciary lacked impartiality and independence was wrong. Not a single judgment of the Sri Lankan courts had been studied in that report. The Sri Lankan judiciary had performed admirably to protect the rights of all Sri Lankans. The people of Sri Lanka had a right to live in their country in freedom and security without foreign interference.

Africa Culture Internationale reminded that States had the obligation to protect the rights of children, who were among the most vulnerable groups given modern insecurities. It strongly agreed with a report of the United Nations that stipulated that any violence against children was unjustifiable. Yet, some countries still had not ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Equal commitment was needed to reduce the level of exploitation and violence against children.

International-Lawyers.org expressed concern at the human rights record of Canadian mining companies in South America, where there had been incidents of deaths and criminalization. The United Nations Working Group on business and human rights had observed that a gap still existed between Canada’s commitments and its provision of human rights. The Government of Canada should investigate human rights abuses involving Canadian extractive industries.

Right of Reply

Armenia, speaking in a right of reply in response to Azerbaijan’s statement last Friday, said that item 5 was about United Nations human rights mechanisms. Azerbaijan had repressive human rights policies. Armenia hosted thousands of Syrian refugees, and because of Armenia’s history, the country understood the effects of conflicts on societies. Azerbaijan had committed ethnic cleansing.

Azerbaijan, speaking in a right of reply in response to Armenia, said Azerbaijan’s statement was indeed on item 5, and it had invited delegations to pay more attention to the human rights record of Armenia. Humanitarian relief actions by States should be exclusively humanitarian in nature; the Armenian delegation was pretending actions taken were exclusively humanitarian, yet only Armenians had been granted refugee status.

General Debate on the Universal Periodic Review

Tunisia, speaking on behalf of the African Group, said the African Group attached great importance to the Universal Periodic Review process, which should be conducted in a constructive, objective and non-politicized manner. It should support the reviewed State in the protection of human rights. The African Group looked forward to supporting the constructive character of the Universal Periodic Review process. The effective implementation of the recommendations depended on adequate technical assistance and capacity building.

India, speaking on behalf of a group of countries, noted that the Universal Periodic Review was a platform for sharing of good practices. The Universal Periodic Review was unique in the universal support it had thus far enjoyed. Further participation was needed before some countries could ask for any fundamental reform. Risks of politicization were connected with those calls for reform. Using the Universal Periodic Review to score political points was unacceptable. The implementation of accepted recommendations was desirable, but the primacy of the national sovereignty and context of reviewed countries had to be respected as well.

Malta, speaking on behalf of the European Union, reiterated the European Union’s strong support for the Universal Periodic Review, which had enormous potential to bring real improvements on the ground. The European Union called on States to implement the accepted recommendations. It stressed the complementarity of the Universal Periodic Review and other United Nations human rights bodies. The European Union underscored the active role of civil society in the Universal Periodic Review process, and its role in the implementation of the recommendations. It regretted the recent reprisals against persons who cooperated with Universal Periodic Review mechanisms.

Georgia reaffirmed Georgia’s support for the Universal Periodic Review mechanism, adding that effective implementation of the recommendations was crucial for having an effect on the ground. Domestically, a mechanism for implementation had been created which fully met the requirements made by the guidelines issued by the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights. Parliaments played an important role in the domestic implementation of international human rights commitments.

China said the third round of the Universal Periodic Review provided a platform for all countries to share experiences in the promotion and protection of human rights. China had been taking part in it actively, to contribute to the common progress of human rights. Objectivity, transparency, non-confrontation and non-politicization were important watchwords for the Universal Periodic Review process. Every country had the right to implement recommendations based on its national circumstances.

Venezuela said the Universal Periodic Review had shown great effectiveness, adding that it was a forum for cooperation and its work guaranteed the universality of the review. The fulfilment of the commitment on human rights and the review of progress and challenges facing countries needed to be addressed with respect for their capacities. Only by involving States positively could the human rights situation be improved. The international community should not allow interference by certain States, which was ineffective.

Tunisia stressed the importance of the Universal Periodic Review for the exchange of best practices and constructive dialogue with the Human Rights Council. It underlined its commitment to the Universal Periodic Review and involving all stakeholders in that process, including civil society. Tunisia was ready to actively participate in implementing all the recommendations made to it, which showcased its commitment to advance all political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights.

Ecuador stated that it was up to date in presenting its reports to the United Nations treaty bodies. It noted that the Universal Periodic Review helped establish national roadmaps for the implementation of human rights standards. Ecuador rejected those who proposed resolutions to demonstrate by their own examples that they applied human rights standards in their own territories. It was crucial that the Universal Periodic Review kept its constructive, objective and non-politicized character.

South Africa attached great importance to the Universal Periodic Review and found great benefit in being given the opportunity to reflect in detail on where it found itself as a country in its human rights journey. Thus, South Africa strongly supported the principles of peer review and the universality of the Universal Periodic Review, and it strongly opposed efforts in some quarters to politicize and instrumentalize the Universal Periodic Review as that would divert its purpose and weaken its effectiveness.

Slovenia said it fully supported the Universal Periodic Review process which was seen as a crucial mechanism contributing to the improvement of human rights. Slovenia had prepared a voluntary mid-term report on the implementation of the recommendations of the second Universal Periodic Review cycle. Since the last review, Slovenia had made several legislative changes in line with the Universal Periodic Review recommendations.

Portugal stressed the importance of the Universal Periodic Review which had proven its value in the promotion and protection of human rights by creating an impact on the ground. Domestic implementation of its recommendations was key. The 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development was also a highly valuable opportunity to better engage in dialogue and cooperation by strengthening mechanisms of coordination, reporting and follow-up.

United States said that the Universal Periodic Review was a unique mechanism to promote accountability for human rights commitments. Although non-governmental organizations did not participate officially during formal Universal Periodic Review working group presentations, their voices were invaluable. The United Nations should encourage civil society’s participation in this process.

Tanzania, speaking also on behalf of Dominica, The Gambia, Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles and Uganda, said those countries’ participation in the session had revealed that issues pertaining to the implementation of human rights could not be ignored by any countries. The Trust Fund for least developed countries and small island developing States called on all developed and willing nations to contribute to the work of the Trust Fund to ensure it fulfilled its objectives.

Maldives said the Universal Periodic Review process was one of the success stories of the Human Rights Council, but noted that small island developing States such as Maldives faced difficulties, with their very small presence in Geneva. Recommendations made to countries such as Maldives should be reasonable and achievable in the development context of the country.

Bahrain said the importance of the Universal Periodic Review stemmed from its role to reinforce cooperation nationally and internationally. The Universal Periodic Review reflected the seriousness of States to protect human rights, and it was hoped that it would continue to function effectively. Bahrain believed that cultural dimensions that could not just be ignored in the Universal Periodic Review.

Israel assigned great importance to the Universal Periodic Review, which if used properly, could be a key vehicle in the promotion of human rights. Israel stressed that one of the strong points of the Universal Periodic Review was its non-selectivity, a principle that the Human Rights Council should uphold. However, many countries which themselves called for non-selectivity willingly took part in the discriminatory discussion under item 7.

Seychelles expressed its strong commitment and support for the Universal Periodic Review, which allowed States to deliberate solutions according to their individual economic, social and cultural contexts. In order to realize the full mandate of the Universal Periodic Review, focus had to be placed on the implementation of recommendations. Seychelles looked forward to engage with relevant stakeholders.

Armenia underlined that the Universal Periodic Review was an important part of the national implementation and promotion of human rights. Armenia kept its focus on the Universal Periodic Review recommendations and welcomed the practice of mid-term reporting by countries. That exercise gave more credibility to the process and kept the international community informed about the implementation of recommendations.
Syria reiterated its commitment to the Universal Periodic Review and praised it as a key mechanism that ensured countries were treated on an equal footing. This mechanism was a good way to promote human rights while promoting good faith between countries, avoiding interferences in internal political actions, double standards and politicization. It was the best way to discuss the human rights situation in the world.

Global Alliance of National Human Rights institutions welcomed the start of the third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review. While States had the priority to ensure follow up and implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations, national human rights institutions had a critical role in supporting States in this process and in monitoring implementation.

Colombian Commission of Jurists was concerned about the insufficient impact that the recommendations of the Universal Periodic Review had had in Colombia. The murders of 80 persons in 2016 and the death of 22 human rights defenders in 2017 proved that the situation was getting worse every day. The increasing number of acts of harassments, including sexual violence and torture, reflected the lack of effective measures to tackle these issues.

International Catholic Child Bureau, in a joint statement, drew the attention of the Human Rights Council to laws in effect in Paraguay. Challenges persisted in their implementation, and there was a lack of coordination among several institutions. Resources needed to be devoted to ensure the effective implementation of recommendations. Even though a telephone hotline had been established, there was no effective referral of cases. Parliamentarians had an essential role to play.

Geneva International Catholic Centre, in a joint statement, expressed concern with regard to the implementation of recommendations made in the framework of the Universal Periodic Review. Member States should ensure the effective implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations through the establishment of a permanent government mechanism to liaise with relevant ministries and consult with civil society.

International Service for Human Rights said lack of implementation of recommendations challenged the Universal Periodic Review’s success. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should continue its work to focus on implementation. Cases of reprisals against those seeking to engage in the Universal Periodic Review continued to be reported, in countries such as Bahrain. An institutionalized reprisals mechanism should be established. Civil society played an essential role in the Universal Periodic Review.

Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain called attention to Bahrain’s reprisals against civil society’s participation in the Universal Periodic Review at all stages of the process. External non-governmental organizations had not been allowed to take part in the process. Immediate action should be taken to protect those who wished to cooperate with the United Nations human rights mechanisms.

Iraqi Development Organization, in a joint statement, drew attention to Yemen’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute and called on the Human Rights Council to begin an independent investigation into human rights violations, especially with respect to health and access to education in Yemen. Member States should redouble their efforts to put an end to the conflict in Yemen and to hold all those responsible for human rights abuses accountable.

Alsalam Foundation, in a joint statement, highlighted the deterioration of the human rights situation in Bahrain, especially the freedom of expression and assembly, the expanded use of the capital punishment, and arbitrary withdrawal of citizenship. It called on the Government of Bahrain to immediately implement all the Universal Periodic Review recommendations.

Conseil International pour le soutien à des procès équitables et aux Droits de L’Homme expressed concerns about the repeated human rights violations in Bahrain. Several requests for visits from Special Procedures were still pending, although acts of torture, summary detentions and arbitrary arrests were happening on a daily basis. The organization called for an investigation on human rights violations in Bahrain. There were also serious concerns about the situation of Shia communities in Kuwait.

International-Lawyers.org was concerned that Israel’s actions since its last Universal Periodic Review were in contravention to recommendations by Member States. Israel persisted in its illegal occupation and denial of Palestinian self-determination and the right of return of Palestinian refugees. Israel continued to refuse to abide by its international obligations and continued to violate Palestinians’ fundamental rights.

United Nations Watch was worried that the Universal Periodic Review would turn into a mere States’ review on the situation of human rights. United Nations Watch recalled that many countries with a low human rights agenda such as Qatar, Sudan and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea had praised Gadhafi’s regime in Libya as a model for the promotion and protection of human rights in the past.


CIVICUS – World Alliance for Citizen Participation said the Universal Periodic Review was becoming increasingly and critically important. In a number of countries, civil society was witnessing severe limitations on its participation in the process, with some countries actively thwarting civil society participation and the integrity of the Universal Periodic Review mechanism. To avoid it becoming an elitist institution required recommendations being mainstreamed throughout all relevant national, regional, and international human rights mechanisms.

Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik said many of the recommendations accepted or partly accepted by Iran were aligned with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. During the third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review, recommendations to States should be more precise, particularly those related to economic, social and cultural rights. States should also make their plan of action public for implementing the recommendations.

International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, in a joint statement, drew the attention of the Human Rights Council to Iraq’s lack of adherence to the accepted Universal Periodic Review recommendations. The country had received an alarmingly high number of recommendations in the second cycle, numbering 242. Freedom of expression continued to be repressed by militias, and the Government of Iraq was urged to start respecting its international commitments.

Human Rights Law Centre drew attention to Australia’s Universal Periodic Review in the context of the rights of indigenous peoples, notably the over-imprisonment of indigenous women who were locked up 20 times more than other women in Australia. Indigenous women were often in custody for short time periods, which could have severe negative consequences on their family life and employment opportunities.

World Barua Organization called attention to the double standards of India regarding its programmes of affirmative programmes, which it claimed were among the best in the world. However, in practice, the Government’s education grants for lower-caste students did not help improve their access to higher education. There was a huge gap in higher-education costs and the actual amount of granted scholarships.

Liberation reminded that the involvement of parliaments in the Universal Periodic Review process should be conducive to a stronger engagement of Governments in the implementation of the accepted recommendations and contribute to the strengthening of the rule of law. It called attention to the specific situation of the members of the Moroccan Parliament elected from the non-self-governing territory of Western Sahara, illegally occupied by Morocco since 1975.

UPR Info welcomed the commitment made in March 2017 by 64 States to encourage broader use of oral updates on Universal Periodic Review implementation in the general debate under item 6. Several treaty bodies had created follow-up procedures by which States were given three to five priority recommendations that they should report on within one year. While such reporting would be voluntary, States would highlight their full-cycle engagement to improve human rights.

Tourner la Page highlighted that Morocco had received several recommendations from States in the Universal Periodic Review encouraging it to abide by its international obligations and recognize the right to self-determination of the people of Western Sahara. Freedom of expression and press were also not guaranteed in Western Sahara. Tourner la Page urged Morocco to put an end to the gross violations of human rights against Western Sahara’s people.

Association des étudiants tamouls de France highlighted that torture was still prevalent in India. Inhuman treatments were committed against human rights defenders and civilians. A bill designed to fight against torture and eradicate its use had been impeded from being adopted. Association des étudiants tamouls de France urged the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to send a Special Rapporteur on torture in India and called on India to ratify the Convention against Torture and its additional protocols.

Le Pont said Sri Lanka was facing the third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review, noting that the country during the second cycle had rejected recommendations related to accountability. It also rejected recommendations aimed at ensuring transparency and non-impunity in the judicial process. Sri Lanka had to end impunity for human rights violations and a strong witness protection act should be created.

Association Bharathi Centre Culturel Franco-Tamoul said Sri Lanka was facing the third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review, but had rejected recommendations relating to impunity in the judicial process. Sri Lanka had not witnessed any major change in reconciliation. Sri Lanka should accede to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Sri Lanka should end impunity and create a strong witness protection act.

Tamil Uzagam said recommendations made to Sri Lanka had included recommendations to establish a register for all missing persons or people in custody. The authorities had failed to address the issue of enforced disappearances. The Government’s ratification of an instrument for the protection of all persons from enforced disappearances was not effectuated.

Association Solidarité Internationale pour l’Afrique reminded that the Government of Sri Lanka had failed to implement the Universal Periodic Review recommendation that it investigate all enforced disappearances. The families of the disappeared feared that the Commission on Disappeared Persons would not serve its purpose. The Association called on the Council to ensure that it fulfilled its mandate.

Alliance Creative Community Project reminded that Sri Lanka had rejected a number of its previous Universal Periodic Review recommendations, while those who had cooperated with the United Nations human rights bodies had been persecuted. Accordingly, Tamils from northern Sri Lanka did not want to cooperate. It urged the Council to prevent the persecution of those in Sri Lanka who wanted to cooperate with the Council.

Rencontre Africaine pour la defense des droits de l’homme reiterated its call for reflection on the elaboration of a universal indicator that would contribute to classifying countries on the basis of the results attained in the domain of human rights. It drew attention to the absence of meaningful implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations in Bahrain. It was equally concerned about the lack of means to implement Universal Periodic Review recommendations in Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Conseil de jeunesse pluriculturelle was concerned about the restrictions enforced on activists, journalists and human rights defender by several national authorities in the Middle East. In several States of this region, notably Palestine, the right to freedom of expression was regularly violated. The criminalization of such legitimate activities constituted gross violations of human rights.

Conectas Direitos Humanos called on Brazilian authorities to make public their internal calendar of work on the Universal Public Review and to include non-governmental organizations in the process. Conectas Direitos Humanos firmly rejected the concept of family defined by the Holy See which only recognized the possibility of marriage between a man and a women.



For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC17/100E