UN-Human rights : the Human Rights Council (HRC) facing the decisive evaluation

After more than four years since its creation by the UN, in 2006, the Human Rights Council (HRC) has now to face the results and decisive evaluation. Meetings are following each other between diplomats, NGO and experts to decide about the process to follow in order to improve the Council functioning. The goal is obviously to achieve further efficiency in serving human rights protection all over the world.
In this consultation process, a new meeting would take place on Tuesday April 20th in Montreux (Switzerland). Some dozens of diplomats and parties involved in human rights field, would make a diagnostic of the HRC weak and strong points.
Opinions are divided between those who think that despite of its young age, the Council has been more present than the former Human Rights Committee. Their contradictors think the opposite. For them, the HRC was lacking anticipation and reactivity in cases of serious human rights violations, such as the Iran case.

In any case, the sceptics are bound to point out the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), this new mechanism set up in March 2006. It certainly allows to evaluate, with the participation of NGO, each State respect of its obligations regarding human rights. But, for them, it remains far from offering the same autonomy as the special procedures based on independent valuations.  Nevertheless, there are many who think that the UPR has the great advantage of being applied to all States, whether small or powerful ones, and no country can fail to its obligations. Up to now, the UPR has been applied to 112  UNO member countries, and all the member States would  have normally undergone this exam before 2012. Thus, for the UPR supporters, human rights protection throughout the world has been improved since the setting up of this mechanism. There are some who do not hesitate to talk about the future beneficial  advent of  the “Human rights globalization”. The practice has, nevertheless, showed the existence of deficiencies in UPR recommendations method. Many voices call for the rationalization of these recommendations procedures, in such a way as to allow a join action between the State, the civil society and HRC to see to the efficient implementation of these recommendations.


Posted on

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *