The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a mechanism of the United Nations

United Nations

The United Nations is an international organization whose stated aims are facilitating cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achievement of world peace...

 (UN) Human Rights Council (HRC) that emerged out of the 2005 UN reform process. Established by General Assembly

General assembly

General assembly may refer to an official meeting of the members of a trade union, church, association, or similar organization, or of their representatives, in particular:-Governing bodies of international organizations:*The United Nations General Assembly...

 resolution 60/251 of 3 April 2006, the UPR periodically examines the human rights

Human rights

Human rights are "commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being." Human rights are thus conceived as universal and egalitarian . These rights may exist as natural rights or as legal rights, in both national...

 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.

Principles and objectives

HRC Resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007 and HRC decision 6/102 of 27 September 2007 elaborated the UPR’s operation. HRC resolution 5/1 provides that the UPR should:

• 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 UPR are:

• 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).

UPR cycle

The UPR currently operates on a four-year cycle. Forty-eight States are reviewed each year during three sessions of the HRC’s Working Group on the UPR, with 16 States reviewed at each session. The HRC determined the order of review for the first UPR cycle (2008-2011) on 21 September 2007 through the drawing of lots. This process was instructed by the resolution 5/1 requirements that: all 47 member States of the HRC be reviewed during their term of membership; that initial members of the HRC, especially those elected for one or two-year terms, should be reviewed first; that a mix of HRC member and observer States should be reviewed at each Working Group session; and that equitable geographic distribution should be respected in the selection of countries for review.

Basis of country reviews

The basis of country reviews is: (a) the Charter of the UN; (b) the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly . The Declaration arose directly from the experience of the Second World War and represents the first global expression of rights to which all human beings are inherently entitled...

; (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.

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; and
• A ten-page summary of information received from stakeholders (including NHRIs, NGOs, and other civil society actors) also prepared by OHCHR. Strict technical guidelines govern the form and content of stakeholder submissions (which are restricted to five pages).

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 future UPR cycles, presentation by the State concerned of its work on follow-up to the previous review.

Working Group on the UPR

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. The Working Group, which met in Geneva for the first time in April 2008, allocates three hours to each review, one hour 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. A two-hour interactive dialogue follows the State’s presentation, during which HRC member States question the State and make recommendations towards the improvement of its human rights situation and performance.

Issues addressed during country reviews have included:

• Accountability and impunity
• Asylum seekers, refugees and internally displaced persons
• Counter-terrorism measures
• Death penalty
• Detention, including arbitrary detention and prison conditions
• Development
• Due process protections
• Education
• Elections
• Employment
• Enforced disappearances
• Environment
• Extrajudicial executions
• Freedom of association
• Freedom of opinion and expression, including media freedom
• Freedom of movement
• Freedom of religion and belief
• Gender equality
• Health
• Housing
• Human rights defenders
• Human rights education and training
• Human trafficking
• Indigenous peoples
• International humanitarian law, including the protection of civilians in armed conflict
• Judiciaries and justice systems
• Migrant workers
• Minorities
• National human rights mechanisms, including the establishment of NHRIs
• Non-discrimination, including on the bases of ethnicity, race, sex, and sexual orientation and gender identity
• Persons with disabilities
• Police and military
• Ratification of/accession to international human rights instruments
• Torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
• Violence against women.

Each review is facilitated by a group of three States, known as a “troika”, which serve as rapporteurs. The troika is first responsible for receiving questions from UN member States in advance of the country review, clustering them, and transmitting them to the UPR Secretariat (OHCHR), which in turn transmits them to the State 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 presented 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 with the full involvement of the State under review. A different troika is formed for each review. The selection of troika members is also confirmed through the drawing of lots.

Thirty minutes is 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 presented to it by States (known as ‘UPR outcomes’) 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 outcomes 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. 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. ‘A’ status NHRIs and NGOs in consultative relationship with the UN Economic and Social Council

Economic and Social Council

Economic and Social Council might refer to one of the following:* United Nations Economic and Social Council* French Economic and Social Council* Economic and Social Council * European Economic and Social Committee...

(ECOSOC) have the opportunity to make ‘general comments’ before the adoption of the outcome report.

Follow-up to UPR outcomes

States bear the primary responsibility for implementing UPR outcomes. However, other stakeholders, including NHRIs and NGOs, also have a role in outcome implementation. The State’s progress in implementing UPR outcomes will be examined in subsequent reviews.

State non-cooperation with the UPR

After exhausting all efforts to encourage a State to cooperate with the UPR mechanism, the HRC will address, as appropriate, cases of persistent non-cooperation with the mechanism. At June 2011, the HRC had not taken any such action.

Stakeholder UPR contribution opportunities

The rules governing the participation of NHRIs and NGOs at the HRC, and therefore in the UPR mechanism, are prescribed by resolution 5/1, which states that their participation shall be based on the ‘practices observed by the [CHR], while ensuring the most effective contribution of these entities’.

While the UPR is an intergovernmental process, there are a number of contribution opportunities available to non-governmental stakeholders. These include:

• Participating in national consultations toward the preparation of a State’s national report. States are encouraged to undertake broad national consultation processes towards the preparation of their national reports
• The submission of information toward State reviews. Submissions may be incorporated into the OHCHR-prepared summary of stakeholders’ information discussed above
• Attending the review of the State at the Working Group on the UPR. Stakeholders may attend Working Group sessions, but cannot partake in the interactive dialogue
• Attending the HRC session at which the outcome report on a State is adopted. ‘A’ status NHRIs and ECOSOC-accredited NGOs may make ‘general comments’ before the adoption of the outcome report
• Submitting written statements under HRC agenda item 6 (UPR). Adhering to HRC convention, ‘A’ status NHRIs and ECOSOC-accredited NGOs can submit written statements under any HRC agenda item
• As appropriate, working on follow-up to UPR outcomes.

HRC review process

In resolution 60/251, the General Assembly required the HRC to review and report on its work and functioning after its first five years. In October 2009, the HRC established the open-ended intergovernmental working group on the review of the work and functioning of the HRC (composed of the HRC’s 47 member States) to lead its review process. Chaired by the then HRC President (Ambassador Sihasak Phuangketkeow of Thailand), the Working Group met for two substantive sessions. The first Working Group session took place on 25-29 October 2010; the second session was held on 7, 17-18, and 23-24 February 2011.

On 25 March 2011, the HRC adopted as resolution 16/21 the outcome of its review of the work and functioning of the HRC. While it is yet to be confirmed by the General Assembly, the resolution provides that the second cycle of the UPR will commence in June 2012. It also proposes a number of changes to the UPR’s operation. These include:

• Changing the periodicity of the UPR cycle to four-and-a-half years, implying that 42 States (rather than the current 48 States) will be reviewed each year
• Extending the duration of country reviews from the present three hours. The modalities for this extension were expected to be agreed on at the HRC’s 17th session (30 May - 17 June 2011)
• Clustering recommendations contained in UPR outcome documents thematically, with the full involvement and consent of the State under review and the States that made the recommendations
• Requiring the State under review to clearly communicate to the HRC, in a written format preferably prior to the HRC plenary session at which the outcome document on its review will be adopted, its positions on all received recommendations
• Encouraging States to provide the HRC, on a voluntary basis, with a midterm update on their follow-up to accepted UPR outcomes
• Dedicating a separate section of future summaries of stakeholders’ information to ‘A’ status NHRIs
• Allowing ‘A’ status NHRIs to intervene immediately after their State during the adoption of the outcome of the review of that State by the HRC plenary.

External links

• United Nations General Assembly. Accessed 2 June 2011.
• United Nations human rights treaty bodies. Accessed 2 June 2011.
• United Nations Human Rights Council. Accessed 2 June 2011.
• United Nations Economic and Social Council. Accessed 2 June 2011.
• United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Accessed 5 June 2011.
• Universal Periodic Review. Accessed 5 June 2011.
• ‘Basic facts about the UPR’, OHCHR. Accessed 2 June 2011.
• ‘Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme: A Handbook for Civil Society’, OHCHR (New York & Geneva, 2008). Accessed 3 June 2011.
• UPR-info. Accessed 3 June 2011.
• United Nations Charter. Accessed 7 June 2011.
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Accessed 7 June 2011..
• General Assembly resolution 60/251, establishing the Human Rights Council. Accessed 6 June 2011.
• Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, institution-building of the Human Rights Council. Accessed 6 June 2011.
• Human Rights Council decision 6/102, follow-up to Human Rights Council resolution 5/1. Accessed 6 June 2011.
• Human Rights Council resolution 12/1, open-ended intergovernmental working group on the review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council. Accessed 6 June 2011.
• Human Rights Council resolution 16/21, outcome of the review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council. Accessed 6 June 2011.
• Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31, consultative relationship between the United Nations and non-governmental organizations. Accessed 6 June 2011.
• Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/74, national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights. Accessed 8 June 2011.
• Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (Paris Principles). Accessed 8 June 2011.
• International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions (ICC). Accessed 8 June 2011.