HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE DISCUSSES ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

The Human Rights Committee this afternoon discussed a document drawn up by its Experts Christine Chanet and Ruth Wedgwood entitled “preliminary thoughts on the Committee’s relationship with the Human Rights Council”. The aim of the document was to draw the Committee’s attention to the Universal Periodic Review and to how the Committee should position itself in relation to it.

As one of the positive aspects of the Universal Periodic Review, Ms. Chanet mentioned the fact that the Universal Periodic Review process helped to draw broader attention to treaty body recommendations, as well as to the reports from special rapporteurs, the reports from State parties and the information provided by non governmental organizations and national human rights institutions. Publicity was given to the debates, in particular, through live and archived webcasting of the Universal Periodic Review sessions. She also noted the possibility that critical questions asked by some States could be used to publicly commit those States to the same norm.

Ms. Chanet also mentioned negative aspects of the Universal Periodic Review process, inter alia, the possibility afforded to the States under examination to publicly reject the recommendations of the Working Group of the Universal Periodic Review, even though the obligations were already binding as a matter of treaty law. She drew special attention to the fact that such rejections of the Universal Periodic Review recommendations might be seen to imply the rejection of the treaty bodies’ recommendations on the basis of which the Universal Periodic Review recommendations were formulated. Ms. Chanet and Ms. Wedgwood also regretted the limited involvement of non governmental organizations in the Universal Periodic Review and the inherent politicization of the process.

As to recommendations, Ms. Chanet said that treaty bodies should specify which concerns and recommendations they deemed to constitute priorities, following the consideration of each State Party report, so as to guide the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights compilations and the Universal Periodic Review process. Also, non governmental organizations should be encouraged to closely follow the Universal Periodic Review process. Furthermore, States should be reminded by the Chairperson of the Human Rights Council, as well as by the High Commissioner, that the political dialogue of the Universal Periodic Review did not release them from their legal obligations under the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights and other human rights treaties.

Several Experts expressed their views regarding the report presented by Ms. Chanet and Ms. Wedgwood.

At its next public meeting of the Committee on Wednesday, 29 October 2008 at 11 a. m., the Committee will review the progress report of its Special Rapporteur for follow-up to concluding observations.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CT08023E