a. Human Rights Promotion

The Council’s main vocation is the formulation of international legal texts. The Commission was originally created to draft an international Bill of Rights and is thus at the origin of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two 1966 International Covenants, on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. Currently, the Council is, inter alia, thinking about the possibility to elaborate an international regulatory framework that would regulate, monitor, and oversee the activities of private military and security companies. Moreover, the Advisory Committee has drafted a United Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training. The Council also elaborated an Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child that provides a communications procedure from NGOs or individuals complementary to the State reporting procedure under the Convention. This Optional Protocol was opened to signature on 28 February 2012.

The Council’s mandate therefore includes carrying out studies, making recommendations, and preparing drafts of human rights conventions. It also develops technical assistance programs by nominating independent experts to carry out country studies on legal issues and to suggest means of assistance.

b. Human Rights Protection

From 1946 to 1967, the Commission did not really respond to human rights violations, mainly because it lacked the mechanisms to do so. The mandate of the Commission was broadened in 1967 and 1970, when ECOSOC adopted Resolutions 1235 (6 June 1967) and 1503 (27 May 1970), which established two special procedures (known under the names of the resolutions that adopted them) to examine human rights situations. The philosophy of the Commission was not to sanction any State or try to obtain reparation for violations committed, but rather to put international pressure on the governments concerned during the examination of the human rights situations in their countries.

These procedures were transformed when the Council was created in 2006, and new procedures have been created. Indeed, one year after its first meeting, on 18 June 2007, the HRC adopted its “Institution-Building Package,” a resolution that explains the mandates, procedures, and organs of the Council, namely the Universal Periodic Review Mechanism, the Special Procedures Mechanism, the Human Rights Advisory Committee, and the Complaint Procedure, as well as provides the Rules and Procedures of the Council.

c. The Complaint Procedure

This 1503 procedure, established by Resolution 1503 of 27 May 1970, has served as a basis for the establishment of the new Complaint Procedure established pursuant to the creation of the Council. This new procedure has a similar mandate to the previous one, which is to address communications that reveal consistent patterns of gross violations of all human rights and fundamental freedoms.

In order to address those allegations of human rights violations, two working groups have been established, the Working Group on Communications and the Working Group on Situations, with the mandate to examine the communications and to bring to the attention of the Council consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The Working Group on Communications (WGC) is designated by the Advisory Committee from among its members for a period of three years and consists of five independent experts who are geographically representative of the five regional groups. The Working Group meets twice a year for a period of five working days to assess the admissibility and merits of a communication. Indeed, for a communication to be admissible, some criteria must be met:

• it must not be driven by political motivations;
• it must not be anonymous or abusive;
• all available means at the national level must have been resorted to and exhausted, and;
• the situation must not be dealt with under other international procedures.

When assessing the admissibility of a communication, the information is anonymously given to the State concerned to enable it to respond. This confidentiality is paramount in order to preserve the security of the victims and the author of the communication. Nonetheless, this is not an absolute guarantee of anonymity.

All admissible communications and recommendations, which come for the most part from NGOs, are thereon transmitted to the Working Group on Situations.

The Working Group on Situations (WGS) consists of five members appointed by the regional groups from among the Member States of the Council for a period of one year. It meets twice a year for a period of five working days in order to examine the communications transferred to it by the Working Group on Communications, including the replies of States, as well as the situations that the Council is already seized of under the complaint procedure. The Working Group on Situations, on the basis of the information and recommendations provided by the Working Group on Communications, presents the Council with a report on consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms and makes recommendations to the Council on the course of action that could be taken.

Subsequently, the Council takes decisions concerning each situation brought to its attention. Four possible options are open to the Council; it can decide to (1) suspend the review of the situation, (2) keep the situation under review and request the State concerned to provide further information, (3) appoint an independent expert to monitor the situation and report back to the Council, or (4) if the State shows a lack of goodwill and the violations are serious, the Council may render the situation public.

Communications under this procedure may be submitted by individuals or groups at the following email address: cp@ohchr.org or to any country or regional office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

d. Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

Among the main changes over the years was the creation of the Universal Periodic Review, a mechanism that assesses on a four-year basis the human rights situations in all 193 UN Member States.

The UPR is a State-driven process that gives the opportunity for States to expose the legislative measures and actions they have taken to improve the human rights situations in their countries and to fulfill their human rights obligations.

Every four years, all UN Member States and Observer States are reviewed; the order of the countries is decided on the basis of equitable geographic distribution.

The review of each State is based on several documents:

•Information prepared by the State concerned, usually in the form of a national report.

•A compilation prepared by the OHCHR of the information contained in the reports of treaty bodies (Expert Committees); special procedures (Special Rapporteurs and Working Groups), including observations and comments by the State concerned; and other relevant official United Nations documents, notably from UNICEF.

•Additional, credible, and reliable information provided by other relevant stakeholders: other international organizations, NGOs, national human rights institutions, and the like.

The review is conducted in a working group chaired by the president of the Council and in the presence of the 47 Member States of the Council. Each Member State decides on the composition of its delegation and is assisted by a group of three States, known as “troikas,” which serve as Rapporteurs. The selection of troikas for each State is done through a drawing of lots following elections for the Council membership in the UNGA. All Member States, even Observer States, can participate in the review, including in the interactive dialogue that takes place after the exposé by the State under review of its report. Other observers, such as international organizations or NGOs, can also attend the review. The duration of the review is approximately three hours for each country. Ultimately, the Council adopts an outcome of the review, which is a report consisting of a summary of the proceedings of the review process, conclusions and recommendations, and the voluntary commitments of the State concerned. This outcome document, as a cooperative mechanism, should be implemented primarily by the State concerned and, as appropriate, by other relevant stakeholders, although States are sometimes reluctant to implement the recommendations.

e. International investigations on violation of human rights and international humanitarian law (IHL)

Over the years, the UN system have created and mandated numerous international commissions of inquiry and fact-finding mission to investigate contentious situations of human rights and IHL violations.

The international and independent establishment of facts is indeed the first step to diplomatic or judicial management of highly polarised situations.

In addition to the various human rights procedure and bodies such as the work of Special rapporteurs, investigative mechanisms are increasingly being used within the UN to respond to situations of serious violations of international human rights and IHL including those posing threat to international peace and security. They are now considered as being a key tool in the UN’s response to such violations particularly in promoting accountability and combating impunity.

These international investigative mechanisms have been established by various UN Bodies such as the UNSC, the UNGA, the HRC (and its predecessor the Commission of Human Rights), the UNSG and the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

For instance, the UNSC used its power (under article 34 of the UN Charter) to investigate any dispute, or any situation that is likely to endanger international peace and security, to launch international investigation on violation of IHL in former Yugoslavia in 1992-94 (S/RES/780 (1992)), in Rwanda in 1994 (S/RES/935(1994)) and in Darfur in 2004 (S/RES/1564 (2004)). The UNSC also supported investigation process by the UNSG such as the Investigative team on serious violation of human rights and IHL in DRC in 1998 (S/1998/581) and the Panel of experts on accountability in Sri Lanka in 2010 by the UNSG declaration of 22 June 2010 (SG/SM/12967). In situation such as Syria, where the functioning of the UNSC was blocked by the veto of a permanent member, the UNGA used its power under article 12 of the UN Charter to launch an international impartial and independent investigation mechanism in 2016 (A/RES/71/248). This process complements the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syria Arab Republic established by the HRC in 2011 (still ongoing under the mandate of the HRC.)

Since its creation in 2006, the HRC has directly mandated 37 investigative mechanisms, including fact-finding missions and commissions of inquiry and contributed to even more. Most have been established to investigate alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian law in specific countries with only one being of a thematic nature (expert mechanism to advance Racial justice and equality in law enforcement). They gather and verify information, create an historical record of events, identify alleged perpetrator and provide a basis for further investigations or prosecution in front of international or national court. They also recommend measures to redress violations, provide justice and reparation to victims, and hold perpetrators to account.

Based on this extensive experience, the OHCHR has also developed and provided guidance on methodology and international standards to such investigative bodies and serves as repository and institutional memory of their work.

As of April 2023, the HRC was running eleven investigative mechanisms:

•The Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran;

•The Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua;

•The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine;

•The International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia;

•The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel;

•The Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Libya;

•The Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela;

•The Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar;

•The International team of experts on the Democratic Republic of the Congo;

•Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan;

•Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic.

Other investigative mechanisms have also been established by the UNSC from 1985 to 2021, or by the General Assembly in situations where the UNSC was blocked by vetos of permanent members such as in 2016 with the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism in Syria; and the UNSG in 1987 with its mechanism for the investigation of alleged use of chemical and biological weapons.

➔Children ▸ Committee against Torture ▸ Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights ▸ Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women ▸ Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination ▸ Committee on the Rights of the Child ▸ Discrimination ▸ Human rights ▸ Human Rights Committee ▸ Individual recourse ▸ Special rapporteurs ▸ Women

✎ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

Palais Wilson

52 rue des Pâquis

1202 Geneva, Switzerland

Tel.: (41) 22 917 92 20

Email: InfoDesk@ohchr.org

@ www.ohchr.org