COMMITTEE ON PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF MIGRANTS DISCUSSES TREATY BODY REFORM

The Committee on the Protection of Migrant Workers continued its discussion on treaty body reform this afternoon, with a view to taking a position on proposals set out in presentations before them at the end of their morning meeting. At the end of its morning meeting, the Committee had heard a presentation by Jane Connors of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on treaty body reform and on several proposals of the High Commissioner in that regard, including for a unified standing treaty body, and the Chairperson had introduced the draft report of the Working Group, which included proposals for a mechanism to strengthen the harmonization of the working methods of the treaty bodies.

This afternoon the Committee also heard a presentation by Committee Expert Francisco Alba on the draft report of the Working Group on the Harmonization of the Working Methods of the Treaty Bodies. In the ensuing discussion, the Chairperson suggested that the Committee not support the concept of a unified standing treaty body, which threatened the very identity of the Convention, and that it focus on ways to strengthen coordination and harmonization among treaty bodies. The Chairperson also took the position that the mechanism for strengthening treaty body harmonization should report to the Inter-Committee Meeting, and that the Inter-Committee Meeting itself should be preserved. Experts agreed on those positions. The Committee also heard a briefing by Committee Expert José Brillantes on a seminar relating to technical cooperation and follow-up on treaty body concluding observations, and heard a presentation by Committee Expert Ahmed Hassan El-Borai concerning the report of the Working Group on Reservations.

In addition, the Committee continued its discussion of the issue of promotion of the Convention. A representative for the International NGO Platform on the Migrant Workers' Convention informed members about an informal meeting it had organized on 21 January 2007 for States parties to discuss reporting issues and to exchange views with those States who had already presented their reports. The Chairperson suggested that perhaps the Platform could encourage national non-governmental organizations to push Governments to complete their reports. Also with a view to promoting the Convention, Experts discussed ways to have human rights issues incorporated in the upcoming Global Forum on Migration and Development to be held in Brussels, and it was agreed that the Committee would ask the High Commissioner to work on their behalf towards that end.

Finally, the Chairperson proposed that the day of general discussion to be held in 2008 be devoted to commemorating the fifth anniversary of the entry into force of the Convention, which could then be used as a vehicle for promoting the Convention. It was suggested that a half-day celebration of the Convention be held, and that the High Commissioner be invited to speak. That idea was accepted, and it was agreed that at the Committee's next session, in November, the Committee would work out further details.

When the Committee next reconvenes in public, on Friday, 3 November at 3 p.m., it will adopt its annual report and make public its concluding observations on the initial report of Egypt, which it considered this week, before closing its fifth session.


Statements

FRANCISCO ALBA, the Committee Expert who had represented the Committee on the Working Group on the Harmonization of the Working Methods of Treaty Bodies, presented the draft report of that group. Although he had not attended the meeting held last week, on 17 and 18 April, the draft report before them was largely based on the work that had been done previously in the Working Group. The draft report noted that most treaty body Committees were opposed to the idea of a unified standing treaty body, as they were worried that they would lose their specificity if such a body were established. What they had supported was the idea of further harmonizing and streamlining the working methods of the treaty bodies.

Mr. Alba suggested that the Committee, as one of the youngest treaty bodies, not take a strong position, but indicate that they preferred to retain their specificity with regard to the Convention. Most Committees had been more than willing to lessen the burden of reporting on States parties, and understood how difficult it was for some States to fulfil all of their reporting obligations to the various treaties they were parties to. There were ways to avoid multiplicity, and the Committee should express its view in favour of coordination with other bodies in that regard.

With regard to the proposals contained in the Working Group's draft report, to establish a mechanism to strengthen harmonization of the working methods of treaty bodies, Mr. Alba favoured the proposal to create a working group consisting of one representative of each treaty body with flexible membership, which would meet three times a year for two years and which could be mandated to develop concrete proposals and recommendations in consultation with and for the consideration of treaty bodies, reporting to the Inter-Committee Meeting. That was the most feasible and least disruptive solution, in his view. The other proposal might involve the dissolution of the Inter-Committee Meeting, which would "replace or be complemented by" a coordinating body made up of the chairpersons and representatives of treaty bodies that would meet once a year.

In the ensuing discussion, an Expert said that another problem with a unified standing treaty body was that it was liable to politicize the process of considering State party reports. Another Expert said that, while the reasons for the suggestion were clear, the unified standing treaty body proposed by the High Commissioner was simply not a feasible solution to those problems. An Expert suggested that, as one of the youngest treaty bodies, not only the Committee's specificity, but its very identity was challenged by the idea of a unified standing treaty body. The problems they were considering were only just beginning to be dealt with; but, they were important problems, and ones that would have a huge impact in the future.

An Expert complained that the proposals that had been put forward for treaty body reform were not sufficiently clear in order to take a position on them. The Chairperson clarified that the concrete proposal of the High Commissioner on a unified treaty body was "dead in the water". What they were debating was the concept of such a body, and whether it was still worth pursuing or not, and what the alternatives were. The OHCHR Secretariat had made it clear that they felt the proposal was still on the table. He suggested that they not support the concept of a unified treaty body, but focus on ways to harmonize the work of the treaty bodies. The Chairperson also concurred with Mr. Alba that the Inter-Committee Meeting should not be subsumed by a new body tasked with harmonizing the working methods of the treaty bodies.

In a briefing on the seminar with regard to technical cooperation and follow-up on concluding observations, Committee Expert JOSÉ BRILLANTES said that the seminar had taken place on 9 and 10 November 2006. It focused on the format and substance of concluding observations, and how specialized agencies and the OHCHR Secretariat could help in their realization. The need to involve all actors and to be sure that they were all on the "same page" was emphasized. Concepts of implementability, receptivity and adaptability were discussed, as well as harmonization, collaboration and technical assistance. It had been observed that treaty body recommendations were often too abstract, and unrealistic. Another was that there needed to be local ownership of the recommendations. Often non-governmental organizations had input into concluding observations; it was felt that national institutions should take an active part in the formulation of recommendations. While concluding observations were non-binding, it was still felt they had value as they served to highlight areas that needed attention. Concluding recommendations or observations should also be linked to existing bodies or programmes.

Among the seminar's observations were that OHCHR should increase technical capacity to allow States to comply with concluding observations. It should also ensure that recommendations be made part of the evaluation and monitoring process of the countries. Treaty bodies could participate in the work of national institutions, for example through the Berlin Consultations. They should also cross-reference other international treaties, such as those of the International Labour Organization, to facilitate implementation. Concluding recommendations should be precise, and yet not overly prescriptive, and should require follow up within one year on specific matters. All parties should be encouraged to participate in the reporting cycle, to encourage national ownership of the process.

Presenting the report of the Working Group on Reservations (MC/2007/5), Committee Expert AHMED HASSAN EL-BORAI, said that the Working Group had met on 14 and 15 December 2006 to harmonize the positions of different treaty bodies on reservations placed by States parties. A few differences of opinion on issues between the International Law Commission and the treaty bodies had emerged during the meeting. Several treaty bodies felt that there were reservations that were specific to the field of human rights, a position the International Law Commission did not support. Questions of the validity of reservations, as well as the consequences of declaring reservations invalid were also discussed. According to the International Law Commission (ILC), it was not for treaty bodies to determine the consequences of an invalid reservation. Another question on which the ILC and the treaty bodies did not agree was on whether treaty bodies should have the right to ask States to present the reasons for reservations to treaties where those reservations were seen to contradict the spirit of the treaty.


For use of the information media; not an official record


CMW07005E