Universal Periodic Review

Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) play an important, albeit limited, role in the United Nations most recent human rights monitoring mechanism, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Drawing on empirical data from an Australian case study and interviews with international stakeholders, the study explores the NGO role and influence in this state-centric, peer review mechanism. Case study findings indicate that recommendations made by NGOs, in particular a coalition of domestic NGOs, correlate closely with many UPR recommendations but that United Nations sources are more influential. This suggests that other United Nation human rights mechanisms complement the UPR, so that NGOs should continue to engage with both these and the UPR.

This article examines the effectiveness of Nigeria’s engagement with the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review Mechanism (UPR). After two cycles of the UPR and now in the third cycle, questions on the impact of the UPR process on the ground is gaining increasing attention and there is now a growing focus on state implementation of UPR recommendations. This article engages with this issue in the context of Nigeria. It analyses the extent of Nigeria’s engagement with the UPR mechanism and considers the potential for acculturation. Given the threat of terrorism which continues to confront Nigeria, this article examines the extent to which the Nigerian government’s fight against terrorism has impacted on its engagement with the UPR mechanism.

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) represents an innovation in the monitoring of human rights in international level. Discussing with hypotheses about shaming, this article stands back from the division between allies and non-allies to verify, within the scope of UPR, the postulation of the interests of the countries of the so-called Northern Triangle and Mexico on the protection of immigrants in the US. From the analysis of the recommendations made to the US in the migratory field, we argue that the primary variable to determine the relational dynamics of the decision to make and follow recommendations is the stock of undocumented migrants from the recommending countries in the US. The article concludes that UPR represents more than a space to produce shaming, but a political opportunity for countries, including the less powerful ones, to publicly put their interests before the hegemonic power, which makes the recent US exit from HCR even more serious.

The Universal Periodic Review is an innovative mechanism for protecting and promoting human rights within the United Nations. Instituted by the Human Rights Council in 2006, it reviews human rights situations in all States. This article analyses the configuration of this new procedure in order to assess its success in de-politicizing human rights, and in providing substantive output on the improvement of human rights at domestic level. While it remains early to detect trends, the experience of the first session of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review could shed light on both positive developments and concerns.

Some states, having gained increased weight in the United Nations [UN] human rights machinery, pushed through reforms of the Charter-bodies designed to limit their powers of investigation. This paper focuses on the impact of these views in relation to the methods of work developed by special procedures. However, it also highlights how the limits imposed on the freedom enjoyed so far by mandate-holders in the performance of their functions may have provided the most powerful arguments to overcome their brittle legal foundations, and to provide sound legal basis to the most intrusive activities of such procedures. The approval of a Code of Conduct appears to endorse a practice that subverts the traditional requirement of state consent when monitoring activities result in a final assessment based on international law as to the existence of a violation

This article examines the effectiveness of South Africa's engagement with the Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review Mechanism (UPR). After two cycles of the UPR, questions on the ability of the UPR mechanism to improve the human rights situation on the ground is gaining increasing attention. This article underscores the value of cooperation and dialogue in monitoring human rights implementation. It analyses the extent of South Africa's engagement with the UPR mechanism and considers the potential impact of human rights ritualism in the UPR engagement of South Africa.

This paper analyzes recommendations made to states under the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in order to determine whether or not the UPR is making meaningful recommendations to states under review. The UPR reviews the human rights of all UN Member States every four years. During the review, each state receives a number of recommendations from other UN member states. This paper uses data from UPR Info to determine if states with better human rights performance as measured by the CIRI human rights data project receive fewer recommendations than states with worse performance. It finds that, even when controlling for other factors, states with worse records on civil and political rights generally receive more recommendations than states with better records. States with lower scores from CIRI on women's economic and political rights receive more recommendations regarding women's issues than states with higher scores. These findings hold regardless of region, suggesting that, at a minimum, the UPR process is identifying violators of human rights.

Indonesia is one of a handful of UN Member Nations which has resisted becoming a State Party to the Genocide Convention. Given its long and dark history of mass atrocity crimes, it is unlikely Indonesia will ratify the Genocide Convention in the near future. Yet in the past two decades since beginning the democratisation process in 1998, Indonesia has been praised for its improvements in the promotion of human rights, regionally within ASEAN and internationally. Indonesia is the fourth most populous country in the world and has long seen itself as the region’s natural leader. Former President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (2004-14) did much to try to raise Indonesia’s international profile within the UN and regional organisations, self-consciously positioning at different times as a middle power, an advocate for human rights, and a buffer between China and the West. Despite its willingness to advocate on humanitarian issues at the regional and international levels, Indonesia shows little progress implementing adequate protection against serious human rights abuses at the domestic level.

Since its inception, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) has been subjected to a substantial amount of criticism. The mechanism began functioning in 2008, however little has been made known about the roles and functions of the UPR. This article explicitly examines the first UPR process of Malaysia in 2009, in order to illustrate how the mechanism operates in practice by highlighting the engagement of Malaysia government with the stakeholders, the follow-up process and the main issues concerned. This article argues that in spite of the excellent diplomacy skills that were portrayed by the Malaysian government in the UPR session, the human rights situation in the country has not improved much. This paper seeks to determine how effective the UPR has been at encouraging human rights reforms nationally by analyzing and assessing the implementation actions of the Malaysian government in response to their accepted UPR recommendations.

Peer-reviewed mechanisms for the implementation of human rights such as the Universal Periodic Review rely upon traditional sovereign state diplomacy for contemporary human rights implementation. This is a positive development as a) at a theoretical level, as it reveals an evolving maturity of the human rights regime with a capacity to detach from exclusively legalistic approaches to human rights implementation; b) at a policy level, there is enough evidence of measured positive outcomes of peer-reviewed mechanisms to suggest a preference for more cooperative approaches to human rights as a first and complementary step to other more law-based/adversarial means of implementation; and c) peer-reviewed mechanisms offer a theoretical and pragmatic framework conciliating between universalist and relativist conceptual approaches to human rights, while accommodating views of international law and integrating respect for sovereignty

Despite considerable efforts put into the guidance and practice of human rights-based approaches within international development evaluations, systematic human rights analyses continue to be an often-neglected domain in practice. This practice note provides an entry
point into human rights reporting mechanisms as a resource for evaluators. International human rights mechanisms can provide a window into the relationship between a government’s priorities and international expectations, and can provide insight into both the
development and human rights achievements and challenges within a particular national context. An analysis of the dialogue-through-reporting between governments and human rights committees can provide the basis of a framework which can be used to inquire further and validate through the evaluation.

El Examen Periódico Universal (EPU) de las Naciones Unidas es el principal mecanismo internacional para monitorear los derechos humanos, puesto que todos los Estados miembros de la ONU tienen sus situaciones de derechos humanos revisadas periódicamente. Con este fin, esta investigación se limita al análisis de la participación de España, Grecia e Italia, como países revisados, en el segundo ciclo del mecanismo del EPU en el campo de la migración. Por lo tanto, este trabajo se enfoca en una revisión documental de la actuación de estos Estados en dicho mecanismo. Así, son identificadas las principales recomendaciones recibidas por los Estados y, aún, se incluye la intermediación respecto a las posiciones de los gobiernos en lo que se refiere a la aceptación o no de las recomendaciones.

The Human Rights Council was born in 2006 replacing the inefficient Commission on Human Rights of the United Nations (UN). In order to guarantee human rights in the member States of the UN, the Council created the Universal Periodic Review, which assesses reports provided by States, the Office of the High Commissioner of the United Nations for Human Rights and relevant institutions in promotion of human rights, to enable advances in the area within countries over a period of four years. This article aims to analyze the recommendations made to Brazil in two cycles of the review, and to evaluate the measures taken by the same as the recommendations on the public policy on security in the prison system. Brazil still fails to perform the recommendations, of which seventeen realized in these two cycles are related to the prison and penitentiary issues of the country. Although measures are taken, such as the National Program to Support the Prison System, the New Law of Provisional Measures, and Effort Prison of the National Council of Justice, there is still a long way for Brazil to ensure the necessary changes to guarantee the human rights in the prison system.
Keywords: Human Rights Council; Universal Periodic Review; Brazilian prison system; Human rights.

O Conselho de Direitos Humanos nasceu em 2006 como substituição a ineficiente Comissão de Direitos Humanos das Nações Unidas (ONU). De forma a garantir os direitos humanos nos Estados-membros da ONU, o Conselho cria a Revisão Periódica Universal, que avalia relatórios fornecidos pelos Estados, pelo Escritório do Alto Comissariado das Nações Unidas para Direitos Humanos, e instituições relevantes destinadas à promoção dos direitos humanos, a fim de possibilitar avanços na área dentro dos países num período de quatro anos. O presente artigo visa analisar as recomendações feitas ao Brasil nos dois ciclos já ocorridos da Revisão, assim como avaliar as medidas tomadas pelo mesmo quanto às recomendações acerca da política pública de segurança no sistema prisional. O Brasil ainda mostra-se falho em cumprir as recomendações, das quais dezessete concluídas nesses dois ciclos são relacionadas à questão carcerária e penitenciária do país. Apesar de medidas tais como o Programa Nacional de Apoio ao Sistema Prisional, da Nova Lei de Medidas Cautelares e do Mutirão Carcerário do Conselho Nacional de Justiça, ainda há um longo caminho a ser percorrido para que o Brasil garanta as mudanças necessárias para a garantia dos direitos humanos no sistema prisional.
Palavras-chave: Conselho de Direitos Humanos; Revisão Periódica Universal; Sistema prisional brasileiro; Direitos humanos.