HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL HOLDS GENERAL DEBATE ON THE UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW

The Human Rights Council in its midday meeting held a general debate on the Universal Periodic Review and concluded a general debate on its subsidiary bodies and mechanisms. At the beginning of the meeting, the Council heard an address by Abdulla Abdullatif Abdulla, Under-Secretary for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bahrain.

Mr. Abdulla presented Bahrain’s voluntary interim report on the implementation of the recommendations received, saying that a special committee to investigate allegations of torture and ill-treatment had been set up and Bahrain criminalized torture. Bahrain had taken major steps in order to build the capacity of its security forces in the area of human rights, including through the setting up of the Code of Conduct for the police and regulating the use of arms. It had enacted the law to set up a national human rights institution in line with the Paris Principles.

In the general debate on the Universal Periodic Review, speakers stressed the importance of the implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations, including through international support and technical assistance, and underlined the importance of cooperation with civil society organizations. Noting that during the two cycles more than 11,000 recommendations had been issued to the States under review, of which 65 per cent were vague or redundant, delegations stressed that the focus now must be on improving the efficiency of the process. The success of the mechanism depended on providing manageable recommendations to States under review and States issuing recommendations should limit themselves to two each. Best practices by States should be identified and shared, such as submitting mid-term reports, elaborating human rights national action plans and establishing follow-up mechanisms.

Italy on behalf of the European Union, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on behalf of a Group of States, Ethiopia on behalf of the African Group, United Kingdom, Morocco, Cuba, China, Maldives, Algeria, India, Iran, Republic of Moldova, Council of Europe and Tunisia took the floor.

Equality and Human Rights Commission, UPR-Info, Korea Centre for United Nations Human Rights Policy (joint statement), Human Rights Law Centre, International Service for Human Rights, Save the Children International, International Catholic Child Bureau, Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain, Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik, United Nations Watch, Maarij Foundation for Peace and Development, Rencontre Africaine pour la défense des droits de l’homme, Amnesty International, and Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture spoke in the general debate.

During the general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms, speakers said that the right to peace was an essential precondition for economic and social progress and the exercise of all human rights and it would not be realized without addressing the underlying reasons that continued to breed wars, conflict and insecurity in many parts of the world. It was essential that the international community committed to further addressing international crises, which threatened global peace and security. The Secretary-General’s grim report on reprisals signalled once more the urgent need for Member States to step up a coordinated response to these acts, delegations said and stressed the fundamental importance of a coordinated approach to combating reprisals. The Human Rights Council should finally appoint a focal point on this issue and guarantee the freedom of civil society when conducting its important work and in cooperating with the Council. Some speakers remained concerned about the politicization and lobbying by States in the selection of mandate holders, urging that such practices be avoided in order to promote genuine dialogue and discussion among States.

Speaking in the general debate were Algeria, Pakistan, Botswana, India, United Kingdom, Morocco, Sri Lanka, Council of Europe, Hungary, Angola, Bolivia, Switzerland, El Salvador, and Norway.

The following national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations also took the floor: Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, International Service for Human Rights, American for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, International Buddhist Relief Organization, Alsalam Foundation, Liberation, Mbororo Social and Cultural Development Association, Il Cenacolo, United Nations Watch, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism, World Barua Organization, CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Society Studies Centre, World Muslim Congress, Maarij Foundation for Peace and Development, Rencontre Africaine pour la défense des droits de l’homme, Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture, Al Khoi Foundation, International Buddhist Foundation, International Lesbian and Gays Association, Association of World Citizens, Centre for Human Rights and Peace Advocacy, Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik, and World Association for the School as an Instrument of Peace.

The Council heard a presentation from the Working Group on the draft Declaration on the Right to Peace and started its general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms on 19 September, and a summary can be found here.

Malaysia spoke in right of reply to statements made during the general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms.

The Council is holding a full day of meetings today. At 3 p.m., it will hear the presentation of the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories, and hold a general debate on the subject. At 5 p.m., it will meet behind closed doors to take up its communications procedure.

Statement by the Under-Secretary for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bahrain

ABDULLA ABDULLATIF ABDULLA, Under-Secretary for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bahrain, said that in line with Bahrain’s democratic reforms and the commitment to human rights, he was presenting a voluntary report on the implementation of the recommendations received two years ago at its Universal Periodic Review. Bahrain had received 176 recommendations of which it had totally accepted 145, partially accepted 13 and rejected 18. The High Coordination Committee for Human Rights was in charge of coordinating the implementation of the recommendations. With regard to the withdrawal of the reservations of Bahrain on Articles 15 and 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, a Commission had been established to study the impact on the Law of the Family. Bahrain had set up a special committee to investigate allegations of torture and ill-treatment and torture had been criminalized in the criminal code. A national law on the education of persons with disabilities had been adopted, and Bahrain had taken major steps to build the capacity of its security forces in the area of human rights, including through the setting of the Code of Conduct for the police and regulating the use of arms. Bahrain had fully implemented 19 out of 26 recommendations by the Commission of Inquiry and had enacted the law to set up a national human rights institution in line with the Paris Principles. A number of laws had been amended to bring domestic laws in line with the international norms and standards.

Documentation

The Council has before it a note by the Secretariat on the report of the twenty-first annual meeting of special rapporteurs/representatives, independent experts and chairpersons of working groups of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/27/61)

General Debate on Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms

Algeria said that the right to peace was an essential precondition for economic and social progress and the exercise of all human rights. It was necessary for individual and collective rights in every nation. Peace had to be sustainable and could not be achieved without eliminating challenges of poverty, inequality, eradication of racism, xenophobia and intolerance, among others, and without tolerance between all civilizations and cultures. Focus had to be placed on the need to pursue the threat of terrorism.

Pakistan said that it attached great importance to peoples’ right to peace, which lay at the very heart of the creation of the United Nations. The right to peace could not be realized without addressing the underlying reasons that continued to breed wars, conflict and insecurity in many parts of the world. Around the world many continued to suffer under the yolk of occupation. Unfortunately, South Asia and the Middle East were the direct witnesses of the consequences.

Botswana fully agreed that civil society was an indispensable partner of the United Nations system. The work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Council could never be achieved without the further efforts of civil society. Many reports were received of reprisals following cooperation with the United Nations. Such acts of reprisals were unacceptable under any circumstances as they continued to undermine the functions of the United Nations system as a whole and required unanimous condemnation.

India addressed the issue of the selection of United Nations mandate holders, noting the lack of cultural, geographic and educational diversity of mandate holders. There was an overwhelming representation of lawyers, which reinforced a legalistic approach to the issues discussed. India remained concerned by the politicization and lobbying by States in the selection of mandate holders, urging that such practices be avoided in order to promote genuine dialogue and discussion among States.

United Kingdom supported that all persons be allowed to freely communicate within the United Nations system, and condemned intimidations and reprisals. The United Kingdom called upon States to stop intimidating any individuals and civil society, stressing that no impunity should be tolerated. The United Kingdom also noted that the United Nations Economic and Social Council needed to assess civil society organizations in a fair and impartial manner.

Morocco said that the right to peace was closely linked to good neighbourliness. Peace also depended on the demilitarization of refugee camps, and the respect of refugees as dignified human beings. Peace was the fruit of States’ ability to negotiate their differences in a peaceful manner. To that end, Morocco underlined the importance of self-determination in the securing of peace and security at the regional and international levels, adding that it depended on the promotion of dialogue and openness among States.

Sri Lanka stressed that the protection of the people’s right to peace was a fundamental obligation of States, and had to go hand in hand with the principles of the United Nations Charter, including the principle of a State’s sovereignty and integrity.

Council of Europe said that it had recently adopted a convention to prevent violence against women, protect the victims and pursue the perpetrators. The European Court of Human Rights adopted such an approach, and had specified that the protection of women had to be immediate and not subjected to the adoption of legislative measures.

Hungary welcomed the report of the Secretary-General and shared his concern about acts of reprisal. Hungary agreed that a coordinated approach to combatting reprisals was fundamental. Hungary regretted that the United Nations General Assembly deferred action on the Human Rights Council resolution appointing a United Nations Focal Point to ensure such a coordinated approach. Civil society organizations played an essential part in the activities of the United Nations, and had to be protected in their activities.

Angola recognized peace as the primary precondition for social well-being, development and progress, and enjoying of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Angola strongly condemned all practices that disturbed international peace and security. It was essential that the international community commit to further addressing international crises, which threatened global peace and security. Upholding peace was an ongoing challenge for the international community and could not be dissociated from the full enjoyment of human rights.

Bolivia said that it was a peaceful State which promoted a culture of peace and of the right to peace. It worked to promote cooperation between peoples of the region and throughout the world. The right to peace was an important issue and a sine qua none prerequisite for all rights, including the right to life. It was necessary to continue as States to work with the Working Group on the draft Declaration on the Right to Peace in order to bring its task to the best possible conclusion.

Switzerland shared the concerns as regarded forms of intimidation and reprisals against civil society representatives that exercised their basic rights and provided first-hand information. Protecting these stakeholders had to be a priority in absolute terms. Their participation was essential for the work of the Council. All forms of intimidation and reprisals were condemned. It encouraged all States to ensure that Resolution 24/24 was fully implemented.

El Salvador endorsed the conclusions and recommendations submitted by the Working Group on the draft Declaration on the Right to Peace. The right to peace was of the utmost importance and El Salvador welcomed the decision of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States in which it spelled out its rejection of war and preference for solutions through peaceful means. El Salvador would continue to actively work and contribute to the tasks of the Working Group.

Norway was deeply concerned by the many incidents of reprisals against individuals and organizations cooperating or seeking to cooperate with the United Nations human rights mechanisms. The situation was clearly outlined in the Secretary-General’s report, which highlighted several cases of reprisals around the world. Cases of reprisals took different forms. Cooperating with the United Nations mechanisms could indeed be dangerous, and it was appalling that this was still the case in many instances.

Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations in a joint statement with World Young Women’s Christian Association; World Student Christian Association; and International Alliance of Women was very concerned by the issue of reprisals. The Council was called upon to finally appoint a focal point on this issue, and to guarantee the freedom of civil society when conducting its important work and in cooperating with the Council.

Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII; on behalf of severals NGOs¹, commended the efforts of the Chair of the Working Group on the draft Declaration on the Right to Peace to build consensus among Member States and to root the new draft texts on the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter and the International Bill of Human Rights. A draft Declaration on the Right to Peace should build a new milestone in the existing international legal framework to protect all rights.

International Service for Human Rights said that the Secretary-General’s report on reprisals made evident the consistent failure by some States to respond to allegations of reprisals. Impunity remained the norm and fuelled recurrence. The Secretary-General documented reprisals against activists from Sri Lanka, including those cooperating with the inquiry by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It also documented cases of reprisals against activists from Viet Nam.

Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain in a joint statement said that Bahrain was obligated to provide reports to the United Nations Human Rights Committee and Committee Against Torture, but had failed to do so. Human rights violations, including torture, were widespread in Bahrain. Bahrain was called upon to provide reports to those treaty bodies and to invite the Special Rapporteur on torture to visit the country.

Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative was alarmed that many of the cases of reprisals referred to in the Secretary-General’s report took place in Commonwealth countries, including Pakistan, Kenya, Nigeria and Sri Lanka. Civil society participation was crucial to the work of the Council, but could not be ensured if the work of civil society was not protected. It called on all States to endorse the Secretary-General’s recommendations to collectively denounce reprisals, defend the right to cooperate with the United Nations and ensure that the General Assembly was supported to implement Council resolution 24/24.

International Buddhist Relief Organization said that it was unfortunate that the issue of caste-based discrimination was not included in the work of the Advisory Committee of the Human Rights Council.

Alsalam Foundation highlighted the Saudi Government’s actions as regarded recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur on violence against women after the mandate’s visit to the country in 2008. It asked Saudi Arabia to revisit the report of the Special Rapporteur and implement all of the recommendations of the mandate, including abolishing the kafala system.

Liberation brought to attention the grim human rights situation in Cameroon. Although the law provided for freedom of assembly, this was restricted in practice. Officials routinely asserted that the law authorized the Government to grant or deny the right for peaceful assembly. Civil society organizations were stopped from having press conferences where criticism was expected.

Mbororo Social and Cultural Development Association said that the indigenous people of India, the Adivasis, were classified as ‘scheduled tribes’ by the Indian Constitution, although this definition differed from state to state. They had suffered greatly in India as the nation aspired to become a regional power, enduring discrimination, prejudice and displacement.

Il Cenacolo said that the right to peace was a fundamental human right, and its realisation relied on the realisation of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, the protection of human rights defenders and the rights of migrants. The right to peace also relied on the protection of the right of ethnic and religious minorities and on States combatting racism and xenophobia.

United Nations Watch said the founding principle of this Council was to protect victims worldwide. Acts of reprisals were unacceptable and reprehensible. Algeria, China, Pakistan, Viet Nam, United Arab Emirates and Cuba, all members of the Council, had perpetrated reprisals and harassment against persons who collaborated with the United Nations human rights mechanisms, including the Human Rights Council.

Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom welcomed the drafting of a United Nations Declaration on Right to Peace. It regretted that topics that contributed to peace, such as disarmament, social justice and gender equality were left out of the draft declaration. Women and girls’ empowerment and women’s participation in peace processes were crucial elements for the realisation of the right to peace. Militarism contributed to social inequalities by promoting a culture of war and patriarchism.

International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism said that it had to be assumed that the text of the draft Declaration on the Right to Peace should signify an added value as compared with the right to life in peace, already proclaimed some 30 years ago by the General Assembly, and clearly focus on the right to peace as an emerging right with its various dimensions of promotion and protection.

World Barua Organization said that in accordance with the Advisory Committee declaration on the right to peace, every victim of human rights violations had the right to the restoration of rights and redress of grievances. The United Nations mechanisms were urged to impress upon the Bangladesh Government to honour the right to peace of its people.

CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation said the Secretary-General’s grim report on reprisals signalled once more the urgent need for Member States to step up a coordinated response to these acts. In follow-up to the Secretary-General’s report on cases in Viet Nam, it had received the names of seven persons who were threatened, prevented from travel, and otherwise intimidated because they had or wished to participate in the country’s Universal Periodic Review.

Society Studies Centre was deeply concerned about violations of the basic human right to development by persistent coercive unilateral measures by some countries in violation of international law. Such measures had to be repealed because they harmed people more than governments. The treaty bodies should consider the negative impact of such sanctions in the consideration of human rights situations.

World Muslim Congress said that much more needed to be done to address the issue of reprisals. It was concerned about violations against human rights defenders in Kashmir, including violence, torture and passport confiscations. It called on the United Nations mechanisms to consider country visits to India. The appointment of a Focal Point to deal with acts of reprisals was essential.

Maarij Foundation for Peace and Development in a joint statement was concerned about the situation in Iraq and Syria, as well as other conflicts throughout the world that led to displacement and vulnerability for citizens. The resolution on the right to peace was therefore welcomed, and should include references to social integration, development and transitional justice.

Rencontre Africaine pour la défense des droits de l’homme said that the right to peace was yearned for by all peoples and cultures, adding that many Heads of State did not want to respect that right. The right to peace moved at a snail’s pace if at all and peace did not exist in many countries, including South Sudan and Sri Lanka.

Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture said today the Arab world, except Tunis, was in turmoil and crises of various degrees. It was time for the Human Rights Council to voice strongly its support to the aspirations of the Arab people and ensure peaceful settlement of conflicts and the fulfilment of their aspiration for freedom, dignity, decent living and human rights.

Al Khoi Foundation was concerned that the Human Rights Council was unable to provide protection and support to certain religious and ethnic groups who suffered and could not have a voice in the United Nations. One such group was the Kurds, who suffered at the hands of extreme groups, and to whom the United Nations did not extend recognition or protection.

International Buddhist Foundation was concerned that some countries were reluctant to include reference to terrorism in the draft resolution on the right to peace to be adopted by the Council. The right to peace had to be the response to threats to the human life by terrorism. This Council and civil society organizations had to do more for the realisation of the right to peace.

International Lesbian and Gay Association said that intersex people faced violence and discrimination everywhere. Medically unnecessary interventions were being carried out without informed consent to align intersex people’s bodies with gender standards. The Special Rapporteur on torture had expressed concerns about this practice. Intersex athletes were also victims of rights violations.

Association of World Citizens was concerned that the emblem of Switzerland referred to Christianity, although Switzerland claimed to be a secular country. Muslims were playing a great role in the development of the Swiss society. The State had to be reminded about its limits to ensure the rights of everyone.

Centre for Human Rights and Peace Advocacy spoke about the slum-dwellers in India who lived in appalling conditions and said that it was regrettable that the growing economic giant India was unable to re-distribute the wealth to the most marginalized groups in the society.

Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik said that the acts of reprisals were not only limited to victims of human rights violations but to their families, friends and lawyers. Such was the case in Iran. Three individuals had been tortured and executed for submitting a list of executed persons to the Special Rapporteur. States should fulfil their commitments to all citizens, and especially those deprived of liberty.

World Association for the School as an Instrument of Peace said that Cambodia had benefitted from the Paris Peace Agreement in 1991 but many elections since then had been rigged. This was because an independent electoral system did not exist in the country. The false elections in Cambodia never represented the wishes of its people.

Right of Reply

Malaysia, speaking in a right of reply in response to allegations made concerning alleged reprisals, said that the person referred to had acted against the national law when he failed to register his organization. Actions taken by the Government did not constitute a form of harassment or reprisal and were fully compliant with international law, including legitimate limitations on the right to freedom of expression.

General Debate on the Universal Periodic Review

Italy, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the Universal Periodic Review was a truly universal mechanism. The European Union stressed the importance of the implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations, including through international support and technical assistance. The European Union was pleased that national human rights institutions were in a position to speak out within the Human Rights Council. Civil society organizations played a key role in the Universal Periodic Review process, and any acts of reprisals or harassment against them should be condemned.

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, speaking on behalf of a group of States, expressed its commitment to the Universal Periodic Review mechanism and noted with appreciation that 49 countries had presented a mid-term report on the implementation of recommendations. All countries were encouraged to submit mid-term reports on the implementation of recommendations. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia also underlined the importance of cooperation with civil society organizations, and welcomed the efforts of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to assist United Nations Member States in the implementation of recommendations.

Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the African Group, commended the African States which had engaged with the Universal Periodic Review mechanism and said that the success of this mechanism depended on providing manageable recommendations to the States under review. The capacity building and technical assistance in the Human Rights Council should be based on consultation and consent of the State concerned and be provided upon the request of that State.

United Kingdom said that at the adoption of its 2012 Universal Periodic Review in the Council, the United Kingdom had committed to provide a mid-term report on all the recommendations received and to follow up on areas not included in the recommendations but which civil society organizations felt strongly about. Conducting a mid-term report was an example of best practice and the United Kingdom encouraged other countries to do the same.

Morocco said that during the two cycles of the Universal Periodic Review, more than 11,000 recommendations had been issued to the States under review. Sixty-five per cent of those recommendations had been vague or redundant and in order to improve the effectiveness of this mechanism, it was essential to improve the process of drafting of recommendations and make them more operational. States making the recommendations should limit themselves to two each.

Cuba said that the Universal Periodic Review had been established to address the politicization of the Commission of Human Rights. Politicization, double standards and selectivity unfortunately remained, as developed countries and powerful non-governmental organizations supported by them sought to create country-specific mandates.

China said the principles of transparency, equality, non-selectivity and non-politicization had to be respected. It was important to encourage through constructive dialogue the reviewed countries and provide developing countries with technical assistance. China hoped that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights would continue taking views of different countries into account.

Maldives said that the Universal Periodic Review was a means not to name and shame but to work constructively for the improvement of human rights. Civil society organizations sometimes lacked the guidance and resources to participate in the process constructively. Maldives recognised the importance of the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and underlined the importance of providing technical assistance to States.

Algeria said the Universal Periodic Review was one of the Human Rights Council’s greatest success stories, but noted the need to respect the rules on institution building with regard to that mechanism. Algeria emphasized that the provision of technical assistance by the Council and the Office of the High Commissioner must take into account the needs of States in order to have tangible results in the field.

India said the Universal Periodic Review had proved to be an effective tool to steadily and tangibly improve human rights in each Member State of the United Nations. India especially valued the contribution of the Board of Trustees in administering the voluntary fund for technical assistance that helped countries implement the recommendations they had accepted.

Iran briefed the Council on how it was implementing the recommendations it accepted from its second Universal Periodic Review cycle, coordinated by the High Council for Human Rights of the Judiciary via a multi-stakeholder drafting committee, which Iran noted had consulted with and taken on board the views of civil society representatives. Iran was ready to have a positive and constructive dialogue with other countries.

Republic of Moldova reiterated the importance it attached to the Universal Periodic Review mechanism and encouraged all States to continue their commitment through all phases of the process. The open participation of civil society organizations at the national level was important. As the process was in its second cycle, the focus should be on efficiency and to that effect best practices by States should be identified and shared, such as mid-term reports, elaboration of human rights national action plans and the establishment of the follow-up mechanism.

Council of Europe said that the Universal Periodic Review was a very useful process and the use of the Council of Europe documentation could help Governments, civil society organizations and national human rights institutions to compare and identify recommendations they received. Further, that documentation could be used to identify synergies and develop cooperation.

Tunisia today presented its mid-term report prepared in cooperation with national stakeholders, which provided the replies and information on the measures adopted to implement the recommendations received. The national plan of action had been adopted to guide the implementation of recommendations received through the Universal Periodic Review process and from other human rights treaty bodies.

Equality and Human Rights Commission, the national human rights institution of the United Kingdom, welcomed steps taken by the British Government to address gender violence and discrimination as well as racism and hate crime. It encouraged the United Kingdom to improve the collection and analysis of data and human rights indicators. It regretted that the Government had reduced its financial support to the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which may reduce its capacity to work in compliance with the Paris Principles.

UPR-Info said that data showed that recommendations made during the Universal Periodic Review had had an impact on the human rights situation on the ground. A study by UPR-Info would soon be released to assist States’ efforts in the implementation of recommendations.

Korea Centre for United Nations Human Rights Policy in a joint statement said the lack of initiatives by governments was the main reason for the lack of implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations. The Council should adopt a call on States to translate recommendations in local languages, establish implementation monitoring bodies, submit mid-term reports, and include the judiciary and national human rights institutions.

Human Rights Law Centre said that indigenous women were the fastest prison demographic in Australia and referred to the case of a 22 year-old indigenous woman who had died in custody. Indigenous deaths in custody occurred on average about once every month and remained a serious ongoing concern.

International Service for Human Rights highlighted the importance that States made, accepted, and implemented recommendations related to human rights defenders. Their protection and the protection of their space was primordial. The Universal Periodic Review could give defenders visibility and contribute to their protection.

Save the Children International welcomed the United Kingdom’s decision to submit its mid-term report, and steps taken to address some of the Universal Periodic Review recommendations. However, it regretted that the report failed to offer critical assessment as to how far recommendations in relation to children’s rights had been implemented.

International Catholic Child Bureau welcomed Togo’s presentation of its mid-term report and encouraged it to continue implementing recommendations, but raised concern about the recommendation regarding legal aid in the judicial system. On other issues, clear progress had been made. Togo must focus on improving hygiene, health and protection in places of deprivation of liberty, and it must ensure that children were only detained for a minimum period.

Americans for Democracy and Human Rights in Bahrain said Bahrain had failed to effectively implement the vast majority of the 158 recommendations made in its 2012 Universal Periodic Review. The organization highlighted a recommendation on the ability of Bahraini mothers to pass on their citizenship. It expressed concern over the new laws which expanded Bahrain’s terrorism laws to greatly restrict free speech, press, association and assembly as well as civil society space.

Organization for Defending Victims of Violence said there was still a very big gap between speaking about the observation of human rights and actually practising it. It asked the Council to put into practice the recommendations of the Commissions of Inquiry on Gaza and Iraq. If the recommending countries could themselves be role models in observing human rights at the international level, the reputations of both the Universal Periodic Review and the Human Rights Council would increase.

Verein Sudwind Entwicklungspolitik was concerned that at the two Universal Periodic Review cycles many countries did not accept a wide range of recommendations or that they did not implement the accepted ones. States should articulate their recommendations specifically to avoid the use of wide and vague concepts so that implementation of recommendations could be monitored.

United Nations Watch continued to believe in the potential of the Universal Periodic Review and was undertaking a study into its effectiveness which showed that the process carved a new space for engagement between States and civil society. The study also identified a number of negative points, including the misuse of the process to justify not holding perpetrators of human rights violations accountable.

Maarij Foundation for Peace and Development noticed the progress made in the implementation of the Universal Periodic Review recommendations in Bahrain and called on the Government to adopt the amendments to the Family Code, ensure freedom of the press and media, and guarantee the freedom of religion.

Rencontre Africaine pour la Defense des Droits de l’Homme had noted that the conditions for implementation of recommendations from the first cycle had not yet been met in a large number of countries that had been reviewed. Donor States were invited to renew their commitment to render operational the Voluntary Fund for Technical Cooperation.

Amnesty International was deeply concerned at the ongoing trend of intimidation and reprisals against those who engaged with United Nations human rights mechanisms, including the University Periodic Review. No one should face sanction for engaging with or seeking to engage with United Nations human rights mechanisms.

Khiam Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture in a joint statement said that the Under-Secretary for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bahrain had spoken today and had listed the implementation of Universal Periodic Review recommendations at 90 per cent. The Government always made this claim but in fact it had not implemented these recommendations, but committed human rights violations on a systematic scale.

^__________
1Joint statement: International Fellowship of Reconciliation; Company of the Daughters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul; International Institute of Mary Our Help of the Salesians of Don Bosco; International Volunteerism Organization for Women; Education and Development – VIDES; and Pax Romana.

For use of the information media; not an official record

HRC14/131E