The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a mechanism of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council (HRC) that emerged from the 2005 UN reform process.‘In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all’, Report of the Secretary-General (A/59/2005), 21 March 2005; World Summit Outcome , General Assembly resolution 60/1, 24 October 2005. Established by the General Assembly resolution 60/251 of 3 April 2006, the UPR periodically examines the human rights performance of all 193 UN Member States. It is intended to complement, not duplicate, the work of other human rights mechanisms, including the UN human rights treaty bodies. This is the first international human rights mechanism to address all countries and all human rights. The Working Group on the UPR, which is composed of the HRC's 47 Member States and chaired by the HRC President, conducts country reviews.
History Since its inception in 2008, four states have withdrawn participation in the UPR. Under the second Donald Trump administration, the United States withdrew its participation.
Principles and objectives HRC Resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007 and HRC decision 6/102 of 27 September 2007 elaborated on the UPR's functions in its first cycle from 2008 - 2012. For the second and subsequent cycles, a few amendments were introduced to the UPR by HRC Resolution 16/21 of 12 April 2011 and HRC decision 17/119 of 19 July 2011, after a review by the HRC (for further details, see HRC review process below). HRC resolution 5/1 provides that the UPR should:Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 3. Promote the universality, interdependence, indivisibility and interrelatedness of all human rights Be a cooperative mechanism based on objective and reliable information and on interactive dialogue Ensure universal coverage and equal treatment of all States Be an intergovernmental process, UN Member-driven and action oriented Fully involve the country under review Complement and not duplicate other human rights mechanisms, thus representing an added value Be conducted in an objective, transparent, non-selective, constructive, non-confrontational and non-politicized manner Not be overly burdensome to the concerned State or to the agenda of the HRC Not be overly long; it should be realistic and not absorb a disproportionate amount of time or human and financial resources Not diminish the HRC's capacity to respond to urgent human rights situations Fully integrate a gender perspective Take into account the level of development and specificities of countries Ensure the participation of all relevant stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and national human rights institutions (NHRIs).
The objectives of the UN-UPR are:Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 4. The improvement of the human rights situation on the ground The fulfilment of the State's human rights obligations and commitments and assessment of positive developments and challenges faced by the State The enhancement of the State's capacity and of technical assistance, in consultation with, and with the consent of, the State concerned The sharing of best practice among States and other stakeholders Support for cooperation in the promotion and protection of human rights The encouragement of full cooperation and engagement with the HRC, other human rights bodies and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
HRC resolution 16/21 further provides that the second and subsequent cycles should focus on the implementation of the accepted recommendations and the developments of the human rights situation in the State under review.
Procedure
UPR cycle While the first UPR operated on a four-year cycle, the second was extended to four and a half years, and the third lasts five years. Forty-two States are now reviewed each year during three sessions of the HRC's Working Group on the UPR, with 14 States reviewed at each session. The HRC determined the order of review for the first UPR cycle (2008–2012) on 21 September 2007 through the drawing of lots‘Basic facts about the UPR’, OHCHR. and the same order will be maintained during the second and subsequent cycles. The first order of review was instructed by the resolution 5/1 requirementsAnnex to resolution 5/1, paras. 8-11. that all 47 member States of the HRC be reviewed during their term of membership, in addition to a few other criteria.
Basis of country reviews The basis of country reviews is: (a) the Charter of the UN; (b) the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; (c) human rights instruments to which a State is party; and (d) voluntary pledges and commitments made by the State, including those undertaken when presenting their candidature for election to the HRC. Country reviews also take into account applicable international humanitarian law.Annex to resolution 5/1, paras. 1-2.
Documentation upon which country reviews are based Country reviews are based on three documents: A 20-page national report prepared by the State under review A ten-page compilation of UN information (including Special Procedures reports, human rights treaty body reports, and other relevant UN documentation) prepared by OHCHR A ten-page summary of information received from stakeholders (including NHRIs, NGOs, and other civil society actors) also prepared by the OHCHR
In decision 6/102, the HRC provided guidelines for the preparation of information under the UPR. It specifies that States, in preparing national reports, should address/provide: A description of the methodology and the broad consultation process followed for the preparation of information provided under the UPR Background of the country under review and framework (particularly normative and institutional framework) for the promotion and protection of human rights: constitution, legislation, policy measures, national jurisprudence, human rights infrastructure including NHRIs, and scope of international obligations identified in the "basis of review" in resolution 5/1 Promotion and protection of human rights on the ground: implementation of international human rights obligations identified in the "basis of review" in resolution 5/1, national legislation and voluntary commitments, NHRI activities, public awareness of human rights, cooperation with human rights mechanisms Identification of achievements, best practices, challenges and constraints Key national priorities, initiatives and commitments that the State concerned intends to undertake to overcome those challenges and constraints and improve its human rights situation Expectations of the State concerned in terms of capacity-building and requests, if any, for technical assistance; and In the second and subsequent UPR cycles, this should also contain a presentation by the State concerned of its work on the follow-up to the previous review.
Working Group on the UPR The Working Group on the UPR is composed by the 47 Member States of the HRC, chaired by the HRC President and conducts country reviews. The Working Group held its first review in 2008. It allocates three and a half hours to each review, 70 minutes of which is given to the State under review to discuss its domestic human rights framework, measures taken to promote and protect human rights in country, human rights issues of particular national pertinence, and steps taken to address and redress violations. It is also an opportunity for the State to present voluntary human rights pledges and commitments. An interactive dialogue of 140 minutes follows the State's presentation, during which UN member States question the State and make recommendations towards the improvement of its human rights situation and performance. It is worth noting that all 193 UN member states (both HRC members and not) can take the floor.
A wide variety of issues have been addressed during the country reviews and potentially all human rights issues could be addressed during this session. While the counting of the actual number of recommendations is complicated by the fact that they are clustered together in the Working Group report, the NGO UPR Info has calculated the first cycle of the UPR to have provided a total of 21,356 recommendations and 599 voluntary pledges.
The role of the Troika and drafting of the Working Group report
Each review is facilitated by a group of three States, known as the "troika", that serve as rapporteurs. The troika is responsible for receiving the advanced questions from UN member States to the country under review. The second role of the troika is to prepare an outcome document on the review, which includes a summary of the review proceedings, recommendations suggested by States, conclusions, and voluntary commitments presented by the State under review. The outcome document is prepared with the assistance of the UPR secretariat and the recommendations contained in the outcome of the review should preferably be clustered thematically with the full involvement and consent of the State under review and the States that made the recommendations."Review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council" at 4.
Adoption
Thirty minutes are allocated to the adoption of the outcome document at a later stage in the same Working Group session, during which the State under review is given a preliminary opportunity to indicate whether it supports the recommendations suggested to it by States as well as the conclusions reflected in the outcome document. Once adopted, the outcome document is transferred to the HRC for discussion and adoption in plenary. In the intervening period between the Working Group and plenary sessions, the reviewed State is expected to confirm which UPR recommendations it accepts and does not accept.
HRC plenary session The UPR is a standing item on the HRC's agenda (item 6). At each HRC session, time is allocated to the consideration and adoption of the outcome documents transferred from the Working Group on the UPR. An hour is allocated to the adoption of each document, during which the reviewed State is offered the opportunity to present replies to questions or issues not sufficiently addressed during the interactive dialogue at the Working Group.Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 29. HRC member and observer States are also given the opportunity to express their views on the outcome of the review before the HRC takes action on it.Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 30. NHRIs with 'A' statusNHRIs accredited by the (ICC) as compliant with the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (Paris Principles). and NGOs in consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) have the opportunity to make 'general comments' before the adoption of the outcome report.Annex to resolution 5/1, para. 31. This is the only opportunity for civil society to take the floor during the UPR.
Follow-up to UPR outcome
While the outcome of the review, as a cooperative mechanism, should be implemented primarily by the State concerned, States are encouraged to conduct broad consultations with all relevant stakeholders in this regard.
States are encouraged to provide the Council, on a voluntary basis, with a midterm update on follow-up to accepted recommendations. As of 20 February 2013, 28 countries so far have provided the HRC with an implementation report."UPR Implementation"
According to Resolution 16/21, other relevant stakeholders are encouraged to include information on the follow-up to the preceding review in their contributions. The summary of the information provided by other relevant stakeholders should contain, where appropriate, a separate section for contributions by the national human rights institution of the State under review that is accredited in full compliance with the Paris Principles.