United Nations Commission on Human Rights

Last updated

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) was a functional commission within the overall framework of the United Nations from 1946 until it was replaced by the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2006. It was a subsidiary body of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and was also assisted in its work by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNOHCHR). It was the UN's principal mechanism and international forum concerned with the promotion and protection of human rights.

Contents

On March 15, 2006, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to replace UNCHR with the UN Human Rights Council. [1]

History

Eleanor Roosevelt at United Nations for Human Rights Commission meeting in Lake Success, New York, in 1947 Eleanor Roosevelt at United Nations for Human Rights Commission meeting in Lake Success, New York - NARA - 196772.jpg
Eleanor Roosevelt at United Nations for Human Rights Commission meeting in Lake Success, New York, in 1947

The UNHRC was established in 1946 by ECOSOC, and was one of the first two "Functional Commissions" set up within the early UN structure (the other being the Commission on the Status of Women). It was a body created under the terms of the United Nations Charter (specifically, under Article 68) to which all UN member states are signatories.

It met for the first time in January 1947 and established a drafting committee for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the United Nations on December 10, 1948.

The body went through two distinct phases. From 1947 to 1967, it concentrated on promoting human rights and helping states elaborate treaties, but not on investigating or condemning violators. [2] It was a period of strict observance of the sovereignty principle.

In 1967, the Commission adopted interventionism as its policy. The context of the decade was of Decolonization of Africa and Asia, and many countries of the continent pressed for a more active UN policy on human rights issues, especially in light of massive violations in apartheid South Africa. The new policy meant that the Commission would also investigate and produce reports on violations.

To allow better fulfillment of this new policy, other changes took place. In the 1970s, the possibility of geographically oriented workgroups was created. These groups would specialize in investigating violations in a particular region or even a single country, as was the case with Chile. With the 1980s came the creation of theme-oriented workgroups, which would specialize in specific types of abuses.

None of these measures, however, were able to make the Commission as effective as desired, mainly because of the presence of human rights violators and the politicization of the body. During the following years until its extinction, the UNCHR became increasingly discredited among activists and governments alike.

The Commission held its final meeting in Geneva on March 27, 2006, and was replaced by the United Nations Human Rights Council in the same year.

Mandate

The Commission on Human Rights was intended to examine, monitor and publicly report on human rights situations in specific countries or territories (known as country mechanisms or mandates) as well as on major phenomena of human rights violations worldwide (known as thematic mechanisms or mandates). [3] The Human Rights division of the U.N. is also expected to uphold and protect the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Structure

At the time it was extinguished, the Commission consisted of representatives drawn from 53 member states, elected by the members of ECOSOC. There were no permanent members: each year (usually in May), approximately a third of its seats would come up for election and those chosen would be appointed for a three-year term.

Seats on the Commission were apportioned by region, using the mechanism of the United Nations Regional Groups. During its last year of service in 2005, the representation by region was as follows.

The Commission would meet each year in regular session for six weeks during March and April in Geneva, Switzerland. In January 2004, Australia was elected as chair of the 60th Session. In January 2005, Indonesia was elected chair of the 61st Session. Peru was elected chair of the 62nd Session in January 2006. The Commission held its final meeting in Geneva on March 27, 2006.

Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights

In 1999 the Economic and Social Council changed its title from the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities to the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights". [4]

The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights was the main subsidiary body of the Commission on Human Rights. It was composed of twenty-six experts whose responsibility was to undertake studies, particularly in light of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and make recommendations to the Commission concerning the prevention of discrimination of any kind relating to human rights and fundamental freedoms and the protection of racial, national, religious and linguistic minorities. Membership was selected with regard to equitable geographical distribution.

The Sub-Commission established seven Working Groups that investigate specific human rights concerns, including:

The United Nations Human Rights Council assumed responsibility for the Sub-Commission when it replaced the Commission on Human Rights in 2006.

Special procedures

The Commission on Human Rights established 30 special procedures, or mechanisms, to address specific country situations or thematic issues such as freedom of expression and opinion, torture, the right to food, and the right to education. [5]

Individuals with expertise in particular areas of human rights were appointed by the chair of the Commission to serve as Special Rapporteurs for a maximum of six years. They are unpaid, independent experts who receive personnel and logistical support from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for their work. Their main activities are to examine, monitor, advise and publicly report on human rights situations in specific countries or territories. They are able to write to governments about reported violations and conduct fact-finding visits to countries that invite them. [6]

The special mechanisms are categorised according to thematic [7] and country mandates. [8]

Special procedures also include working groups made up of up to five experts who monitor and investigate specific human rights concerns. Three groups were established by the Commission:

The special procedures are now under the direction of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

Criticism

The Commission was repeatedly criticized for the composition of its membership. In particular, several of its member countries themselves had dubious human rights records, including states whose representatives had been elected to chair the Commission. [9] Countries with records of human rights abuses like torture, extrajudicial killings, political imprisonment, and disappearances likely sought election to the Commission to project a positive international image. Commission membership also provided some political shelter from criticism of these abuses. [10]

Another criticism was that the Commission did not engage in constructive discussion of human rights issues, but was a forum for politically selective finger-pointing and criticism. The desire of states with problematic human rights records to be elected to the Commission was viewed largely as a way to defend themselves from such attacks. [11] [12]

Activist groups had long expressed concern over the memberships of the People's Republic of China, Zimbabwe, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, and the past memberships of Algeria, Syria, Libya, Uganda and Vietnam on the Commission. These countries had extensive records of human rights violations, and one concern was that, by working against resolutions on the Commission condemning human rights violations, they indirectly promoted despotism and domestic repression. [9]

On May 4, 2004, United States ambassador Sichan Siv walked out of the Commission following the uncontested election of Sudan to the commission, calling it an "absurdity" in light of Sudan's ethnic cleansing in the Darfur region. [13] One major consequence of the election of Sudan to the Commission was the lack of willingness for some countries to work through the Commission. For example, on July 30, 2004, it was the United Nations Security Council, not the Commission, that passed a resolution—by 13–0, with China and Pakistan abstaining—threatening Sudan with unspecified sanctions if the situation in the Darfur region did not improve within the following 30 days.[ citation needed ] The reasons given for the action were the attacks by the Janjaweed Arab militias of Sudan on the non-Arab African Muslim population of Darfur, a region in western Sudan.

The Commission had also come under repeated criticism from the United States for its unwillingness to address other human rights concerns. In 2001, the United States was voted off the Commission by the other member states, many of whom have been criticized for their human rights violations, [14] and in 2003 Syria put forward a proposal to discuss US war crimes in Iraq. But journalist Anne Applebaum wrote, "the European Union and the United States aren't exempt from blame, either", citing their hesitance in voting to criticize Russia's actions in Chechnya. [15]


Israel

The Commission was also criticized by advocates of Israel for bias against Israel. [16] In 2002 Anne Bayefsky, a professor of international law at York University in Toronto, wrote that "commission members seek to avoid directly criticizing states with human rights problems, frequently by focusing on Israel, a state that, according to analysis of summary records, has for over 30 years occupied 15 percent of commission time and has been the subject of a third of country-specific resolutions". [17] On April 15, 2002, the Commission approved a resolution affirming the "legitimate right of the Palestinian people to resist the Israeli occupation in order to free its land and be able to exercise its right of self-determination". [18] In so doing, the Palestinian people was declared "fulfilling its mission, one of the goals and purposes of the United Nations". Of the 53-member commission, 40 countries voted yes, five voted no, and seven abstained. Although widely reported that the resolution condoned resistance to Israel by "all available means, including armed struggle", the resolution itself does not contain those words. [19] Alfred Moses, a former United States ambassador to the Commission and now chairman of the monitoring group UN Watch, said that "A vote in favour of this resolution is a vote for Palestinian terrorism." [20] In a letter to the Commission on November 15, 2002, following an attack by Palestinians on Israelis in the town of Hebron, Nabil Ramlawi, the Permanent Observer for Palestine at the UN, appealed to the resolution as justification for the attack. [21]

Human rights and mental health

In 1977, the Commission formed a "Sub-Commission to study, with a view to formulating guidelines, if possible, the question of the protection of those detained on the grounds of mental ill-health against treatment that might adversely affect the human personality and its physical and intellectual integrity". The sub-commission was charged with "determin[ing] whether adequate grounds existed for detaining persons on the grounds of mental ill-health". The guidelines that resulted, UN Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care, [22] have been criticized for ignoring and failing to protect the rights of involuntary patients. [23]

Genocide

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) passed a number of resolutions concerning genocide: UNCHR Decision 9 (XXXV); 1986/18; 1987/25; 1988/28; 1989/16; 1990/19; "Fiftieth Anniversary of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide", 1998/10; and "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide", 1999/67. [24]

In 1978 the UNCHR endorsed the recommendation of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities to distribute widely the Ruhashyankiko Report. [25]

In August 1992, the UNCHR "condemn[ed] absolutely the concept and practice of 'ethnic cleansing'" in the former Yugoslavia but did not describe it as genocide. The Commission's resolution was endorsed by the UNCHR parent body, the United Nations Economic and Social Council. [24] In November 1992, the UNCHR "call[ed] upon all States to consider the extent to which the acts committed in Bosnia ... and in Croatia constitute genocide in accordance with [the Genocide Convention]". [24]

At the request of Canada in May 1994, an emergency meeting was convened to deal with the ongoing genocide in Rwanda. René Degni-Segui was appointed as a Special Rapporteur, immediately visited Rwanda and promptly issued a report on the scope of the genocide. [24]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crimes against humanity</span> Authoritative and systemic acts that severely violate human rights

Crimes against humanity are widespread or systemic criminal acts which are committed by or on behalf of a de facto authority, usually by or on behalf of a state, that grossly violate human rights. Unlike war crimes, crimes against humanity do not have to take place within the context of wars, and they apply to widespread practices rather than acts which are committed by individuals. Although crimes against humanity apply to acts which are committed by or on behalf of authorities, they do not need to be part of an official policy, and they only need to be tolerated by authorities. The first prosecution for crimes against humanity took place during the Nuremberg trials. Initially considered for legal use, widely in international law, following the Holocaust, a global standard of human rights was articulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Political groups or states that violate or incite violations of human rights norms, as they are listed in the Declaration, are expressions of the political pathologies which is associated with crimes against humanity.

A United Nations General Assembly resolution is a decision or declaration voted on by all member states of the United Nations in the General Assembly.

Issues relating to the State of Israel and aspects of the Arab–Israeli conflict and more recently the Iran-Israel conflict occupy repeated annual debate times, resolutions and resources at the United Nations. Since its founding in 1948, the United Nations Security Council, has adopted 79 resolutions directly related to the Arab–Israeli conflict as of January 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Human Rights Council</span> United Nations body tasked with the promotion of human rights

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is a United Nations body whose mission is to promote and protect human rights around the world. The Council has 47 members elected for staggered three-year terms on a regional group basis. The headquarters of the Council are at the United Nations Office at Geneva in Switzerland.

The International law bearing on issues of Arab–Israeli conflict, which became a major arena of regional and international tension since the birth of Israel in 1948, resulting in several disputes between a number of Arab countries and Israel.

The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights was a think tank of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. It was wound up in late August 2006.

Christopher John Robert Dugard, known as John Dugard, is a South African professor of international law. His main academic specializations are in Roman-Dutch law, public international law, jurisprudence, human rights, criminal procedure and international criminal law. He has served on the International Law Commission, the primary UN institution for the development of international law, and has been active in reporting on human-rights violations by Israel in the Palestinian territories.

Human rights in Israel refers to human rights in the State of Israel both legally and in practice. The subject has been evaluated by intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and human rights activists, often in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the wider Arab–Israeli conflict and Israel internal politics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International response to the War in Darfur</span>

While there is a consensus in the international community that ethnic groups have been targeted in Darfur and that crimes against humanity have therefore occurred, there has been debate in some quarters about whether genocide has taken place there. In May 2006, the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur organized by United Nations "concluded that the Government of the Sudan has not pursued a policy of genocide ... [though] international offences such as the crimes against humanity and war crimes that have been committed in Darfur may be more serious and heinous than genocide." Eric Reeves, a researcher and frequent commentator on Darfur, has questioned the methodology of the commission's report.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">UN Watch</span>

UN Watch is a Geneva-based non-governmental organization whose stated mission is "to monitor the performance of the United Nations by the yardstick of its own Charter". It is an accredited NGO in Special Consultative Status to the UN Economic and Social Council and an Associate NGO to the UN Department of Public Information.

Issues relating to the State of Palestine and aspects of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict occupy continuous debates, resolutions, and resources at the United Nations. Since its founding in 1948, the United Nations Security Council, as of January 2010, has adopted 79 resolutions directly related to the Arab–Israeli conflict.

The International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur was established pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1564 (2004), adopted on 18 September 2004. The resolution, passed under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, urged the Secretary-General to set up an international commission to investigate human rights violations committed in Darfur. The following month, the Secretary-General appointed a five-member panel of highly regarded legal experts: chairperson Antonio Cassese, Mohammed Fayek, Hina Jilani, Dumisa Ntsebeza and Thérèse Striggner Scott.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Schabas</span> Canadian academic (born 1950)

William Anthony Schabas, OC is a Canadian academic specialising in international criminal and human rights law. He is professor of international law at Middlesex University in the United Kingdom, professor of international human law and human rights at Leiden University in the Netherlands, and an internationally respected expert on human rights law, genocide and the death penalty. Schabas has been described as "the world expert on the law of genocide and international law."

Criticism of the United Nations has encompassed numerous arguments regarding various aspects of the organization, such as policy, ideology, equality of representation, administration, ability to enforce rulings, and ideological bias. Often cited points of criticism include: a perceived lack of the body's efficacy, antisemitism, appeasement, collusion, promotion of globalism, inaction, abuse of power by nations exerting general control over the Assembly, corruption, and misappropriation of resources. A number of decisions by the United Nations is seen as a failure to prevent armed conflicts and enforce the Charter of the United Nations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict</span> Team formed in 2009 to investigate human rights violations by Israel against Palestinians in Gaza

The United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, also known as the Goldstone Report, was a United Nations fact-finding mission established in April 2009 pursuant to Resolution A/HRC/RES/S-9/1 of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) of 12 January 2009, following the Gaza War as an independent international fact-finding mission "to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying Power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression". South African jurist Richard Goldstone was appointed to head the mission. The other co-authors of the Report were Hina Jilani, Christine Chinkin and Desmond Travers.

The term international framework of sexual violence refers to the collection of international legal instruments – such as treaties, conventions, protocols, case law, declarations, resolutions and recommendations – developed in the 20th and 21st century to address the problem of sexual violence. The framework seeks to establish and recognise the right all human beings to not experience sexual violence, to prevent sexual violence from being committed wherever possible, to punish perpetrators of sexual violence, and to provide care for victims of sexual violence. The standards set by this framework are intended to be adopted and implemented by governments around the world in order to protect their citizens against sexual violence.

From July 8 to August 26, 2014, another conflict between Israel and Gaza escalated and led to the outbreak of a war between Israel and Gaza. Between 2,127- 2,168 Gazans were killed, including 578 children. The Gaza Health Ministry reported more than 70% of the victims were civilians whilst Israel reported that 55% of the dead were civilians. On the Israeli side 66 soldiers and 5 Israeli civilians, including one child, were killed. These violent outbreaks led to various speeches regarding the Gaza Conflict in front of the United Nations, given by the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, the President of the Palestinian National Authority, Mahmoud Abbas and members of the Human Right Watch and Representatives of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict.

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran is a United Nations Special Rapporteur whose mandate is to monitor and investigate human rights violations in Iran. The current Special Rapporteur is Javaid Rehman. He is the sixth special rapporteur to Iran, following the tenures of Andrés Aguilar (1984–1986), Reynaldo Galindo Pohl (1986–1995), Maurice Copithorne (1995–2002), Ahmed Shaheed (2011–2016), and Asma Jilani Jahangir (2016–2018).

References

  1. "UN creates new human rights body". BBC. 15 March 2006.
  2. "Brief historic overview of the Commission". United Nations Human Rights Council. Retrieved 22 June 2018.
  3. "Administrative Committee on Coordination (ACC)" (PDF). Administrative Committee on Coordination (ACC). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 19, 2014.
  4. Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Retrieved 2010-04-19
  5. Archived April 28, 2015, at the Wayback Machine
  6. "Human Rights Special Procedures: Determinants of Influence" (PDF). Retrieved August 28, 2014.
  7. Thematic Mandates Archived April 28, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
  8. Country Mandates Archived March 5, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
  9. 1 2 "The Shame of the United Nations". New York Times. 2006-02-26. Retrieved 2006-08-15.
  10. Vreeland, James Raymond (2019-05-11). "Corrupting International Organizations". Annual Review of Political Science. 22 (1): 205–222. doi: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-050317-071031 . ISSN   1094-2939.
  11. Annan, Kofi (2005). "In Larger Freedom, Report of the Secretary-General of the United Nations for decision by Heads of State and Government in September 2005". The United Nations.
  12. Crossette, Barbara (December 1, 2008). "A Disappointing Record, Will the new Human Rights Council take its mandate seriously?". America Magazine. Retrieved 2015-09-28.
  13. Sudan keeps U.N. human rights post - World news - nbcnews.com
  14. "UN: U.S. Loses Seat On Rights Commission In Surprise Vote" . Retrieved 2021-01-12.
  15. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2010-07-15. Retrieved 2010-05-04.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  16. "The Struggle against Anti-Israel Bias at the UN Commission on Human Rights". UN Watch . 4 January 2006. Archived from the original on 23 October 2013. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
  17. Anne Bayefsky: Ending Bias in the Human Rights System New York Times, May 22, 2002.
  18. UN Commission on Human Rights, Resolution 2002/8 "E/CN.4/RES/2002/8 of 15 April 2002". Archived from the original on April 2, 2015. Retrieved March 27, 2012., UN Doc. E/CN.4/RES/2002/8, 15 April 2002.
  19. See e.g. Question of the Violation of Human Rights in the Occupied Arab Territories, Including Palestine Archived April 2, 2015, at the Wayback Machine Commission on Human Rights, Fifty-eighth session, Agenda item 8. E/CN.4/2002/L.16. 9 April 2002.
  20. Steven Edwards: UN Backs Palestinian Violence Christian Action for Israel, April 16, 2002.
  21. Ed Morgan: Slaughterhouse-Six: Updating the Law of War, Part 2 of 2 Archived June 3, 2011, at the Wayback Machine German Law Journal, Vol. 5 No. 5–1 May 2004.
  22. G.A. Res. 119, U.N. GAOR, 46th Sess., Supp. № 49, vol. 1, at 188–192, U.N. Doc. A/46/49 (Vol. I) (1992‑02‑18) [A/RES/46/119 Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care, adopted 1991‑12‑17].
  23. Richard Gosden, “Coercive Psychiatry, Human Rights & Public Participation,” in: Brian Martin, ed., Technology & Public Participation (University of Wollongong, 1999), pp. 143–167. Archived October 14, 2004, at the Wayback Machine .
  24. 1 2 3 4 Schabas, William (2000). Genocide in international law: the crimes of crimes, Cambridge University Press, ISBN   0-521-78790-4, ISBN   978-0-521-78790-1 pp. 468,469
  25. Schabas, p.466 footnote 124 citing UNCHR Decision 9 (XXXV).