“Human Rights Council”

By

SHERAZ AHMAD
35187
To

Dr. WALEED RASOOL

Professor Of

United Nations: Reforms and Restructuring

This Assignment is submitted as partial fulfilment
of the requirement of the degree of
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE
IN
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC POLICY

RIPHAH INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY ISLAMABAD
Table Of Content

Introduction
Historical Background
Structure and Membership
Mandate and Functions
Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
Special Procedures
Complaint Procedure
Advisory Committee and Expert Mechanisms
Major Challenges and Criticisms
Human Rights Council and Key Global Crises
Reforms and the Future
Conclusion

Introduction
The Human Rights Council (HRC) was established in 2006 as part of the United Nations’ efforts to create
a stronger, more focused body dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights around the
world. It replaced the earlier UN Commission on Human Rights, which had faced widespread criticism for
being ineffective and overly politicized. The formation of the HRC was a recognition of the fact that in a
world constantly grappling with injustice, discrimination, and violations of basic rights, there was a need
for a more robust and dynamic institution to address these issues.

The HRC operates as an intergovernmental body, meaning that it consists of 47 member states elected
by the UN General Assembly. These members come from all regions of the world, ensuring that a broad
spectrum of perspectives is represented. The Council’s mandate is wide-ranging, as it is tasked not only
with addressing human rights violations but also with promoting a culture of respect for human dignity,
fairness, and equality. It meets several times a year in Geneva, where governments, civil society
organizations, and independent experts come together to discuss pressing human rights concerns, share
reports, and propose solutions.

One of the Council’s most innovative features is the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a process through
which the human rights record of every UN member state is reviewed every few years. This mechanism
ensures that no country is above scrutiny and that all states, no matter how powerful or small, are held
accountable for their human rights obligations. The UPR process is based on dialogue rather than
confrontation, allowing countries to reflect on their progress, identify challenges, and receive
recommendations from other states. This collaborative approach has been praised for encouraging
states to take concrete actions to improve the human rights situation within their borders.
In addition to the UPR, the HRC also appoints Special Rapporteurs—independent experts tasked with
investigating and reporting on specific human rights issues or situations in particular countries. These
experts play a critical role in uncovering and documenting human rights abuses, often in regions where
access to information is limited, or governments are unwilling to cooperate. Their findings are used to
build international awareness and pressure, sometimes leading to meaningful change on the ground.
Over the years, the HRC has addressed a wide variety of human rights issues, ranging from civil and
political rights, such as freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial, to economic, social, and
cultural rights, including the right to education and adequate living standards. The Council has taken up
cases of abuses in conflict zones, racial discrimination, gender-based violence, and the rights of
marginalized groups, such as indigenous peoples, migrants, and people with disabilities. It has also been
a platform for tackling emerging challenges like the impact of climate change on human rights and the
consequences of digital technologies for privacy and freedom.
However, the Human Rights Council has not been without its critics. One of the most persistent critiques
is that it can be overly politicized, with member states sometimes prioritizing their national interests
over the universal principles of human rights. There have been instances where countries with poor
human rights records have been elected to the Council, raising concerns about its credibility and moral
authority. Additionally, the Council’s response to some crises has been slow, often hampered by
diplomatic maneuvering and disagreements among its members.
Despite these challenges, the Human Rights Council remains a crucial institution in the global effort to
protect human rights. Its work has brought attention to countless human rights violations, provided a
voice to the oppressed, and created pathways for holding violators accountable. While there is room for
reform and improvement, the Council represents the international community’s ongoing commitment to
the idea that all people, regardless of their nationality, race, religion, or gender, are entitled to live in
dignity, free from fear and oppression. In a world where human rights continue to be under threat, the
Human Rights Council’s role as a defender of human dignity is more important than ever.

Historical Background
The Human Rights Council has its roots in the older UN Human Rights Commission, which was formed in
1946, just after World War II, as part of efforts to ensure atrocities like those seen during the war would
not happen again. The Commission played a significant role in creating the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights in 1948, one of the most important documents in human history. However, by the early
2000s, the Commission faced criticism for being too political, as countries with poor human rights
records often sat on the Commission, which affected its credibility.
To address these concerns, the UN decided to reform the system. In 2005, during a period of broad UN
reforms, then-Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for a new, more credible and effective body. This led
to the establishment of the Human Rights Council in 2006, with a stronger mandate and clearer
processes to tackle human rights violations.

Structure and Membership

The Human Rights Council is made up of 47 member states that are elected by the UN General Assembly
for three-year terms. Members are chosen through a secret ballot, ensuring that no one can easily
influence the selection process. The Council is structured to ensure that representation is balanced
across the globe. Membership is divided among regions: 13 seats for Africa, 13 for Asia, 8 for Latin
America and the Caribbean, 6 for Eastern Europe, and 7 for Western Europe and other states.
Countries can serve for up to two consecutive terms before taking a break. What makes the membership
interesting is that all countries, whether large or small, have an equal vote. But this has also led to
controversy because some nations with questionable human rights records have been elected. For
example, countries like Saudi Arabia and China have been members, which raised concerns due to their
own human rights violations.
The Council has a President and four Vice Presidents, elected for a one-year term, who help guide the
Council’s work and ensure discussions remain focused.

Mandate and Functions

The Human Rights Council’s mandate is broad and essential: it aims to promote and protect human
rights worldwide. This includes investigating situations where human rights violations are alleged,
providing recommendations to governments on how they can improve, and supporting countries in
developing strategies to better uphold human rights.
The Council works through regular sessions, held three times a year in Geneva, Switzerland. These
sessions are open to member states and observer states, meaning any country can participate in the
discussions, although only members can vote. In between these regular sessions, the Council can hold
special sessions to address urgent human rights crises. For example, the Council convened special
sessions to discuss the humanitarian crises in Syria (2011) and Myanmar (2017).

Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is one of the Council’s most important tools. Introduced in 2008, the
UPR is a process where the human rights record of every UN member state is reviewed every four and a
half years. This is a major step forward in making sure all countries, no matter how powerful, are held
accountable for their human rights actions.
Each country must submit a report on its human rights situation, after which other countries can ask
questions, provide feedback, and make recommendations. The UPR is unique because it’s non-
confrontational—countries can’t refuse the process. It has helped create a global dialogue on human
rights issues and led to many countries making positive changes. For instance, after its UPR, Brazil took
steps to address police violence and improve conditions for indigenous communities. Even though the
process isn’t punitive, peer pressure often works to nudge countries toward improvements.

Special Procedures
Special Procedures refer to the Council’s system of appointing independent experts, known as Special
Rapporteurs, Independent Experts, or Working Groups, who focus on specific human rights issues or
investigate the situation in particular countries. Special Rapporteurs don’t represent governments but
instead act in their individual capacity as experts. There are over 50 different special procedures in place,
covering areas such as freedom of speech, the right to health, and violence against women.
For instance, after the conflict in Myanmar in 2017, which saw the military crackdown on the Rohingya
minority, the Council appointed a Special Rapporteur to investigate and report back on human rights
abuses. These experts travel to countries, gather evidence, talk to victims and governments, and present
their findings to the Council, making recommendations for action.

Complaint Procedure
One of the more unique features of the Human Rights Council is its complaint procedure, which allows
individuals, groups, and non-governmental organizations to file confidential complaints about severe
human rights abuses. Introduced in 2007, this process ensures that even the voiceless can be heard on a
global stage.
Once a complaint is filed, it is reviewed by a Working Group on Communications and the Working Group
on Situations, which determine if the issue is serious enough to be brought before the Council. While the
process is confidential to protect the complainants, it can lead to investigations and recommendations
for improvement. This is particularly useful in countries where human rights defenders face threats for
speaking out.

Advisory Committee and Expert Mechanisms

The Human Rights Council relies on advice from its Advisory Committee, a body of 18 experts elected by
the Council. These experts provide research, propose new ideas, and help shape the Council’s response
to complex human rights issues. They focus on themes like minority rights, climate change’s impact on
human rights, and discrimination.
In addition to the Advisory Committee, the Council has other expert mechanisms, such as the Expert
Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which advises the Council on how to better protect
indigenous populations worldwide.

Major Challenges and Criticisms

Like any international body, the Human Rights Council isn’t perfect. One of the most significant criticisms
it faces is that it’s sometimes used as a political tool. Countries with poor human rights records, like
Russia, Venezuela, and China, have been members in the past, and their election often raises eyebrows.
These countries can vote on human rights issues even though they themselves are accused of violating
human rights, which undermines the Council’s credibility.
Another criticism is that the Council has been slow to act in some cases. For example, it took a while for
the Council to respond to the Syrian crisis after the civil war began in 2011. Some say this delay allowed
human rights violations to continue unchecked. Nonetheless, the Council remains an essential platform
for international cooperation on human rights.

Human Rights Council and Key Global Crises

Over the years, the Council has addressed many global crises. For example, during the Syrian Civil War,
the Council conducted multiple investigations into war crimes and human rights abuses, pressuring the
international community to take action. Similarly, after the 2017 Rohingya crisis in Myanmar, the Council
played a vital role in investigating crimes against humanity committed by the military.
While the Council doesn’t have the power to enforce its decisions like a court, it can create moral
pressure and build global consensus around human rights violations, pushing for international action.

Reforms and the Future

Reforms and the future of the Human Rights Council (HRC) have been subjects of growing debate and
reflection in recent years, with many recognizing the need for improvements to ensure the Council’s
effectiveness and credibility. While the HRC has made significant strides in addressing human rights
violations globally, the landscape of human rights is continuously evolving, and the Council must adapt
to meet new challenges.
One of the key areas where reform is needed is in the selection of its members. The election process for
the Council has been criticized for allowing countries with poor human rights records to gain
membership. This has often led to concerns about the Council’s legitimacy, as some states use their
position to deflect criticism or avoid scrutiny, undermining the very purpose of the Council. Moving
forward, there is a pressing need to reform the criteria for membership, ensuring that states are held to
a higher standard when seeking to serve on the Council. A more rigorous vetting process, possibly
requiring a review of the human rights practices of prospective members, could help ensure that those
who sit on the Council are truly committed to upholding human rights principles.
Another area ripe for reform is the Council’s ability to respond swiftly and effectively to urgent human
rights crises. Currently, the process of addressing violations can be slow, burdened by political
maneuvering and lengthy procedures. There is a need for a more streamlined approach that allows the
HRC to take immediate action when situations of severe human rights abuses emerge, such as in cases of
genocide, ethnic cleansing, or other mass atrocities. This could involve granting the Council more
authority to act independently or increasing the power of its Special Rapporteurs and independent
experts to intervene and report more rapidly on urgent matters.
The HRC also faces the challenge of ensuring that its work remains balanced and inclusive. Critics have
often pointed out that the Council focuses disproportionately on certain countries or regions, while
neglecting others where serious human rights violations are occurring. This uneven attention can fuel
accusations of bias and politicization. Going forward, the Council must strive to maintain a more
balanced approach, ensuring that all regions and issues receive adequate attention. This could be
achieved by strengthening the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism to make sure it covers a
wider range of issues, and by increasing transparency in the selection of topics and countries that are
reviewed.
In terms of the future, the HRC must also look beyond traditional human rights issues to address
emerging concerns. The world is facing new and complex challenges that affect human rights, such as
climate change, technological advancements, and economic inequality. Climate change, for example, has
profound implications for human rights, affecting everything from the right to food and water to the
right to shelter and life itself. As environmental degradation worsens, the HRC will need to focus more on
the link between environmental issues and human rights, possibly developing new frameworks or
guidelines that address these interconnected problems.
Similarly, the rise of digital technology and artificial intelligence presents new human rights concerns.
Issues such as mass surveillance, data privacy, and the use of AI in decision-making processes all have
significant implications for individual freedoms and rights. The HRC must expand its mandate to include
these modern concerns, ensuring that human rights protections evolve alongside technological
advancements. This may involve engaging with tech companies, governments, and civil society
organizations to create international standards for digital rights and ethical AI use.
Civil society and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) will continue to play a crucial role in shaping
the future of the Human Rights Council. These groups often serve as the voice for marginalized and
oppressed communities, bringing attention to human rights abuses that might otherwise be ignored.
Strengthening the relationship between the HRC and these organizations will be vital in ensuring that a
wide range of perspectives and voices are heard. The Council should explore ways to better integrate
civil society into its processes, giving them a more prominent role in investigations, consultations, and
decision-making.
In addition to reforms within the Council, the international community as a whole must show a stronger
commitment to supporting the HRC’s work. Too often, the success of the Council is hampered by a lack
of political will from its member states. States must be willing to engage with the HRC in good faith,
upholding the recommendations made through the UPR and cooperating fully with the Council’s
investigations. This also means providing the Council with the financial resources it needs to carry out its
mandate effectively. Underfunding is a significant issue, limiting the Council’s ability to conduct thorough
investigations or support Special Rapporteurs in their work. By increasing funding and resources,
member states can empower the HRC to respond more effectively to global human rights challenges.
The future of the Human Rights Council will depend not only on the reforms it adopts but also on the
broader global environment. As geopolitical tensions rise and new challenges emerge, the Council must
remain flexible and resilient. Its ability to adapt, reform, and innovate will determine whether it can
continue to serve as the leading global institution for human rights protection. The world today demands
a more responsive, transparent, and committed HRC that can address not only current human rights
violations but also anticipate and mitigate future threats to human dignity and freedom.

Conclusion
The Human Rights Council (HRC), established in 2006 as a subsidiary of the United Nations General
Assembly, has played a pivotal role in advancing global human rights protection and addressing
violations worldwide. Over the years, it has evolved into a key platform for international dialogue,
enabling states to come together and collectively address complex human rights issues. The Council’s
unique mechanism, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), provides a comprehensive framework for
assessing the human rights records of all UN member states, ensuring that no country is exempt from
scrutiny. This peer-review system has encouraged accountability and cooperation, fostering an
environment where states are not only critiqued but are also given constructive recommendations to
improve their human rights conditions.
The HRC has also been instrumental in bringing attention to and investigating some of the most pressing
human rights crises around the world, from civil conflicts and authoritarian regimes to issues such as
racial discrimination, gender-based violence, and the rights of minorities and vulnerable populations. By
appointing Special Rapporteurs and independent experts, the Council has managed to highlight systemic
abuses in various regions and provide detailed reports, often shedding light on situations that might
otherwise be overlooked or suppressed by the international community. Furthermore, the HRC’s
commitment to thematic issues like freedom of expression, the right to education, and the rights of
migrants and refugees underscores its holistic approach to human rights, recognizing the
interconnectedness of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.
Despite these achievements, the HRC has not been without its challenges and criticisms. Accusations of
politicization and bias, particularly with regard to the election of member states with questionable
human rights records, have been frequent. Some countries have used their membership to shield
themselves or their allies from criticism, diluting the Council’s credibility. Additionally, there have been
concerns about the disproportionate focus on specific issues, particularly with regard to certain regions
or states, which detractors argue undermines the universality of the Council’s mission.
Yet, despite these criticisms, the HRC remains a vital institution for the promotion and protection of
human rights globally. Its success lies not only in its ability to address violations but also in its capacity to
adapt and evolve. The Council has demonstrated resilience in responding to emerging global challenges,
such as climate change’s impact on human rights, the rise of digital surveillance, and the implications of
global migration patterns. Moreover, it has shown a willingness to incorporate the voices of civil society,
non-governmental organizations, and other non-state actors, making the protection of human rights a
more inclusive endeavor.
In conclusion, the Human Rights Council stands as a testament to the international community’s ongoing
commitment to uphold the dignity and rights of individuals worldwide. While its journey has been
marked by both significant accomplishments and substantial obstacles, its role in shaping the global
human rights landscape remains undeniable. As the world continues to grapple with new and ongoing
human rights challenges, the Council’s future lies in its ability to remain impartial, ensure accountability,
and strengthen cooperation among nations. The success of the HRC, ultimately, will depend on the
collective will of its members to prioritize human rights over political interests, ensuring that it remains a
robust defender of universal human dignity and justice for generations to come.