Rhetoric and reality

Rhetoric and reality

Article

1. Priya pillai, human right expert, analyses the importance of Human Rights Council

Important analysis

2. US recently withdrew from HRC.
3. US alleged that HRC target Israel
4. There is demand for withdrawal in other countries including India.
5. The HRC was established in 2006, as part of the UN’s reform process, replacing the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
6. There are 47 Council members which are elected by the General Assembly with three-year terms, with a maximum of two consecutive terms.
7. States are elected on the basis of geographic quotas.
8. Current members include Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, Pakistan, and the United Kingdom
9. It was to serve as a forum for all states to examine and ‘peer review’ the record on human rights.
10. The ‘Universal Periodic Review’ process, where all states are scrutinised, is currently in its third cycle (2017-2021).
11. No state is exempt from this process, including Security Council members.
12. The main criticism against it is that it is made up of states not known for their human rights records
13. It is also alleged that states are using the opportunity to highlight the records of other states.
14. Although HRC has good track record on evolution of human rights norms
15. Situation in Syria, Yemen, Myanmar, and North Korea are highlighted by HRC
16. HRC also addressed LGBTIQ rights and discrimination on the basis of religion
17. The HRC is also a forum to monitor international obligations of a state based on international law that states themselves have undertaken. This forum is an important component of the UN rights system
18. Another aspect overseen by the HRC is the appointment of special rapporteurs — independent mandate holders — on issues including internal displacement, torture, racial discrimination, as well as country specific mandates.
19. HRC should not be confused with the role of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
20. OHCHR is a separate institution which presents reports independent of the HRC, the recent report on Kashmir being an example.
21. Discussions and reform proposals for HRC are already in the works, with engagement by states and human rights organisations indicating a consensus building approach.
22. Author argues that US has overlooked the reform process of HRC.
23. Author observes that invoking sovereignty as the basis to disengage is specious at best and malafide at worst.
24. At last author opines that both states and individuals who need more robust defence of their right would lose more.
25. Author also suggests for substantive engagement with issues concerning the rights of individuals.