The UN Human Rights Council was established in 2006 to replace the widely discredited Human Rights Commission. Through the reforms it intends to adopt, the Council aims to better promote and protect human rights around the world. But a year after its existence, activists are saying that the Council has acquired the same flaws that its predecessor had.

One year since the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has been established, human rights activists across the globe still see the same flaws that its predecessor had.

In 2006, the establishment of Human Rights Council—which replaced the ineffectual Human Rights Commission—gave renewed hope for social movements and civil society with its positive reforms such as the Council’s readiness to hold emergency sessions, better links to the General Assembly, and the new Universal Periodic Review, among others.

The Commission was noted for its members’ unwillingness to accept criticism of its human rights practices, non-restriction of gross human rights violators to become members, and the lack of effective action on emerging human rights crises. And the Council, critics say, seems to be heading the same path as that of its predecessor.

Membership in the Council

One of the criticisms that lead to the downfall of the Commission is that States which tolerate human rights violations were not only allowed to become members, but were even given the Commission chairpersonship seat, like Libya in 2003.

Now, with membership reduced from 53 to 47 members states, Egypt recently won a seat to the Council last May 17 despite the appeal of some 40 human rights organisations and a range of regional and international organisations to not elect the country because of alleged “appalling human rights record and consistent failure to cooperate with the UN.”

Prior to the elections, the Nairobi-based African Women’s Development and Communication Network (FEMNET), along with other NGOs, successfully lobbied to oppose the election of the Government of Belarus to the Council, claiming that the country “has in the past consistently failed to cooperate with UN human rights mechanisms and has actually one of the worst human rights records in Europe.”

NGO non-participation

Like the Commission, the Council needs NGO input for its credibility and transparency. However, issues on NGO participation such as how to allocate appropriate speaking time to the increasing number of NGOs, how to integrate grassroots organisations, how to prevent the appearance of government-sponsored NGOs, remain unresolved.  NGOs are presently calling for the Council to provide adequate opportunities for all stakeholders, including NGOs and independent national human rights institutions, to participate in all aspects of its work.

As sessions are continually held in Geneva, a report of the Center for Women’s Global Leadership (CWGL), an organisation which promotes the leadership of women and advances feminist perspectives in policy-making processes in local, national, and international arenas, back in 2005 clearly recommended that the Council should maintain a standing annual session of a period of few weeks. NGOs from the global South will find it difficult to participate at the Human Rights Council because of the high costs involved as the Council intends to meet more than three times a year. This may imply that only the large, well-funded NGOs can largely influence the Council’s proceedings, if NGOs can influence them at all.

“For women’s rights groups,” said the Thailand-based Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD), “there were additional demands for advocacy towards ensuring both the retention of the existing spaces for women’s rights as well as securing integration of women’s human rights within the HRC.”

More piled up work

The June 18, 2007 deadline for the Council to decide on institution-building processes is fast approaching, but reaching a decision seems low on the agenda. With the Council’s first year mostly devoted to establishing a Universal Periodic Review in which the human rights records of all states will be considered, reviewing the system of independent experts which are responsible for reporting on human rights abuses, and developing its methods of work, the Council now faces an increasing backlog of work that deserves its immediate attention.

Peggy Hicks, global advocacy director of the NGO Human Rights Watch, says, “Addressing severe abuses shouldn’t be put on hold while the Human Rights Council finds its way. Dozens of appalling situations the world over demand the Human Rights Council’s immediate attention. Human rights victims and defenders deserve better from the Council—much better.” Human Rights Watch is dedicated to protecting the human rights of people around the world.

The International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), an international NGO serving human rights defenders, has compiled the “20 Critical Issues for a Successful Outcome of the Human Rights Council’s Institution Building Process.” Full text of which is available at
 <http://www.ishr.ch/lca/advocacy_kits/ngo_20_critical_issues_4_june_2007.pdf>.

FYI: UN Human Rights Council

What is the Human Rights Council?
The Human Rights Council is the body created by United Nations Member States to strengthen the promotion and protection of human rights around the world. The Council replaces the UN Commission on Human Rights. The Council had its first session on June 19, 2006, after the Commission was abolished on June 16, 2006. 

What are the main objectives of the Human Rights Council?
The Council is responsible for promoting universal respect for and protection of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all. It aims to address violations, promote human rights assistance and education, help develop international human rights law, review the human rights records of member States, work to prevent abuses, respond to emergencies, and serve as an international forum for dialogue on human rights issues.

What makes the Human Rights Council different from its predecessor?
- The Commission’s members were selected behind closed doors and then “elected” by acclamation. By contrast, the new members of the Council had to compete for seats, and successful candidates needed to win the support of a majority of all member states, in secret ballot. For the first time ever, candidates gave voluntary commitments to promote and uphold human rights, and are expected to meet them or else face possible suspension from the Council.
- The resolution establishing the Council also stresses the importance of ending double-standards, a problem that plagued the past Commission. Thus, the Council will also have a new universal periodic review mechanism, which will offer the Council—and the world—the opportunity to examine the records of all 191 member States of the United Nations. Unlike before, no country can escape scrutiny. This promises to be a very powerful tool for human rights advocates worldwide.
- The Council meets throughout the year, whereas the Commission’s limited six-week schedule severely impaired its effectiveness and flexibility. With this precious additional time, the Council should be able to undertake preventive initiatives to defuse simmering crises, and to respond quickly to emerging human rights crises.

Source: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, <http://www.ohchr.org/english/press/hrc/kit/kit-english.pdf>.

Sources:
“Backlog of Work Facing UN Rights Body” from Human Rights Watch, posted on March 12, 2007, <http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/03/12/sudan15470.htm>.
“Chat session about the Human Rights Council, the new UN human rights body” from Human Rights Education Associates, posted on October 5, 2006, <http://www.hrea.org/alumni/HumanRightsCouncil-chat.php>.
“Human Rights Commission Must Change” from Global Policy Forum, posted on January 16, 2006, <http://www.globalpolicy.org/reform/topics/hrc/2006/0116carter.htm>.
“RP reelected to UN human rights council” from the Philippine Daily Inquirer, posted on May 19, 2007, <http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/breakingnews/view_article.php?article_id=66841>.
“Talking Points on the Millennium Summit Review and Women’s Human Rights” from Center for Women’s Global Leadership, posted on April 26, 2005, <www.un-ngls.org/UNreform/centerforwomensglobaleadership.doc>.
“UN Reform & Rights Council” from the Global Policy Forum, posted on August 21, 2005, <http://www.globalpolicy.org/reform/hrc/0821india.htm>.
“UN Reforms: will it strengthen or weaken advocacy for women’s rights?” from Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development, posted in April 2006, <http://www.apwld.org/vol191-08.htm>.