United Nations Human Rights Treaty Bodies and Special Procedures of the Commission on Human Rights--Complementarity or Competition?

Abstract

There are two broad clusters of United Nations human rights machinery: those set up under international human rights treaties (treaty bodies) and those established by the UN Commission on Human Rights (special procedures). They are compared and contrasted, in terms of their potential for duplication and the cooperation or competition attendant on it. The two clusters are distinguished from the perspective of their implicit purposes (mainly multilateral for special procedures, mainly bilateral for treaty bodies) and working methods (examined in terms of general country work, case-specific work, and general overview activity). The incidence of direct cooperation is also addressed. The article concludes that the possibilities of duplication are not as numerous as might be expected, they are generally avoidable or can be accommodated administratively where they exist and that, on balance, the clusters perform complementary functions.

The Universal Periodic Review and the Special Procedures: Weird Picasso Abstraction or a Thought-Out Drawing?

“…Unlike recommendations made in the final outcome of the UPR procedure, the recommendations made by SP usually go into great detail as to desirable measures. 37 Those give a much clearer idea of what should be done in order to comply with the human rights obligation. The language used is lapidary 38 and the lack of prescribed form leaves space for the experts to be more creative; the outcomes may, thus, reflect their personal style and the particular style may affect persuasiveness.…”

“…37 Those give a much clearer idea of what should be done in order to comply with the human rights obligation. The language used is lapidary 38 and the lack of prescribed form leaves space for the experts to be more creative; the outcomes may, thus, reflect their personal style and the particular style may affect persuasiveness. There is no common method -formal or customary -for the drafting of the recommendations.…”

“…Early warning mechanism 42 To ensure that every state would need to account to the Council 43 Understanding of phenomena on comparative and global level 44 Improvement of HR situation of all countries; 45 promotion of interdependence, indivisibility and interrelatedness Legitimacy Based on respect for independent expert Based on voluntary participation Perceived legitimacy largely depends on the personality and background of experts and their drafting style Legitimacy based on involvement of all Member States and strong position of the States under review.…”

“…Fragmental but in-depth review Interdependence, indivisibility and interrelatedness of HR; overall but vague review Possibility to review individual cases 46 Impossibility to review individual cases Multilateral focus Bilateral focus Issue focused (mostly)…”

Tehran 1968 and Reform of the UN Human Rights System

“…Nor did it abandon the reform agenda, and, for the remainder of the Commission's existence, it followed a strategy of incremental change. Although far from systematic, consistent, or comprehensive in their approach, the member states of the WEOG nonetheless contributed significantly to the development and advancement of new international human rights law and the establishment of enforcement mechanisms that included expanding the list of countries reviewed under the Resolution 1503 confidential procedures, treaty-monitoring bodies, special rapporteurs, and eventually the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights following the Second World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993 (Rodley 2003). 9 Even so, despite these advances, post-Tehran, the Commission remained both a hostile forum and a disappointment for the WEOG.…”