The Creation of the Human Rights CouncilThe Creation of the Human Rights Council

On March 15, 2006 the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution creating a new Human Rights Council within the UN System. The Council has replaced the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), the body that formally set and advanced human rights standards in the UN. The 47 member Human Rights Council raises the level of human rights within the UN as it will function as a subsidiary body of the General Assembly. Members of the Council will be elected by the General Assembly on May 9 and the Human Rights Council is expected to begin work on June 19 in Geneva, where it will be based. The HR Council will meet at least 3 times a year on specific agenda with the mandate to also convene in response to emergency situations.

The replacement of the CHR with the HR Council was a major aspect of the extensive UN reforms introduced by Kofi Annan, UN Secretary-General. The negotiations on the establishment of the HR Council formed the central discussions at the 2005 World Summit. The rationale for the replacement of the CHR with the HR Council was that the CHR was ‘too politicised’ and had been ‘discredited’ and its reputation tarnished by its failure to respond to the human rights violations and use of membership on HR Commission to avoid scrutiny and wield as a political tool against others. However, the notion that the CHR was discredited does a disservice to the gains made by the CHR during its 60 years, particularly on gender. Special Rapporteurs (with the critical support of NGOs) at the CHR have succeeded in important international standard setting in human rights on gender issues and fostered innovative thinking about human rights issues. It is hoped that the HR Council will further the gains and achievements of the CHR.

For women’s NGOs there are two critical issues of concern in the creation of the HR Council. The first relates to the Special Procedures (independent experts called special rapporteurs who focus on specific countries or themes, andworking groups on specific topics) such as the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Special Rapporteur on Rights of Migrants whom APWLD has worked closely with over many years. The resolution creating the Council preserves the system of special procedures; however, it will be reviewed in this first year of the HR Council’s work. While many States have re-asserted the importance of the Special Procedures to the advancement and protection of HR, other States have indicated they would like to see the Special Procedures dissolved. During the last session of the CHR on March 27, the Special Procedure mandates were extended until the HR Council convenes.

The second critical concern for NGOs is that NGO participation in the HR Council may not be as strong as it has been in the Commission on Human Rights. Like decisions on the fate of the Special Procedures, NGO participation has been preserved but will be reviewed during the first year of the Council’s work. The risk is that NGO access and participation will be reduced if the rules governing participating of NGOs in the UN General Assembly are applied. Furthermore, NGOs from the global south will have additional barriers in the way of their participation at the HR Council as the HR Council will meet more than 3 times a year in Geneva as opposed to once a year meetings of UNCHR. This will make it very difficult for NGOs from the global south to have a sustained presence at the HR Council sessions because of the high costs involved. Furthermore, the numerous sessions a year will diffuse the ability for women’s NGOs to converge at one time and place to lobby and network. Unless women’s NGOs from the global south can create a way to maintain a presence in Geneva (such as establishing a shared office or appointing a representative) then we may lose ground gained and risk becoming dependent on northern women’s groups to carry our advocacy issues.

It will be important for women’s NGOs to monitor thereview process this year to ensure the continuation of the work of the Special Procedures and that the participation of NGOs in the Council remains at the levels currently allowed in CHR processes.It will also be important for women’s NGOs in the Asia Pacific region to collaborate in strategising for means in which to ensure our continued presence at the HR Council.

The text of the resolution that creates the Council (A/RES/60/251) can befound at www.reformtheun.org/index.php/articles/1954

Some other reforms…?

There is an ongoing discussion in the UN system about str government reporting to treaty bodies (this refers to the various Committees established under different treaties such as the Commit- tee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women established by the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women). Some governments are putting intense pressure to combine their reporting requirements to treaty bodies into one document rather than report on each treaty. While there are some feelings that perhaps this will help to encour- age a consistent and holistic approach to human rights, enhance the mainstreaming of women’s human rights in the work of all treaty committees and create more entry points for advocacy on women’s rights concerns, there are also many concerns with the proposal. Most importantly is uncertainty about the continuing role of the CEDAW Committee in development of progressive understandings and recommendations on women’s human rights. There are also concerns that states obligations to report on women’ human rights could become diffused and avoidable. [For further information please see http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/treaty/reform.htm].

One of the key outcomes of the 2005 World Summit was a decision to establish a Peacebuilding Commission to help countries emerging from armed conflicts. The Commission was established to address a critical gap in the UN and Global system by providing a coordinated, coherent and integrated approach to post-conflict peace building. As an inter-governmental advisory body the Commission will assist countries emerging from violent conflicts by bringing together relevant actors, marshalling resources, and extending the period of attention given to post-conflict reconstruction and peace building. It includes mechanisms for intervention, implementation and monitoring, however, the conflict prevention mandate of the Commission is not very strong and it has little or no enforcement power. However, as a result of pressure from many women’s groups the resolution on the Peacebuilding Commission (concurrently adopted by the UN General Assembly and Security Council) reaffirms the importance of women in the prevention, resolution of conflicts and peace building and the need to increase their participation in decision-making with regards to issues of peace and security. For further information please visit http://www.un.org/ peace/peacebuilding]

For further information on all the UN Reforms please visit the website www.reformtheun.org

For more information contact Lisa Pusey, APWLD Programme Officer at lisa@apwld.org