On 18 June 2007, the
Human Rights Council adopted the President text entitled "UN Human Rights
Council: Institution Building" (resolution 5/1) by which a new Complaint
Procedure is being established to address consistent patterns of gross and reliably
attested violations of all human rights and all fundamental freedoms occurring
in any part of the world and under any circumstances.
The new Complaint
Procedure is established in compliance with the mandate entrusted to the Human
Rights Council by General Assembly resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006, in which
the Council was requested to review and, where necessary, improve and
rationalize, within one year after the holding of its first session, all
mandates, mechanisms, functions and responsibilities of the former Commission
on Human Rights, including the 1503 procedure, in order to maintain a system of
special procedures, expert advice and a complaint procedure.
Accordingly, ECOSOC
resolution 1503 (XLVIII) of 27 May 1970 as revised by resolution 2000/3 of 19 June
2000, served as a working basis for the establishment of a new Complaint
Procedure and was improved where necessary to ensure that the complaint
procedure be impartial, objective, efficient, victims-oriented and conducted in
a timely manner.
Review of the 1503
procedure
In compliance with
the mandate entrusted to it by the General Assembly, the Council decided on 30
June 2006 to establish the Working Group on the implementation of operative
paragraph 6 of General Assembly resolution 60/251 (decision 1/104), to
formulate concrete recommendations on the issue of reviewing and when
necessary, improving and rationalizing all mandates, mechanisms, functions and
responsibilities of the former Commission on Human Rights, including the 1503
procedure.
The Working Group
held three formal open-ended sessions from 13 to 24 November 2006, 5 to 16
February 2007 and 10 to 27 April 2007. The segment on the complaint procedure
was chaired by the Permanent Representative of Switzerland , who was appointed
by the President of the Council to facilitate the consultations on this
mechanism. Discussions in the Working Group and various rounds of informal
consultations were conducted on the basis of an initial and subsequently
revised framework for discussions prepared by the Facilitator. Following the
last session of the Working Group, a final proposal (A/HRC/5/15) was submitted
by the Facilitator to the President, taking into account to the greatest extent
possible, the positions expressed during several months of consultations, with
a view to facilitating the drafting of the section on the Complaint Procedure
of a final document on institution building of the Council to be adopted in
June 2007.
Summaries of the
discussions held in the Working Group on the Complaint Procedure are contained
in documents A/HRC/3/CRP.3, A/HRC/4/CRP.6 and A/HRC/5/CRP.6.
How does the
complaint procedure work?
Pursuant to Council
resolution 5/1, the Complaint Procedure is being established to address
consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of all human
rights and all fundamental freedoms occurring in any part of the world and
under any circumstances.
It retains its
confidential nature, with a view to enhancing cooperation with the State
concerned. The procedure, inter alia, is to be victims-oriented and conducted
in a timely manner.
Two distinct working
groups - the Working Group on Communications and the Working Group on
Situations - are established with the mandate to examine the communications and
to bring to the attention of the Council consistent patterns of gross and
reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Manifestly
ill-founded and anonymous communications are screened out by the Chairperson of
the Working Group on Communications, together with the Secretariat, based on
the admissibility criteria. Communications not rejected in the initial
screening are transmitted to the State concerned to obtain its views on the
allegations of violations.
The Working Group on
Communications (WGC) is designated by the Human Rights Council Advisory
Committee from among its members for a period of three years (mandate renewable
once). It consists of five independent and highly qualified experts and is
geographically representative of the five regional groups. The Working Group
meets twice a year for a period of five working days to assess the
admissibility and the merits of a communication, including whether the
communication alone or in combination with other communications, appears to
reveal a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human
rights and fundamental freedoms. All admissible communications and
recommendations thereon are transmitted to the Working Group on Situations.
The Working Group on
Situations (WGS) comprises five members appointed by the regional groups from
among the States member of the Council for the period of one year (mandate
renewable once). It meets twice a year for a period of five working days in
order to examine the communications transferred to it by the Working Group on
Communications, including the replies of States thereon, as well as the
situations which the Council is already seized of under the complaint
procedure. The Working Group on Situations, on the basis of the information and
recommendations provided by the Working Group on Communications, presents the
Council with a report on consistent patterns of gross and reliably attested
violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms and makes recommendations
to the Council on the course of action to take.
Subsequently, it is
the turn of the Council to take a decision concerning each situation thus
brought to its attention.
What are the
criteria for a communication to be accepted for examination?
A communication
related to a violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms is admissible,
unless:
· It has manifestly political motivations and its object is not
consistent with the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
other applicable instruments in the field of human rights law; or
· It does not contain a factual description of the alleged
violations, including the rights which are alleged to be violated; or
· Its language is abusive. However, such communication may be
considered if it meets the other criteria for admissibility after deletion of
the abusive language; or
· It is not submitted by a person or a group of persons claiming to
be the victim of violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms or by any
person or group of persons, including NGOs acting in good faith in accordance
with the principles of human rights, not resorting to politically motivated
stands contrary to the provisions of the UN Charter and claiming to have direct
and reliable knowledge of those violations. Nonetheless, reliably attested
communications shall not be inadmissible solely because the knowledge of the
individual author is second hand, provided they are accompanied by clear
evidence; or
· It is exclusively based on reports disseminated by mass media; or
· It refers to a case that appears to reveal a consistent pattern of
gross and reliably attested violations of human rights already being dealt with
by a special procedure, a treaty body or other United Nations or similar
regional complaints procedure in the field of human rights; or
· The domestic remedies have not been exhausted, unless it appears
that such remedies would be ineffective or unreasonably prolonged.
The National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), when they are established
and work under the guidelines of the Principles Relating to Status of National
Institutions (the Paris Principles) including in regard to quasi-judicial
competence, can serve as effective means in addressing individual human rights
violations.