HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE OPENS ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTIETH SESSION

The Human Rights Committee this morning opened its one hundred and twentieth session at the Palais Wilson in Geneva, hearing an address by Ibrahim Salama, Chief of the Human Rights Treaties Division at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Committee adopted the agenda of the session and heard a presentation of the report of the Working Group on Communications.

In his opening remarks, Mr. Salama reminded of the failure of many States to respect their human rights obligations, including their obligation to report to the Human Rights Committee, referring to the unacceptable number of overdue reports to the treaty bodies, which currently stood at 34 per cent. Mr. Salama encouraged Committee Members to meet with a representative from the capacity-building team of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights during the session to consider how they could work more closely with field colleagues to address the problem.

In the ensuing discussion, Committee Experts fully shared the concern about late reporting by States, noting that one obstacle had to do with the Secretariat’s limited capacity to prepare the list of issues. They welcomed the information about the capacity-building programme offered to States, as well as the potential for the Committee to harmonize practices with other treaty bodies in the review process of States. Experts sought details on how meetings between treaty bodies would be facilitated in the future.

Presenting the report of the Working Group on Communications, Olivier de Frouville, Chairman of the Working Group on Communications, briefed the Committee about the Working Group’s deliberations on 26 individual communications and four repetitive cases. Mr. de Frouville drew attention to the lack of translation into French, even when the rapporteur was Francophone. The principle of multilingualism seemed to have been forgotten, which harmed the effectiveness of the United Nations and of the Human Rights Committee.

During the session, the Committee will consider the situation in Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Honduras, Mongolia, Swaziland, Madagascar and Pakistan.

The next public meeting of the Committee will be at 3 p.m. this afternoon when it will start to consider the fourth periodic report of Switzerland (CCPR/C/CHE/4).

Opening Statement

IBRAHIM SALAMA, Chief of the Human Rights Treaties Division at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, reminded of the failure of many States to respect their human rights obligations, including their obligation to report to the Human Rights Committee, referring to the unacceptable number of overdue reports to the treaty bodies, which currently stood at 34 per cent. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was the treaty with the fourth highest number of States not complying with their reporting requirements in a timely manner, with 36 per cent of initial reports overdue. The Committee’s steps to reinvigorate its procedure and to consider States’ implementation of the Covenant in the absence of a report had borne fruit. Since the initiation of that procedure in March 2016, with respect to overdue initial reports from twelve States, two reports had been submitted to the Committee; eight States were actively drafting their reports; and two States were being supported by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Office’s treaty body capacity-building programme had been instrumental in encouraging States to produce overdue reports to the Committee. The Office was actively involved in encouraging five States to produce their reports. It had organized training-of-trainers workshops that had focused on treaty body reporting and training methodologies for State officials. With respect to Swaziland, technical cooperation and advice had been provided on replying to the list of issues, in sending a high-level delegation and in organizing a mock session. Mr. Salama encouraged Committee Members to meet with a representative from the capacity-building team during the session to consider how they could work more closely with field colleagues in that regard. He stressed that the Office and the Committee had to work hand in hand.

Other treaty bodies were important collaborators on the issue of non-reporting States. The Chairpersons would continue to reflect on that issue, but only with collective wisdom of all members could the goal of full compliance be achieved. Therefore, Mr. Salama encouraged the Committee Members to consider that issue together with other treaty bodies in formal and informal meetings. The procedures of the Human Rights Council, including special procedures and the Universal Periodic Review, which also experienced lack of cooperation with States, were also likely partners in the struggle for compliance. The Committee’s references in its concluding observations to States refusing access to special procedures or to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights might be a way of encouraging States to step up their cooperation. Treaty body procedures and technical cooperation were ineffective if States themselves were not willing to cooperate in the reporting process. Reporting was a legal obligation of States and failure to report by some affected all. This could be an item for consideration at the Committee’s biannual meeting with States parties during the current session. It would also be important to feed into the discussion on the 2020 treaty body strengthening review, Mr. Salama suggested. He expressed hope that some of the suggestions would urge the Committee Members to come together and work with the Office to improve the reporting gap.

Mr. Salama also referred to the consideration by the General Assembly at its forthcoming session of the request transmitted by the Secretary-General in his report of 2016 on the strengthening of the human rights treaty body system for additional meeting time to enable treaty bodies, especially the Human Rights Committee, to address the significant increase of incoming individual communications. Mr. Salama informed that the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions would soon provide its recommendations to the Fifth Committee of the General Assembly.

Questions by Experts

An Expert fully shared the concern about late reporting by States, noting that one obstacle had to do with the Secretariat’s limited capacity to prepare the list of issues. As part of the package, was the increase of the Secretariat’s capacity in that respect foreseen?

Another Expert welcomed the information about the capacity-building programme offered to States, as well as the potential for the Committee to harmonize practices with other Treaty Bodies in the review process of States.

One Expert thanked Mr. Salama for having provided direction to the Human Rights Committee in harmonizing its work. Would the meetings between treaty bodies to facilitate the harmonization of procedures be held and would they continue in the future?

Replies

IBRAHIM SALAMA, Chief of the Human Rights Treaties Division at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and Representative of the Secretary-General, explained that there was no schedule for meetings between treaty bodies. However, it was a very interesting idea. Instead of detailed solutions, there would be an elaboration of a general context to facilitate such meetings, which were important because States benefited from them. The problem was the lack of additional means to organize such meetings. Various proposals would be listed, including those from academic institutions. Mr. Salama encouraged the Committee Experts to submit their own proposals, and he called on the Committee Members to try and ensure to have proposals before 2019. The issue of harmonization was raised at meetings with States parties, and there was a critical tone that harmonization had not gone far enough. One of the major problems was the lack of time to expand the effort. It was necessary to look at the parameters for 2020 that addressed the problem in an implementable way. The question was how to achieve it with the current resources. The problem had to occur first in order to find a solution, Mr. Salama concluded.

Follow-up Questions by Experts

An Expert raised the issue of States’ criticism of the lack of adequate harmonization. Which States had complained and what issues were insufficiently harmonized on?

Reply

IBRAHIM SALAMA, Chief of the Human Rights Treaties Division at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and Representative of the Secretary-General, suggested that the Committee discuss that question in a closed meeting with States.

YUJI IWASAWA, Chairman of the Committee, thanked Mr. Salama for his presentation, expressing hope that the Committee would have a fruitful session. He then moved to the agenda of the session, which the Committee adopted.

Presentation of the Report of the Working Group on Communications

OLIVIER DE FROUVILLE, Chairman of the Working Group on Communications, briefed the Committee about the Working Group’s deliberations on 26 individual communications and four repetitive cases. Mr. de Frouville drew attention to the lack of translation, with only French and English translation available. A large number of cases had not been translated into French, even when the rapporteur was Francophone. Mr. de Frouville noted that the principle of multilingualism seemed to have been forgotten, which harmed the effectiveness of the United Nations and of the Human Rights Committee.

Another member of the Working Group insisted that the lack of translation had set back the work of the Working Group, especially when it came to the translation of communications for rapporteurs. The Group had accepted that situation out of discipline and in order to facilitate the Committee’s work. However, in the future, rapporteurs had to be able to work in their native language or the language of their choice. Radical measures should be taken to ensure that such situations did not occur in the future.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CT17.017E