Report on the 63rd session of the Human Rights Council

Quick summary

The 63rd regular session of the Human Rights Council (HRC63) was held from Monday 7th September to Wednesday 7th October 2026.
On 7 September, the High Commissioner Volker Türk opened HRC63 by presenting a global update on the situation of human rights around the world. He expressed the importance of new emerging threats of human rights on the agency of persons. He touched on the environmental impacts and crisis management necessity that is required in combating the effects of these threats. He highlighted 7 key entry points that will navigate the coming years’ direction. He called on States and governments to act on threats, abuses, and violations of human rights that continue to oppress societies and hinder the opportunity for collaborative engagement and multilateral negotiations. He addressed the importance of a human rights economy that seeks to balance out inequalities in the fight against poverty and injustices. He noted the rising number of femicide cases and the need for legislative and prosecutorial adherence and reform in nullifying the restriction of equal rights on women and girls.
6 panel discussions were held during the session.
86 reports under the Council’s various agenda items were considered.
19 interactive dialogues with Special Procedures mandate holders (14 thematic and 5 country-specific) took place, including those dealing with: a democratic and equitable international order; unilateral coercive measures; the human rights of older persons; contemporary forms of slavery and trafficking in persons; the right to development; toxics; the rights to water and sanitation; mercenaries; enforced or involuntary disappearances; arbitrary detention; truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence; the rights of peasants; the rights of Indigenous Peoples; and People of African descent; Afghanistan; Russian Federation; Burundi; Central African Republic; and Cambodia.
Eight interactive dialogues with investigative mechanisms were held.
Seven new Special Procedure mandate-holders were appointed to the following mandates: Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation; the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea; the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention; the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention; the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls; the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; and the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination.
The outcome reports of the UPR Working Group of the following 15 States were adopted: Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Palau, Paraguay, the Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, the Solomon Islands, and Somalia. The Council could not adopt Nicaragua’s UPR outcome report, as Nicaragua still disengages from the Human Rights Council.
37 texts (34 resolutions, 2 decisions, and one President’s statements) were considered by the Council. This is the same number of adopted texts compared to one-year prior (HRC60). Of the 37 adopted texts, 27 were adopted by consensus (73%), 10 by a recorded vote (27%), and none were rejected.
6 written amendments were put forward by States during the consideration of texts and resolutions: none of them were adopted; 1 was withdrawn and 2 amendments were rejected by a vote.
20 of the texts adopted by the Council (54%) had Programme Budget Implications.

High Commissioner’s briefing

On 7 September 2026, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Volker Türk, addressed the Human Rights Council through his global update on human rights. He warned of ‘diminishing respect for international human rights, humanitarian law, and the United Nations Charter itself,’ but emphasised the strengthened application and universality of human rights in challenging violations. Further, he condemned worldwide, extreme polarisation, which is exacerbated by misinformation and propaganda on social media.

He began by confronting ongoing and escalating conflicts and abuses: between the United States and Iran, with its geopolitical and economic effects felt around the world, he pled for a return to peace negotiations; in Ukraine and Russia, where both States continue field-testing autonomous weapons, he urged a prohibition on deadly autonomous weapons; in Sudan, where attacks continue on civilians and infrastructure, he called for a ceasefire, an end to foreign involvement, access to humanitarian aid, and a move towards democracy; in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, where Israel continues daily strikes and ignores rulings from the International Criminal Court on its attempted annexation of the West Bank, he called on the international community to work towards peace, where both States live side-by-side with dignity; in Lebanon, where Israel and Hezbollah forces continue attacking civilians and infrastructure; and in South Sudan, Yemen, and Ethiopia, where the suffering and hostilities continue.

The High Commissioner highlighted 7 entry points he hopes to build on:

To expose economic and business interests fueling wars and conflicts and the shadow players who support and benefit from conflicts.
To support States in advancing transitional, victim-centred justice that holds perpetrators accountable to avoid vengeance or renewed violence.
To support mediation through confidence-building measures grounded in human rights.
To increase the participation and leadership of women in the peace process, particularly in negotiations in Ukraine, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gaza, and Sudan.
To work with grassroots organisations to mobilise peace worldwide.
To leverage human rights as an early warning tool by strengthening its investigative and analytical capacity in identifying tensions before they escalate into violence.
To push for accountability and sustainable peace and strengthen domestic accountability and support for the International Criminal Court, ensuring that all can face justice, even when domestic courts cannot deliver it.

The High Commissioner identified emerging threats to human rights, such as Artificial Intelligence, emphasising the need for global AI governance and restrictions. He called upon States to agree to regulations and limitations on AI, independent oversight, and stronger collaboration between industry powers. He called upon industry powers to acknowledge citizens’ concerns and consider the human rights impacts of AI on employment, free democracy, and the environment. He acknowledged recent progress internationally, such as establishing the Global Dialogue on AI, the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, and the move towards platform accountability by the European Commission and the Republic of Korea.

Next, he emphasised the need to match technological development with efforts combatting international challenges like the climate crisis. The International Monetary Fund calculated the costs of climate change to our health, economy, and environment at USD $6.7 trillion annually. He implored the global community to focus on limiting global warming to a 1.5 degrees Celsius increase, as stated in the Paris Agreement, by making the current overshoot as “small and short as possible.” Additionally, he warned of profit-driven investments damaging our planet and called for increased early warning systems for natural disasters, like the glacier collapse in Nepal and China.

The High Commissioner addressed the imbalances between the concentration of wealth and power. He noted the economic effect of tariffs on States under debt burdens, inequitable tax rules, and the climate crisis, diminishing States political autonomy and ability to fight poverty. Further, he reported that economic growth is not matched by poverty reductions, creating injustices that strain societies, leading to anger, unbearable costs of living, unemployment, and widening corruption. He stressed the need for transparent institutions, fair taxation, and effective public spending, and pushed for a universal human rights economy with human rights as the heart of global policy.

Regarding civic spaces, he warned of increasing threats to the right to protest, free expression, and information accessibility. Despite civic spaces’ ability to facilitate change, many States resort to repression: in Iran, authorities use war as a pretext for oppression, executing 59 people on national security charges since March 2026 and forcibly closing businesses; in Pakistan, authorities used lethal force and arbitrary detention against protestors, contrasting with India’s response to protests, demonstrating the benefits of dialogue over force; in Nicaragua, authorities closed opposing political parties; in the Russian Federation, authorities suppress opposing parties participation in elections; in Azerbaijan, Georgia, the Russian Federation, Tunisia, and Uganda, restrictions on civic space and media freedoms worsen; in Afghanistan, the de facto authorities prohibit demonstrations nationwide; in Angola, Myanmar, and Serbia, digital surveillance facilitates repression; in Bosnia, politicians fail to counter hate speech, discrimination, or glorifying war criminals; in Venezuela, arbitrarily detained persons remain incarcerated with the High Commissioner unable to access detention facilities. In contrast, he commended Mexico’s protocol that investigates crimes committed against human rights defenders.

The High Commissioner highlighted an alarming rise in femicide and the difficulty tracking femicide due to data gaps, making legislation and prosecution crucial. He noted the importance of addressing causes of discrimination, inequality, and gender stereotypes. Further, he linked increased violence against women to higher social tensions and likelihoods of conflict. In Libya, there is hope new political agreements will facilitate adopting laws on violence against women; in Afghanistan, a plea to the de facto government to nullify policies criminalising women and girls presence in public life, a form of gender-based apartheid; in Burkina Faso, Niger, and Senegal, LGBTIQ+ people face threats as authorities arrest people under discriminatory laws; in Kyrgyzstan, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States, States are adopting or considering restrictions on the equal rights of transgender people.

The High Commissioner noted increasing racism and discrimination towards people of African descent, migrants, and refugees. He recognised recent cuts to anti-discrimination programs and deliberate attempts to distort or erase histories of discrimination. Further, he expressed concerns over the use of isolated incidents by media and politicians to stoke racism and hatred towards migrants, refugees, Muslims, and marginalized groups, prompting attacks on communities. He urged the United States to halt deportations to States where deportees face discrimination, harm, or death, such as Haiti, and to ensure due process to all people. He asked the United States to end the deplorable conditions in immigration facilities, causing 23 deaths in 2026, to ensure accountability, and to halt provisions of weapons, like electric shock gloves, to immigration enforcement.

The High Commissioner highlighted the need to assist governments with justice systems, including incarceration, identifying prisons as a hotbed for radicalisation and extremism. In China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, he urged authorities to investigate human rights violations and torture in detention facilities and called on China to follow OHCHR recommendations. He supported efforts to end the death penalty, which targets minorities, impoverished people, and dissenting voices. He promised to expose State’s use of execution and address militarised approaches to security and law enforcement. In Bangladesh, he called for strengthened and independent national institutions to oversee security forces. He warned that some powers wish to exchange multilateral cooperation for transactional deal-making, undermining global cooperation on climate and health, leading to situations like the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s ongoing fight against Ebola.

In his closing remarks, the High Commissioner warned of the threat of chronic underfunding, requiring greater rationalisation and creativity to see continued improvement under UN80. He noted the power of the Global Alliance for Human Rights to enable activists to stand up to the anti-rights movement. He urged States, civil society organizations, corporations, academics, youths, local governments, and others to co-create solutions to human rights challenges. He closed by urging all to work towards societies that meet their goals under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and stressed the need to promote robust debate, critical thinking, and resolve disagreement through honest discussion.

Panel discussions

A total of six panel discussions were held during the 63rd session. The panels focused on the following topics:

Panel discussion on progress, challenges and opportunities in promoting and protecting economic, social and cultural rights within the context of addressing inequalities (9 September 2026)

The High Commissioner, Mr. Volker Türk, opened the discussion by drawing on the current violence, repression, and war facing the world, while highlighting the quiet forms of war, such as poverty, hunger, and exclusion, that many worldwide endure every day. He acknowledged that the military, economic, political, and technological need for power is a common cause and creator of these crises, with people’s needs being outweighed by increased military spending. For example, international economic and financial institutions outbalance the need for sustainable financing while nearly a third of the world lives on the cusp of extreme poverty. Funding prevents health systems from collapse or instability, the rise in harder-to-contain outbreaks, and climate-related disasters. He stressed the oppressive nature that perpetual policies and choices of those with wealth, influence, and direct public discourse have over restricting competition and shaping taxation that ultimately diminishes the right to freedom, agency, and autonomy, leading to growing unrest. He noted that human rights are about the redistribution of power and supporting governments in implementing inclusive policies that empower people. He warned that our current economic models and approaches fuel destruction when they should be working towards an ideal of fairness, equal participation, and human rights at every level. The High Commissioner ended by drawing on the need to promote sustainable economies that can provide a more equitable living for all through new initiatives and reforms to international financial institutions.

H.E. Mr. Guide Jia, the Permanent Representative of China to the United Nations Office at Geneva highlighted the cooperation efforts led by China and its involvement in the creation of a new mechanism, the Knowledge Hub for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. He reiterated China’s attachment to the promotion and the protection of these rights throughout the world, in partnership with the OHCHR. While China has reached a great number of targets laid in the 2030 Agenda by the Sustainable Development Goals, Mr. Jia shared the High Commissioner’s concerns in the face of financial challenges and growing inequalities. He called for all States to make substantial efforts and consider the promotion of economic, social and cultural rights as a priority on their multilateral agenda. To this end, he urged greater investment in global cooperation, as well as safeguarding multilateralism through global governance and the inclusion of developing countries. He also noted the importance of allowing the OHCHR to fully fulfil its role in coordinating the promotion and protection of rights alongside States and professional networks. He concluded by reaffirming China’s commitment to support the OHCHR and its relevant mechanisms to work towards the equal and full exercise of economic, social and cultural rights around the world.

Ms. Laura Chinchilla, the President of Club de Madrid, started by noting that while there is a growing recognition that economic, social and cultural rights are of importance, it doesn’t necessarily translate into rights which people are able to enjoy. This is illustrated by 2024 figures showing that one in four people around the world doesn’t have access to safe drinking water, or that 1.7 billion does not have basic sanitation services in their home. She highlighted that these gaps and inequalities do not only impact the enjoyment of human rights and our economies, but also the state of our democracies. The Global Commission on Democracy and Multilateralism set up by the Club de Madrid established economic, social and cultural rights as necessary conditions for the exercise of citizenship. In that sense she raised concerns relating to the problem of corruption, which negatively impacts the enjoyment of rights. Ms. Chinchilla called on States to consider the investment in economic, social and cultural rights as an investment into the infrastructures of democracies, and to consider ratifying the Optional Protocol of the ICESCR as a way to strengthen the multilateral system. She highlighted the role of the OHCHR in helping States convert international commitments into implementation, and called on States to ensure that the Office has the financial capacity to pursue such work. She concluded by reiterating the support of the Club de Madrid to the OHCHR in its essential work towards creating fairer societies and sounder democracies.

Ms. Penelope Hawkins, the Head of Debt and Development Finance Branch at UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD) presented the role of public debt in the pursuit of development. She informed the Council of the decreasing fiscal space for developing countries’ governments to invest in areas such as health, education and essential public services. UNCTAD’s work illustrates the growing cost and inaccessibility of debt as a source of development finance, where developing countries pay on average an interest rate three times higher than developed countries do. In 2025 alone, developing countries paid almost 1 trillion USD in interest on public debt, not including the repayment of the debt itself. It was found that if developing countries could access markets at the same rates, they could save up to 500 billion USD per year to invest into economic, social and cultural rights. These deep financial inequalities have concrete impacts on people’s enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, with children having to forgo education, adequate nutrition or adequate health services. As a result, external financing can no longer be a reliable source for development, and simultaneously other sources of external assistance have fallen away. Ms. Hawkins posited that by working alongside UNCTAD, the OHCHR could develop more fulfilled and complete policies. She reiterated the need to strengthen borrowers’ voices and to facilitate peer learning to achieve financial development on sustainable and affordable terms.

Ms. Melissa Akhir, the Commissioner of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM), closed the panelists’ presentations. She highlighted the work of SUHAKAM over two decades in promoting and advancing economic, social and cultural rights at the Malaysian and Asian level. She presented the work of SUHAKAM relating to the development of the right to health, led through monitoring, research and sustained engagement with the government and contributing to concrete actions and reforms. Additionally, she presented the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, which began with intensive research on the impact of businesses on human rights developments. This experience illustrated the importance of continued advocacy, institutional engagement, collaboration, as well as meaningful participation of involved actors. SUHAKAM also guided work relating to Indigenous people and their rights to land, culture and identity. Ms. Akhir nonetheless reminded the Council of the challenges ahead in guaranteeing economic, social and cultural rights. Indeed, the increasing structural inequalities deeply impact the enjoyment of such rights, with a disproportionate burden on vulnerable and marginalised people. Finally, Ms. Akhir concluded by reminding the Council of the essential and critical role of the OHCHR in strengthening engagement with mechanisms and facilitating exchanges of good practice. She strongly recommended an increased investment in National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) at a time of growing inequalities and growing need for support.

Biennial panel discussion on the right to development (11 September 2026)

The Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Awa Dabo, began by highlighting development as a human right and recalling States’ promise to empower all to participate in decisionmaking in the Declaration on the Right to Development, including those who are often disempowered, and demanded more equitable governance in the international economic framework. Further, the Deputy High Commissioner called for urgent implementation of the international financial architecture agreed upon in the Pact for the Future. The Deputy High Commissioner discussed the progress seen since the Declaration on the Right to Development, such as policies honouring the right to development, advances in income, education, health, access to services, and opportunities, which have helped build stable economies and societies. Additionally, the right to development was incorporated as a binding obligation in the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, and aided in constructing the Millenium Development Goals, the Agenda for Sustainable Development, and domestic policies. Despite this progress, she added, people are still forced to make dangerous journeys to find opportunities and provide a life for themselves; meanwhile, half of the world’s adult population shares the same income as the richest 5,600 people, according to the World Inequality Lab. Inequality is exacerbated by unequal terms of trade and unbearable debt repayments, which devastate State budgets and leave millions without essential services. Further, the Deputy High Commissioner cautioned against the recent backtracking of the Sustainable Development Goals progress, and implored States to recommit themselves to their obligations in the Declaration of the Right to Development.

H.E. Ms. Deike Potzel, the Ambassador and Permanent Observer of the European Union to the United Nations Office and other international organisations in Geneva, noted development as a universal right that is indivisible from human dignity. The EU recognises that individuals are the central actor, driver, and beneficiary of development and it is the State’s responsibility, as duty bearer, to provide and fulfil the realisation of human rights, including the right to development. Ambassador Potzel went on to argue that development can only be sustained when economic progress works alongside the promotion of human rights, freedoms, and democracy, fundamental to which is the rule of law, gender equality, and transparent, accountable good governance The EU’s sustainable development policies aim to eradicate poverty, end discrimination, and reduce inequalities as per the 2030 Agenda. The Ambassador highlighted the EU’s commitment to these principles beyond its own borders, for example, through the EU and OECD member States’ provision of USD 112.5 billion in ODA and its contribution of EUR 306 billion over 4 years through the Global Gateway strategy. She reiterated the importance of the right to development in creating a participatory society in which everyone can contribute.

Mr. Frans Viljoen, Expert of the Working Group on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and of the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, brought an African perspective to the right to development. He reminded the Council that the Declaration on the Right to Development has been ratified by 54 of the 55 African Union Member States. He laid down Africa’s commitment to the right of economic, social and cultural development through article 22 of their Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. This provision has established a legally enforceable standard against which exercises of State power have been assessed, for example in DRC or in Kenya. The pioneer contribution of Africa through jurisprudence has contributed to the larger international debate, showing that development cannot merely be reduced to economic growth but also has to consider participation, equity, accountability and respect for communities’ ways of life. He nevertheless contrasted this advancement with the lack of national development by African States, none of which have legally recognised the right to development. Mr. Viljoen pursued this by presenting the Working Group on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Africa and its current work on General Comments on the Right to Development which aims to provide a deeper understanding of the obligations imposed by article 22. He concluded by reminding the Council that the African perspective illustrates that economic growth cannot bring about development when it excludes communities from its benefits or exposes them to environmental harm and climate change, and that it should serve as guidance and inspiration for the UN to build on its Declaration on the Right to Development.

Ms. Juana Maria Ibanez Rivas, member of the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development, noted the timely need to reaffirm the realisation of the right to development in addressing global crises. She reaffirmed the indispensable role of regional mechanisms as a benchmark of the realisation of the right to development. Regional mechanisms have protected the right by directly referring to the Declaration on the Right to Development, but also indirectly by invoking several goals of the Sustainable Development Goals relating to full development as a global human rights goal. She shared the work of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in securing economic, social and cultural rights which place immediate and progressive obligations on States. The Court has recognised the importance of the right to self-determination, and has recently expressed opinions regarding the challenges posed by the climate crisis towards achieving the right to development. Ms. Rivas presented the work of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights in highlighting the importance of women’s participation to ensure equal and efficient rights. In conclusion, she reiterated the important contributions of the two Inter-American organs as regional mechanisms towards securing the right to development. These mechanisms allow for cooperation and collaboration which is indispensable to achieve concrete results and identify good practice that can serve as examples for other States.

High-level panel discussion on the fifteenth anniversary of the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Education and Training: good practices, challenges and the way forward (15 September 2026)

The High Commissioner Mr. Volker Türk started by reminding the Council of repeated human resilience in the face of sanitary, environmental and economical crises, while noting the importance of preventing rather than reacting to such events. In that sense, human rights education is a fundamental pillar to strengthen cooperation and critical thinking as well as foster solidarity and compassion. He reiterated the importance of embedding the right to education in legislation and mandates on all actors, from civil society that can identify and break cycles of violence, to governments who can increase trust and resilience, and to the youth and children who are given the tools to stand up for themselves. The High Commissioner highlighted the successes of the promotion of human rights education in several States such as Colombia, Northern Ireland or Jordan, presenting this practice as a necessity for every society. While appreciating the efforts from 34 States, he nevertheless noted the remaining gaps in legislation, policies and training which become exacerbated in the face of complex challenges like climate change and rapid technological developments. Mr. Türk called on every State to make human rights education compulsory at all levels and in all disciplines and reiterated the commitment of the OHCHR to collaborate with every actor towards this aim.

H.E. Mrs. Davaasuren Gerelmaa, Permanent Representative of Mongolia to the United Nations office and other international organisations in Geneva noted Mongolia’s longstanding commitment to human rights-orientated education from as early as 1997. Mongolia has further strengthened human rights education in response to UPR recommendations from 2011 to 2014 and in 2016 to 2019 through a designated action plan, and recently for 2026 to 2030. She highlighted Mongolia’s strengthening of its legal and institutional foundations in relation to education, including through the adoption of a revised general law on education in 2023 which implements a mandatory inclusion of human rights across all levels of education. She noted Mongolia’s work advancing a second national human rights program aimed at systematically connecting education with institutional capacity and implementation, and reiterated her country’s commitment to action through the establishment of regional human rights training and research centres, which help implement human rights through culture in an equal and dignified manner.

Mr. Goran Gjorgjiev, Regional Director of the World Organisation of the Scout Movement, brought an international perspective of non-formal education. He raised the importance of not solely focusing on learning and awareness, but to also consider the practical application of those learnings. He highlighted how partnerships with several United Nations agencies such as the OHCHR, UNICEF or the WHO, have allowed this connection between human rights standards and practical local projects. Mr. Gjorgjiev presented how scouting can partner with Ministries of Education to transmit human rights education through participation, leadership and service; scouting also illustrates how human rights are best learned through practice, where young people can engage in dialogue, peaceful conflict resolution and teamwork, both as partners and leaders. He called for collaboration between governments, civil society organisations, schools, NHRIs and youth-led movements to ensure that human rights education is accessible to all which, he argued, is particularly necessary in the face of growing challenges such as increasing polarisation, misinformation, and conflict, with an emphasis on digital technologies and gender equality.

Ms. Marion Wanjiku Mutugi, Commissioner of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, focused on ensuring human rights education commitments reach classrooms. She highlighted Kenya’s use of SDG 4.7 , employing evidence-based self assessments, measuring elements, national education policies, curriculum, teacher education, student assessment, and learning environment. In a study examining three Kenyan counties with 230 respondents, Kenya scored 67 per cent from the Ministry of Education, finding human rights content in social studies, history, government, religious education, and English, with 85 per cent of respondents confirming the existence of human rights principles in textbooks. She highlighted the need to disaggregate data and identified three remaining gaps, with 78 per cent of respondents reporting that national policies were developed without participation from county actors, 60 per cent of policymakers identifying limited budgets for human rights education, 84 per cent of schools lacking professional counsellors, and 61 per cent lacking accessible infrastructure. In response, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights issued an advisory, recommending a bottom-up approach with policy formulation, dedicated budgetary allocation, human rights division within the ministry, and functioning complaint mechanisms. Further, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights proposed a cooperative framework to mainstream human rights curriculum and monitor progress. Within five years of implementation, the cooperation created a memorandum of understanding between the Kenya National Commission of Human Rights, Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development, and universities. She recognised the study as a baseline to monitor improvement and promote accountability.

Mr. Alessandro Ienzi, theatre director, artist and human rights lawyer in Italy, started by presenting his vision of human rights, not merely as principles to be taught, but also as experiences that people must be allowed to live. He reflected on his work which questions the involvement of youth in imagining its future and participating in society. He specifically noted the importance of allowing youth to believe in the value of their voice and experience. Through artistic practice in various countries such as Italy, Nigeria or Egypt, he fostered the conditions for their voices to be heard, considered, and trusted. In collaboration with the OHCHR, Mr. Ienzi and his educational model Lab School sought to strengthen this relation between artistic practice and international human rights education, allowing it to become an experience for children around the world. He highlighted that the objective was not to speak on behalf of the youth, but to create alongside them and recognise that they are more than their vulnerabilities and trauma. In conclusion, he reiterated the need for meaningful participation, dialogue and peacebuilding with young people, giving them the possibility to build the world they hope for, in accordance with international human rights.

High-level panel discussion on the sixtieth anniversary of the International Covenants on Human Rights: universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of all human rights (17 September 2026)

The High Commissioner Mr. Volker Türk started by acknowledging the equal importance of both economic, social and cultural rights, and civil and political rights in creating a stable and cohesive institution. He reflected on the legacy of the two covenants and the prior universal understanding that human rights act as the fundamental norms of statehood which enforce and govern authoritative international standards over the treatment of all people. He noted the ecosystem of human rights treaties that have evolved from the covenants to encompass racial and gender-based discrimination, torture, migrant workers, persons with disabilities, and enforced disappearances. He highlighted the impact of the covenants in influencing regional systems and charters, including the domestic implementation of laws drawn from the language of the treaties. The two expert bodies of the covenants have supported global and grassroots activism guided through respect for diverse societies, and ability to call for remedy for rights violations. He referred to the Committee’s commitment to guide States through challenges including peaceful assembly, climate change, and corporate abuses. He stressed his worry for the current state of Treaty Bodies due to funding cuts that have resulted in staff shortages, cancellation of country visits and sessions, and delays in reports and individual petitions for help. He ended by calling for States’ renewed commitments to the Pact for the Future, to ensure that adequate resources are made to allow Treaty Body mandates to be carried out, and the need for reform to this system to allow for more accessible, efficient, and impactful work.

Mr. Changrok Soh, Chair of the Human Rights Committee, hailed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as one of the greatest achievements of international law and as a blueprint for a just and free society. He identified these rights as an important safeguard against the abuse of power that cannot be restricted, regardless of political circumstances, security, or public order. He praised the Human Rights Committee and its work making the treaty a living instrument, strengthening accountability, clarifying obligations, and giving meaning to the rights in the Covenant. He acknowledged the evolution of the Committee as it adapted to new and emerging threats, highlighting upcoming Comments on the freedom of association, the right to privacy in the age of artificial intelligence, the growing concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, and the growing strain on civil societies and accountability actors. He acknowledged the growing geopolitical instability, but assured that the international community has an agreed upon base of rights and freedoms to provide direction in these times. He identified the central challenge as implementation, calling upon States to engage with the Committee and ensure the system has adequate resources. He encouraged greater coordination across treaty bodies and stressed the needs for sustainable working practices, cautioning treaty bodies against absorbing additional duties without sufficient funding to complete the work. He finished by warning against change simply for the sake of change, emphasising the importance of clear objectives and the need to analyze implications.

Mr. Philip Alston, former Chair of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (and former Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights), championed the progress made by the Covenants, yet pointed to the continued use of vague and often open-ended language used within national jurisdictions. He remarked the importance of the Covenants’ use as a normative and institutional frameworks, respectively, noting that praise alone of its progress does not best respond to current challenges. He focused on three reforms: firstly, the need to strengthen interdependence as ESCR-related provisions remain weak and have marginal effect on organisations that influence resource flows and policy directions which leads to increased inequality and unchecked human rights norms; second, the need for Treaty Body system renewal through implementation of technology to expand creative contributions to achieving practical goals in a more efficient and coordinated approach; third, the need to hold the private sector accountable for unregulated and harmful investments that are consequential to the environment and broader economy. He highlighted that slow progress stands in contrast to the urgent need for action when competing interests continue to block progress. He ended by stating that the current approach to identifying solutions and coordinating considerations are inadequate across all bodies and mechanisms in creating effective responses to minimal ESCR implementation and protection.

Ms. Preeti Saran, Chair of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, welcomed this opportunity to reflect on the achievements, role, and future of the Covenants in the face of modern challenges. She commended the ICESCR for bringing economic, social, and cultural rights to the forefront of human-rights discourse, inspiring its inclusion in national constitutions. She recalled the Committee’s work in its General Comments No. 27 on the environment and sustainable development, non-discrimination, and business activities, and informed on its work for an upcoming General Comments on economic, social, and cultural rights in conflict situations. She noted the work of the CESCR during the Covid-19 epidemic, emphasising the necessity of flexibility in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights in accessing vaccines and medicines. She highlighted the importance of the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR in increasing accessibility to individuals seeking accountability, and urged States to adopt the Optional Protocol. However, she warned that recent stressors on treaty bodies have affected the CESCR, with a 40 per cent budget cut, meeting time reductions, and cancellation of the Pre-Sessional Working Group, severely impacting the Committee’s ability to fulfil its mandate. She discussed the weaknesses of reform propositions to the treaty body system, such as combining special procedures reviews or creating a digital platform to assist in committee elections, warning against structural changes to the treaty body system that would violate treaty provisions or undermine independence. She encouraged impact assessments and cost-benefit analysis for proposed reforms, and advocated for equipping treaty bodies with the necessary funds. Lastly, she warned of global oligopolies increasing control on international commerce, widening economic inequality, and the need to rethink our economic models in light of these developments.

Annual panel discussion on the rights of Indigenous Peoples (23 September 2026)

The Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Awa Dabo, started by acknowledging the adverse effects of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss on Indigenous Peoples, their cultures, ways of life, and beliefs. She highlighted how Indigenous traditions provide insight into how to prevent, mitigate and adapt to these ecological harms, and the necessity of giving Indigenous Peoples full participation into decision-making and governance. She welcomed the important work of UNESCO in providing guidance for States, creating opportunities for cooperation and ensuring the respect of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. She emphasised the need for States to consult and obtain the consent of Indigenous Peoples before proposing any site related to their identity to the World Heritage list, as this will increase the effectiveness of the protection awarded by the list. Ms. Dabo also noted how Indigenous practices have sustained sites for generations and need to share the benefits of conservation and tourism-related activities. She recalled the OHCHR’s work towards strengthening the capacity of Indigenous representatives in decision-making and promoting dialogue with States, UN bodies and heritage actors and encouraged the continuation of steps towards the consistent and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples in World Heritage Committee processes.

Ms. Berta de Sancristóbal, Head of the Europe and North America Unit at the World Heritage Centre, UNESCO, reiterated the organisation’s commitment to advancing human rights, as well as its relation with cultural heritage and with sustainable development. She noted that Indigenous knowledge systems and practices are essential contributors to building resilient societies and promoting sustainable development. Ms. Sancristóbal informed the Council that at least one quarter of UNESCO-designated sites are on Indigenous Peoples’ lands, and that their effective safeguard does not solely rely on laws and technical expertise, but also on Indigenous experience, traditions and custodial practices. Therefore their effective conservation has to include the recognition by States of generational worldviews, spiritual relationships and cultural practices. The addition of the fifth Strategic Objective Communities to the 1972 Convention on the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage was an important milestone in recognising Indigenous communities as custodians and partners in the conservation process. She stressed the inseparability of language, culture, nature and territory for many Indigenous Peoples as an essential aspect of conservation. However, she acknowledged the challenges still arising from insufficient participation in the existing practices, including examining which groups are participating and what heritage is being pursued. She highlighted that the Convention does not operate in a vacuum, and that many concerns raised during World Heritage processes reflect preexisting broader issues. She shared that the UNESCO experience illustrates that prevention in processes is more effective than remediation. In conclusion, she spoke of the continued evolution of the Convention in response to the UN system development and to the growing engagement of Indigenous Peoples, and stressed the need for partnership, dialogue and mutual respect.

Ms. Carmen Rosa Guerra Ariza, the Co-Chair of the International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on World Heritage reiterated Ms. de Sancristóbal’s point about the large number of Worth Heritage sites located on Indigenous land, most of them inscribed without informed and free consent of the concerned Peoples. She noted that when the sites are managed in partnership with Indigenous Peoples, it can have positive impacts for them, through commercial or employment opportunities. She acknowledged the World Heritage Committee’s adoption of the Operational Guidelines for the Application of the Convention, and its active work to push for partnership with UNESCO. She however contrasted this with the practical situations around the world, where many sites are managed without respect for Indigenous Peoples’ connection with them. In many World Heritage sites in Africa and Asia evidence of assassinations, sexual violence, torture, arbitrary detentions, and destruction has been recorded. She stressed that the violation of Indigenous Peoples’ rights is also perpetrated at the international level, with failure to recognise the right to self-determination, and the right to participate in nominating sites to the World Heritage list. She noted with regret that the Universal Exceptional Value of the majority of sites was established without meaningful consultation, and are often based on a Eurocentric perspective incompatible with Indigenous perspectives. She called on the Committee for a revision of the considered criteria, as well as on a stronger involvement of Indigenous representatives.

Mr. Francisco Vidargas, Director for World Heritage at the National Institute of Anthropology and History in Mexico, spoke on behalf of the Wixarika community. He outlined the 30 year process of working with the community to establish Mexico’s new site on the World Heritage List, the Wirikuta Route, which crosses sacred sites of the Wixarika people and is central to their spiritual beliefs and cultural ties. He commented on the unanimous support from UNESCO, the advisory evaluation body ICOMOS, and the World Heritage Committee, to protect and conserve the Wirikuta land and its living organisms to safeguard the memory and culture of the native peoples. He explained that, when conserving the sacred lands, authorities collaborated with and discussed the impact with the native communities and met their concerns by protecting the lands against urban sprawl, inappropriate tourism, consumption of peyote, and mining, and authored the Justice Plan for the Wirarica, Nayeri, Odum, and Mexican peoples. He remarked that, in submitting the location to the UNESCO World Heritage Centre authorities, authorities fulfilled a central concern of the native peoples by offering federal protection of the sacred lands and natural resources. He discussed the establishment of a new general law on the rights of Indigenous and Afro-Mexican peoples, seeking to reform Article 2 of the Constitution to recognise people and communities capacity to protect their knowledge and culture. Finally, he underscored the significance of the recognition of the sacred route, after years of struggle from the native communities towards recognition and protection, highlighting the importance of consulting and listening to native communities.

Annual discussion on the integration of a gender perspective throughout the work of the Human Rights Council and that of its mechanisms (29 September 2026)

The Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Awa Dabo, started by stating that gender stereotypes shape how women are seen, heard, and judged every day. She noted that nine in ten people hold at least one bias against women, only enforcing the scrutinisation for appearance of work. She highlighted that stereotypes may seem normal, usually entrenched and disguised as morality, family values, or established gender roles, but their profound impact on human rights should be realised. She noted that gender stereotypes are directly linked to exclusion, violence, and lack of access to economic opportunities and decision-making. She referred to those living at the intersection of multiple forms of discrimination further stereotyping that they face. She noted how gender becomes particularly pertinent during conflict and crises, influencing targeting, silencing victims, distorting investigations, and enabling impunity. Furthermore, in contexts of migration, women are at higher risk of exploitation and abuse, and stereotypes often shape attitudes in host communities. She underscored the bias encoded in the development of new technologies when women do not participate equally. She urged the end of accepting gender stereotypes as norms when these harmful misconceptions propagate power and control. She called for comprehensive strategies to remove bias, for governments to invest in laws, programmes, and advocacy, and to embed human rights in education and training.

Ms. Nyaradzayi Gumbonzvanda, Deputy Executive Director at UN-Women, began by commending Article 55 of the UN Charter for bringing clarity to gender discrimination issues. She condemned the notion that gender stereotypes were harmless attitudes or cultural norms, noting that when they influence laws, institutions, and decision-making processes, they become structural discrimination, affecting who is valued and protected. She highlighted the intersection of gender discrimination with racism, ageism, and ableism, compounding discrimination for women with overlapping inequalities. In response, she called for integrating gender equality perspectives across the Human Rights Council, warning that women currently enjoy 67 per cent of the legal rights of men and perform more than double the care work. Furthermore, she encouraged transforming the laws, institutions, and norms producing inequality, including by altering language that reduces gender discrimination to a social norm, giving the example of child marriage, which, in reality, is rape. She highlighted three ways to combat gender stereotypes; challenging narratives portraying inequality as natural, removing restrictions on women’s access to employment or assets to allow them to overcome stereotypes around women as leaders or decision-makers, and viewing women, feminist movements, and those facing intersectional discrimination as agents of change with the power to shape laws and institutions. Finally, she advocated for concrete steps; including eliminating gender stereotypes in laws, judicial reasoning, and institutional practice, establishing effective training, complaint procedures, and remedies where stereotypes influence decisions by lawmakers, public officials, and health professionals, assessing artificial intelligence systems for bias and discrimination, and funding and protecting women’s organizations as leaders in reform.

Ms. Rhoda Reddock, member of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), began by addressing the history and mandate of the CERD Committee and Convention. She highlighted CERD’s work, including the most recent recommendation, General Recommendation 41, which builds upon Article 5A of CEDAW and focuses on dismantling gender stereotypes, prejudices, stigma, and the power relations sustaining them. She commended Article 5 as one of the most important in the Convention because it identifies the basis for the other discriminatory practices facing women, provides guidance to State parties on how to address gender stereotypes against women, and, as the only article mentioning men and boys, it provides an opportunity to address how they are affected by gender stereotypes. She highlighted how gender stereotypes are based on notions of women’s inferiority and serve to legitimise women’s unequal treatment through their integration into everyday institutions, standards, and life. She called for the dismantling of gender stereotypes and intersectional discrimination by addressing the broader systems of oppression that fuel them, such as political, colonial, and patriarchal structures, and the elimination of the underlying attitudes that sustain inequality. She also addressed the impact of gender stereotypes and patriarchy on men and boys, which promote damaging ideals of masculinity such as violence, domination, exploitation, control, and a lack of accountability that not only harms women and girls, but all of society. She condemned the justification of gender discrimination as part of tradition, culture, religion, so-called family values, or nature, calling for the elimination of discriminatory practices no matter the origin. Finally, she thanked UN Women and all UN agencies that supported GR 41 and announced the final reading and adoption will occur during CEDAW’s October session.

Ms. Rosina Rossi Albert, President of the Administrative Litigation Court in Uruguay, began by introducing her role as a judge in Uruguay and sharing her institutional experience combating gender stereotypes and training legal professionals to act in cases of gender based violence. She spoke about the Interagency Gender Group of the UN in Uruguay, which tasked the judiciary with developing two guides on gender stereotypes and international standards on women’s rights, one addressing judicial and legal authorities, and the other addressing the staff in the attorney general’s office. She identified the purpose of the guides as aiding justice operators when they are acting in response to issues affecting human dignity and gender. She also explained the drafting process of the guides, which involved judges and lawyers diagnosing common problems facing Uruguayans and identifying the best training and solutions to combat them. She then explained the five main chapters of the guides; the first identifies general definitions of gender issues, the second incorporates regional and international legal frameworks of human rights law, the third explains the role of justice operators in implementing a gender perspective, the fourth sets out a self-test for judiciary operators to evaluate their actions during each stage of the legal process and to ensure they are not perpetuating gender stereotypes, and the fifth contains two sections on jurisprudence, one on cases before the Inter-American Human Rights Court and the CEDAW Committee and one providing a guide on how and where to seek international jurisprudence. She commended the guide’s accessible format and their incorporation of recommendations from the CEDAW Committee, which they adapt to address specific problems facing Uruguayan communities and Uruguayan culture. Finally, she called for all State actors to be accountable on a case-by-case basis for how power is used to uphold human dignity.

Ms. Amrita Kapur, Secretary General of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), noted the organising power gender stereotypes play in amplifying polarisation and violence. She called on States to take responsibility to tackle discrimination, domination, and violence by transforming gender norms within communities to reduce economic and social inequalities reproducing insecurity and violence. She recommended that States integrate gender stereotype, masculinity, and unequal power relations analysis into gender impact assessments and the policy-review process; that militarised masculinities be part of conflict prevention, human-rights investigations, and accountability to break the cycles of institutionalised and normalised violence; that Special Procedures and investigative mechanisms examine militarised masculinities as structural drivers of enabling violence; that States address the political economy behind gender stereotypes, such as the gun industry’s exploitation of violent and militarised notions of manhood; and that States acknowledge that preventing gender stereotypes is preventing authoritarianism, violence, and conflict. She noted that discriminatory ideas of how women should dress and behave are given legal force through policing and surveillance in Iran, and that gender stereotypes are incorporated into institutional frameworks to discriminate, segregate, oppress, and systematically exclude women and girls from public, political, social, and economic life in Afghanistan. Further, she expressed the need to codify gender apartheid as an international crime through the ‘Crimes Against Humanity Treaty.’ Finally, she concluded by highlighting the need to transform harmful gender norms via a human rights-based approach to prevent conflict by recognising the core drivers enabling these norms.

Ms. Tenar Lorente, UN Policy and Advocacy Advisor for Plan International, noted that gender stereotypes are both the root cause and consequence of discrimination. She highlighted Plan International’s submission on CEWDAW’s work on General Recommendation No. 41, arguing for a consistent, age-responsive approach, and emphasising the need for two mechanisms to reinforce one another’s guidance. She recognised that gender stereotypes begin at childhood and are reinforced through gender socialisation. Further, she addressed the compounding effect of age and gender as structural grounds for discrimination, requiring an obligation to change embedded social and gender norms. Regarding Plan International’s research with Cardiff University, entitled ‘Girls’ Everyday Resistance,’ she noted that girls often challenge norms quietly, as challenging them openly can have consequences of exclusion, violence, stigma, and punishment. She highlighted the need to change the institutions and power structures giving gender stereotypes power, noting how this work brings together people to examine norms, harmful practices, and create a space for conversation that directly engages men and boys on the issue. She referred to Plan International’s initiative in Bangladesh, where they work with young people to hold institutions accountable. Regarding the digital environment, she highlighted its impact on girls, with 70 per cent reporting being instructed on how women should behave online. Finally, she concluded with three key points: that prevention must happen early; transformation must address power; and girls must be recognised as the agents of transformation.

Commissions of Inquiry, Fact-Finding Missions and Independent investigations

The Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan

On 7 September 2026, Mr. Mohamed Chande Othman (Chair) spoke on behalf of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan. He highlighted two key findings in the mission report, namely the increasing use of long-range drones which have completely redefined the battlefield, and the external support to the conflict which directly sustains the continuation of violence. It was noted that both the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have made use of long-range drones, deeply impacting civilians. The report provides reasonable grounds to believe that both parties have committed serious human rights law and humanitarian law violations, which could amount to war crimes.

Noting the extension of the conflict past traditional conflict front lines, Mr. Othman stressed the impact of the conflict on the lives of Sudanese civilians, some of whom have been harmed in their homes, schools, hospitals, or while attending various community gatherings. One long-range drone attack by the RSF on a kindergarten in South Kordofan resulted in the death of 114, including 60 children. Mr Othman noted how attacks against civilian infrastructures in North Kordofan have a direct impact on people’s access to food, drinkable water, and adequate healthcare.

Mr. Othman reiterated the burden that women and children continue to suffer in this conflict, reinforcing existing inequalities. Women are directly affected by the attacks on healthcare infrastructures, such as in El-Obeid where the maternity hospital paused its operations. Moreover, he stressed how the attacks on schools not only impact children’s present access to education, but also their future development. The mission reiterated the occurrence of sexual and gender-based violence as a defining feature of the conflict, especially in situations of displacement and arbitrary detention.

Through the report’s work on external interference and external support to the conflict, Mr. Othman highlighted substantial evidence leading the Fact-Finding Mission to believe that military material has been facilitated to the RSF through actors in the United Arab Emirates, Chad, Libya and Somalia. A number of foreign fighters from these States have also been identified by the report. The mission indicated the beginning of its investigation into potential external support to the SAF and informed it will provide updates to the Council.

In sharing the mission’s recommendations to the Council, Mr Othman started with a call for an end to the war and protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure. He reiterated the need for a suspension of all external military support to the conflict, asking for investigative actions against those illicitly involved. In addition to the need for assistance, Mr. Othman called for the preservation of evidence, victims and witnesses to guarantee judicial accountability, extending to all those responsible.

Speaking as the country concerned, Sudan reaffirmed its support vis-à-vis the Fact-Finding Mission and joined its call for justice and accountability. It noted the importance of naming the United Arab Emirates as a crucial external actor funding the rebel forces and fuelling the continuation of violence. It makes clear Sudan is acting towards ending impunity, and has launched several investigations following complaints of enforced disappearances, assassination and murder, and stated that appropriate judicial mechanisms are necessary to achieve stable peace.

The Independent Investigation Mechanism for Myanmar

On 7 September 2026, Mr. Volker Türk and Mr. Nicholas Koumjian (Head of Mechanism) addressed human rights in Myanmar. He called the situation a great international concern, noting the region’s increasing humanitarian needs and reduced funding. He addressed the regional impacts, including forced displacement, deaths from sea-crossings, the risk of a cholera epidemic, and illegal economic activity. Increasingly deadly attacks against civilians have killed 1,200 people in the reporting period, with the majority due to military airstrikes. Further, the military implemented forced conscription to sustain the conflict and exert control, and increased the denial and weaponisation of aid, especially in minority communities.

The High Commissioner highlighted the situation faced by the Rohingya people in the Rakhine State, who face human rights violations including arbitrary arrests, torture, sexual and gender-based violence, enforced disappearances, forced labour and recruitment by the Myanmar and Arakan Army, and land seizure, making return impossible.

Illegal businesses capitalised on the collapsing rule of law in Myanmar through the drug trade, illegal mines, and scam centres, denying citizens access to resources and funding illegal military activity. Myanmar is the leading producer of opium and methamphetamines. Scam centres propagate fraud, kidnapping, human trafficking, slavery, and sexual violence. Mining sites have increased by over 150 per cent since the coup, polluting the air and depositing toxic elements into the water in Thailand and the Mekong Basin. There operations utilise exploitative labour practices, subjecting workers, especially women, to hazards, abuse, and sexual violence.

The High Commissioner called on States to prevent deterioration of rights and cautioned against normalising relations with Myanmar to avoid legitimising systems that violate human rights obligations. The High Commissioner implored States to use leverage to push for human rights-based engagement conditioned on efforts to end violence, allow humanitarian aid, and release those arbitrarily detained. Further, engagement must prioritise accountability for crimes committed against the people of Myanmar. He urged States to refer the situation to the International Criminal Court, cease the transfer of arms, ammunition, jet fuel, and items that risk violating human rights law to Myanmar, and to halt deportation of Rohingya and other refugees to Myanmar.

Mr. Nicholas Kungjan echoed the previous concerns and highlighted recent strikes on a monastery in the Sagaing region, one of over 800 aerial attacks on religious buildings since the coup, and strikes against schools and hospitals. He also addressed an increase in double-tap attacks, targeting first responders and survivors of the initial attack.

The Mechanism collected significant evidence, which it shared with authorities prosecuting crimes against the Rohingya, and pledged to continue their efforts to collect and preserve evidence, and to hold the perpetrators accountable, and called upon States to provide encryption and communications technology to ensure witness safety, to provide safety for witnesses in their territories, and to enact universal jurisdiction to promote accountability.

The Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic

On 8 September 2026, Ms. Fionnuala Ní Aoláin (Commissioner) spoke on behalf of the Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic. She noted the State’s achievements in the two years since the fall of the former government following strengthened engagement with authorities, and stated that the Commission will continue issuing expert papers on human rights issues. The Commission raised several concerns before the Council.

She addressed human rights violations committed by Israeli forces against Syrian communities, noting that the detention and interrogation of Syrian civilians (including children) may amount to war crimes. She further expressed concern over Israel’s expanding presence and occupation, agreeing with the Secretary-General that “violations of Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are unacceptable and must cease”.

She recognised the centrality of accountability to successful transitional justice, and the importance of equal accountability for perpetrators. She noted the necessity of due process and fair trials in judicial proceedings, urging the Syrian Arab Republic to ensure legal detention for those with alleged links to Assad-era security institutions.

The government’s efforts to address issues related to the violence of March and July 2025 were acknowledged by the Commission. Ms. Ní Aoláin recognised human rights issues fueling insecurity in Suwayda, including the displacement of Druze and Bedouin families. She associated the lack of progress surrounding the issue with tension between local and national authorities, and the continued interference from Israel. She reiterated the need for accountability for violations occurring in Suwayda, urging prohibition of further violations. However, she noted that accountability for the acts of March 2025 remains limited, and reiterated the Commission’s continued investigation regarding reported killings and abductions of women and girls.

She noted continuing investigations into deaths in detention, identifying nine cases this year, including a former humanitarian worker. The Commission acknowledged the challenges in eliminating these practices, encouraging a commitment to accountability and engagement with authorities to eliminate torture. Ms. Ní Aoláin recognised expanding freedoms and encouraged authorities to safeguard these rights. However, she highlighted that activists continue to be arrested for criticising the government, and hate speech towards groups linked to the former government persists. The Commission also expressed concern regarding violent threats directed at women activists.

Finally, she noted the government’s efforts to mitigate violations during operations in Aleppo and the Northeast. She shared the findings of the Commission’s investigations into civilian killings, hors de combat fighters, and missing SDF-aligned fighters, and condemned child recruitment practices. She highlighted the necessary resolution for women and children with alleged ties to Daesh. Furthermore, over 2,000 families remain detained within Roj camp, one of the largest arbitrary detention sites of women and children. She recognised the 100 foreign children held arbitrarily in military detention, urging States to support efforts for repatriation and rehabilitation. She condemned the forcible transfer without due process of over 5,700 men and boys to Iraq by the United States, which remains under investigation for possibly violating non-refoulment.

She ended by urging the Council and international community to condemn Israel’s violations against Syrian people and to support actions protecting their rights as they undergo a process of transition.

The Independent Fact-Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

On 18 September 2026 Ms. Sofía Macher (Chair) spoke on behalf of the Independent Fact-Finding Mission regarding the human rights situation in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. She started by addressing the United States’ military intervention and apprehension of President Maduro which violated international law and has led to observable changes in the human rights situation in Venezuela. She noted the interim government’s wish for national reconciliation and peace, adopting measures of political liberalisation and increased public activity. Under a new amnesty law, a process for prison was opened, and from the end of January there has been a drop in politically-related arbitrary detentions and enforced disappearances.

She stressed, however, an increase in short-term arbitrary detentions as a method of intimidation for those seen as opposition, highlighting the continued deprivation of freedom, mistreatment, and torture that hundreds are subjected to in detention centres. She stated the ongoing systemic attacks and violations relating to enforced disappearances and deaths of persons in detention troubled by persistent torture.

She stressed that the repressive apparatus of the Maduro government remains intact and continues to operate under the same legal framework that was used to coerce the civic and democratic space. Venezuela continues to; lack reform to police, security, and intelligence services; lack of accountability for perpetrators of the gravest violations and crimes; the continued restriction of the function of civil society, media, and political parties; harassment of leaders and social activists who are under surveillance; and the social control the public is subjected to.

She noted the mission’s continued investigation into armed civilian groups called colectivos who supported repression through surveillance and oversight of protests. She referred to their continued presence within communities and their exercise of control through the management and distribution of food, fuel, services, and social benefits. She linked the ties between the colectivos and State, finding an overlap in functions related to public order and social control.

She expressed Venezuela’s obligation to investigate these acts, sanction perpetrators, and ensure reparation for the victims.

Ms. Macher ended by underlining the opportunity Venezuela has in creating sustainable change and making progress in restoring the rule of law and democratic governance.

Speaking as the country concerned, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reaffirmed its commitment to promoting and protecting human rights through cooperation with the OHCHR. It noted with regret the lack of acknowledgement in the report of the progress and national efforts pursued towards democracy and national reconciliation. The country opposed the renewal of the mission’s mandate, which was established in 2019 without the State’s consent, and has in their opinion not yielded concrete results towards improving the human rights situation.

The Independent Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran

On 21 September 2026, Ms. Sara Hossain (Chair) spoke on behalf of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Islamic Republic of Iran. She highlighted two two key findings relating to the Iranian government’s ongoing repression which followed the December 2025 protests, and the United States and Israel‘s military campaign from 28 February 2026. She noted the compounding impact of these events on civilian security and instrumentalisation by the government to intensify repression. She expressed the mission’s difficulty in accessing the country, continued restrictions on communication, and increased repressive measures. The findings, therefore, highlight a reduced scale and extent of the violations and crimes committed.

She noted the government’s response to protests relating to economic grievances and calls for political change amassed to brutality and use of legal force and mass arrests, leaving civilians with severe wounds and permanent blindness. The Iranian government estimates the deaths of 3,038 people, with a further 25,000 injured, of which 50 per cent required surgery. Many were unable to access healthcare with security forces present in and around healthcare facilities while using further unnecessary force. She drew on the Iranian authorities’ continued use of large scale arrests and detentions during and after protests. Those detained were subjected to torture and ill-treatment by security and intelligence forces, with families unable to learn the fate of those held. Following the protest, the use of the death penalty intensified and trials were marked by violations of due process and fair trials.

She expressed concern over the large-scale restrictions on digital space with the government imposing nationwide internet shutdowns which lasted more than five months. She underlined the lasting effect that this had on civilians in seeking help and locating family, while additionally preventing the collection of documentation. She emphasised the deepening isolation the people of Iran faced, with new draft legislation threatening imprisonment for communication with persons from designated States.

She noted that the Iranian government’s response to these protests have resulted in gross human rights violations, of which may amount to crimes against humanity, She referred to two incidents of airstrikes conducted by the US killing a total of 179, and strikes by the Iranian government on residential buildings and civilian infrastructures. She additionally mentioned the impact of unilateral sectoral sanctions and the deteriorating effect on living conditions.

The mission noted three recommendations: firstly, that the Iranian government stop all human rights violations and crimes against humanity and ensure accountability, provide reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence; second, that parties of the conflict cease hostilities and seek diplomatic action; third, that all parties conduct independent and impartial investigations into violations.

She ended by urging the Iranian government to take action in addressing structural drivers that augment the brutal cycles of repression, violence, and impunity, and work towards ensuring truth, justice, and transformative reparations for the people of Iran.

Speaking as the country concerned, the Islamic Republic of Iran reiterated the impact of foreign acts of aggression by the United States and Israel on the human rights situation in the country. They called on the international community to hold these actors accountable, maintaining that Iran has been subjected to economic coercion and external manipulation, which the fact-finding mission has failed to address.

The International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine

On 21 September 2026, Erik Møse (Chair) spoke on behalf of the International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine four and a half years after the Russian Federation invasion. In 2026 the Commission recorded an increased use of long-range weapons and short-range drones by Russia in populating areas, having a direct impact on the number of civilian casualties and damage to civilian objects. He noted the lack of access to the impacted zones, which severely hinders investigations. Mr. Møse also shared the Commission’s concerns for the upcoming winter months’ impact on civilians’ living conditions following the severe damage of energy-related infrastructure.

As an impartial and independent body, the Commission reiterated its commitment to investigate both sides of the frontline. Mr. Møse noted the heavy waves of attacks launched at Ukraine’s critical infrastructure including transmission lines, heat supply facilities, and gas facilities, leaving them damaged or destroyed. Such attacks have left millions of civilians with temporary or long-term heating shortages, which have been linked by the Ukrainian authorities to documented deaths and injuries. Mr. Møse informed that the Commission also followed up on reports of Ukrainian attacks against Russian infrastructure.

He then turned to the Commission’s investigation regarding the imposed Russian education on Ukrainian children in occupied areas from 2022. Compulsory courses devoted to patriotic lectures on the Russian Federation have strengthened the Russian curriculum, and extended to occupied areas. Ukrainian children in such areas are forced to enroll in schools following this curriculum, facing potential threats and coercion if they refuse to comply.

The investigation led by the Commission noted the existence of modules on practical military training, part of the mandatory curriculum for children starting at age 14. Those State-sponsored initiatives, which aim at reinforcing patriotic indoctrination, have been reinforced in occupied areas and leave a profound impact on the children, pushing some of them to flee the territories.

Finally the Commission presented its work regarding the recruitment of foreign nationals towards both armed forces, either voluntarily or not. Mr. Møse informed of the deepening investigation into individuals coerced into joining the Russian armed forces, noting that several Member States have not responded to the questions addressed regarding this issue. He noted that many individuals were lured into serving through false promises of lucrative positions, tickets and visas. Many recruited individuals were either killed, injured or captured by Ukrainian armed forces shortly after their arrival on the frontlines. The Commission shared its concerns regarding the physical and psychological impacts on victims and their families, reiterating its call towards judicial and non-judicial accountability.

Speaking as the country concerned, Ukraine reiterated its support towards the Commission and noted that its investigations show Russia’s continued acts violating international law. It reiterated the humanitarian concerns for the months ahead due to the damages sustained by their energy infrastructures, and warned that such catastrophe was already unfolding in the occupied territories. It called on the Commission to investigate the obstruction of humanitarian access to the occupied territories, and called on the international community to act urgently. Ukraine moreover called on Russia to abide by international humanitarian law and release unlawfully detained Ukrainian civilians. It concluded by reaffirming its support to the mandate, and insisting on the need for victims to obtain justice and reparations.

Item 5 & item 10 General Debate

Item 5

During the general debate under Item 5, held on 24 September, several delegations made statements supporting the vital contributions of the UN human rights bodies and mechanisms to protecting human rights worldwide. They highlighted the importance of mandate holders and the need for mandate holders to be independent, neutral, and respect sovereignty. Delegations called for increased technical assistance, capacity building, and more consideration of the capacities of developing States when considering if they have fulfilled human rights obligations. Finally, they expressed concerns about the liquidity crisis and financial restraints on the UN, calling for increased funding and efficiency.

Portugal, speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends of National Mechanisms for Implementation, Reporting, and Follow-up, highlighted the importance of NMIRFs and their contribution to States efforts to implement human rights obligations and promote better coordination with domestic and international institutions. They urged States to strengthen their mechanisms through the use of digital tracking tools and to consider the Marrakesh Guidance Framework. Finally, they called upon States to join and contribute to the International Network of National Mechanisms and to engage with the OHCHR’s NMIRF hub.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the OIC Group, underlined the importance of HRC bodies and mechanisms and called upon Council mechanisms to uphold the principles of independence, impartiality, objectivity, and professionalism. They highlighted the necessity of constructive dialogue and cooperation with States for mechanisms to function. They stated that expert instruments can complement, but not substitute, government efforts or priorities and cautioned against introducing standards that were contentious or not nationally supported by States.

Uruguay, speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends of Special Procedures, reaffirmed its support for a strong Special Procedures system and for the ability of mandate holders to fulfill their mandates, expressing concern that financial constraints were impacting the ability to fulfill their mandates, and called for more adequate and sustainable resourcing. They also expressed concerns over threats, intimidation, disinformation, and other pressures against mandate holders. They encouraged States to adopt transparent and holistic approaches when consulting with mandate holders and to take into account the impact of the Special procedures system.

The European Union reaffirmed its commitment to human rights and UN mechanisms.They encouraged cooperation with international human rights mechanisms, Treaty bodies, Special Procedures, and HRC investigative bodies. They called upon States to respect the independence of mandate holders and to respect mandates and to fulfill their financial commitments in a timely manner. Further, they reaffirmed their support for the international criminal justice system and the ICC and their commitment to upholding the Rome Statute and to preserving the ICC’s independence and integrity.

Venezuela, speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defence of the UN Charter, attached primary importance to the promotion and protection of human rights, particularly the right to development.

Item 10

During the general debate under item 10 on technical assistance and capacity-building, held on 5 October.

The EU, speaking on the behalf of a group of countries, noted the importance of technical assistance and capacity building in the implementation of human rights obligations. They reiterated their support for Georgia’s territorial integrity and called for the reporting mandate to cover the entire country, and regretted the lack of access to mechanisms to the occupied breakaway regions. Regarding Libya, the group invites authorities to expand cooperation with the OHCHR, and to improve humanitarian conditions in detention centers. The group recalled the appalling actions of the Houthis in Yemen, and their arbitrary detention of staff. They expressed support for capacity building of the National Commission of Inquiry.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, supported the Council’s technical assistance and capacity-building mandate that promotes universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They, however, noted that assistance must be provided on the request, and with consent, of the concerned State in accordance with the principles of Resolution 60/251. They felt that an artificial hierarchy of human rights had been created at times through the delivery of technical assistance. They highlighted that technical assistance should not be at odds with domestic priorities, but should promote and protect economic, social, and cultural rights. They referred to the compounding challenges developing nations face that undermine development gains and places burdens on States in fulfilling their human rights obligations. They underscored the importance of technical assistance to countries implementing UPR recommendations.

The Philippines, speaking on behalf of ASEAN, acknowledged the importance of technical assistance and capacity building as tools in helping States fulfill their obligations. They noted that national ownership and impactful and sustainable improvement of human rights on the ground must come from tailed support to national context, needs, and priorities, that is informed by consultation and consent of the State concerned. They referred to the need for fair access to expertise and support across all regions to ensure equitable geographic distribution. They reaffirmed their commitment to advancing human rights based on cooperation and dialogue, capacity-building, and the exchange of experiences. They welcomed the sustained engagement and cooperation with OHCHR in integrating regional initiatives within the human rights system while empowering Member States to translate international obligations into action. They reaffirm their commitment to working with others to advance technical cooperation for the full enjoyment of human rights.

Egypt, speaking on behalf of the Group of Like-Minded Countries, reaffirmed the importance of agenda item 10 in supporting national efforts to promote and protect human rights and strengthen national institutions and capacities. They emphasised that technical assistance should be provided at request, and with consent, of the concerned State in relation to its priorities and needs. They noted it should help States fulfill their obligations and commitments by reinforcing national ownership. They urged the need to preserve the integrity of agenda item 10 by preventing politicisation so that it remains consistent in scope and purpose. The group made reference to the current financial constraints, and called for enhanced and predictable support for technical assistance and capacity building through the Voluntary Fund/

Algeria, speaking on behalf of a group of countries, stressed the need for technical assistance and capacity building to address the human rights implications of nuclear legacies. They noted that the impact of nuclear detonation has no borders, and has caused suffering to victims, their families, and communities, and believe that the lived experiences of those should be considered in collective efforts.

Kenya, speaking on behalf of the African Group, reaffirmed that technical assistance and capacity building remain essential to the implementation of human rights obligations and commitments. They expressed its relevance in light of the growing need to face challenges related to development, governance, and institutional resilience. Through tailored and inclusive approaches, technical assistance when requested by States and in alignment with their national priorities, can act as a meaningful contribution. The Group commended the Officer of the High Commissioner, and encouraged the continued engagement with African regional mechanisms. They emphasised the importance of predictable, equitable, and sustainable resources, as well as the full participation of African States in the work of the Council.

Universal Periodic Review

Adoption of the UPR Working Group outcome reports

The Council adopted the UPR outcome reports of Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Palau, Paraguay, the Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, the Solomon Islands, and Somalia.

The Council could not adopt Nicaragua’s UPR outcome report, as Nicaragua continues to disengage from the Human Rights Council and all activities linked to it and its subsidiary mechanisms.

A total of 3,699 recommendations were made to these 14 States, out of which 3,043 were accepted in full, 638 were noted, and 18 were partially supported.

Country	Supported / Accepted	Noted / Not enjoyed support	Partially supported / partially noted	Number of Recommendations
Belgium	238	62	0	300
Denmark	174	91	0	265
Estonia	208	61	4	273
Latvia	135	102	6	243
Mozambique	284	8	0	292
Namibia	255	35	0	290
Nicaragua	–	–	–	–
Niger	254	11	0	256
Palau	157	24	4	185
Paraguay	238	35	3	266
Seychelles	186	12	1	199
Sierra Leone	271	39	0	310
Singapore	243	99	0	342
Solomon Islands	140	41	0	181
Somalia	260	28	0	288

General debate under item 6

On September 28 2026, the Human Rights Council held a general debate on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) under item 6 of the agenda. As the fourth cycle of UPR came to an end, a number of States reflected on the mechanism and laid down their visions for the upcoming fifth cycle. States highlighted UPR as a mechanism based on cooperation and universality, which needs to be strengthened and preserved in the face of the current multilateralism crisis.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation reiterated its support for the UPR throughout all four cycles as a mechanism facilitating dialogue, universal participation and high-level engagement. It noted its positive impact on advancing the human rights agenda through contribution of civil society and sharing of best practices. Pakistan called for the fifth cycle to remain grounded in principles of universality, impartiality, transparency, voluntary participation, and constructive engagement. Finally they thanked the work of the UPR voluntary funds in its contribution towards technical cooperation and capacity building.

The European Union, also speaking on behalf of Albania, Armenia, Georgia, Liechtenstein, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, the United Kingdom, and Ukraine reaffirmed its full support towards UPR. It highlighted universality, equal treatment of States and inclusive participation as the strengths of the mechanism. For the fifth cycle they called on all States to fully engage with the process, both in making and receiving action-oriented recommendations that can meaningfully be implemented. They noted the invaluable participation of NHRIs and civil societies organisations during the process, calling for their safe participation free from intimidation or harassment.

Venezuela, speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations reminded that UPR was established to support the promotion and protection of human rights universally where all States are evaluated equally by relying on objective and reliable information. The Group of Friends opposed any attempt by a State to politicise the mechanism through unfounded accusation, and called on the OHCHR to invest in technical assistance and cooperation at the request and consent of any State.

Uganda, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement reaffirmed the need to preserve UPR as the only intergovernmental cooperation mechanism where all States are examined similarly. They reiterated the need for UPR to be result-oriented, non-selective and not politicised, but also brought attention to the capacity-buildings needs of States. They underlined the necessity for UPR to rely on reliable accessible information and observations provided by the State under review itself. To conclude they reaffirmed the need for UPR to be protected from misuse and manipulation in order to pursue its important work.

The Philippines, speaking on behalf of The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, called for systematic reforms addressing gaps and inefficiencies in human rights bodies and mechanisms. They called for respect for State sovereignty and international law, highlighting that sustainable progress must arise domestically, rather than being imposed from the outside. They encouraged capacity building centered on the requests, needs, and priorities of States. They called for mandate holders to exercise due diligence and fairness in fulfilling their mandates and for transparency in funding. Furthermore, they expressed concern over the under-representation of Asia-Pacific nations in the OHCHR and among mandate holders, called for greater inclusivity.

Iraq, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, reiterated their commitment to the promotion of human rights and expressed concern over the current liquidity crisis in the UN. They emphasised the need for international cooperation and for strengthening State’s capacity through country visits and communications that have a tangible domestic impact. They also called for mandate holders to respect the history and culture of host countries and to utilise sound sources.

Slovenia, speaking on behalf of Austria, Liechtenstein, Switzerland and Slovenia commanded UPR as one of the most effective and supported mechanisms across the human rights system. In the face of financial challenges, they called for a protection of its core principles of universality, cooperation and equal treatment, asking States to support efforts towards enhancing efficiency. In light of the upcoming fifth cycle, they highlight the importance of implementing accepted recommendations which require resources, operational capacity, political will, and the sustained support of national mechanisms. They concluded by condemning all forms of reprisals against actors cooperating with the mechanism.

Kenya, speaking on behalf of the African Group reaffirmed its support for UPR as a universal, cooperative and non-confrontational mechanism relying on dialogue, equal treatment, and sharing of good practices in human rights. They commended the meaningful engagement and subsequent adoption of African States’ reports during the 63rd Council. The Group reaffirmed the cooperation between UPR and African regional mechanisms towards advancing democracy, good governance, human rights, and sustainable development. This complementarity highlights the necessity of national ownership alongside international cooperation, specifically towards least developed countries.

Trust Fund for SIDS/LDCs

The Trust Fund to support the participation of LDCs and SIDS in the work of the Council, set up in 2012, funded the participation of 6 government officials from Angola, Barbados, Benin, Cambodia, Jamaica, and the Marshall Islands. Half of the delegates come from States that are currently members of the Council.

Special Procedures

Appointment of new mandate-holders

On the final day of the session, the following seven mandate-holders were appointed to fill positions on existing mandates:

Ms. Juliet Willetts (Australia) was appointed Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation.
Ms. Sihaka Tsemo (Cameroon) was appointed Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea.
Ms. Sabrina Mahtani (Zambia) was appointed for the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
Mr. Nicolás Laino (Argentina), member from Latin American and Caribbean States, was appointed for the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
Ms. Daniela Salazar Marín (Ecuador), member from Latin American and Caribbean States, was appointed for the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls.
Ms. Anjli Parrin (Kenya), member from African States, was appointed for the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances.
Mr. Francis Tom Temprosa (Philippines), member from Asia-Pacific States, was appointed for the Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination.

To inform the appointments, the Consultative Group, made up of representatives of Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Azerbaijan, Uruguay, and Canada.

Analysis

Omnia mutantur. Everything changes.

But not at the Human Rights Council. Across September and into earlier October, delegates at the 63rd session of the Human Rights Council carried on much as they have for the past decade. Delivering short (and usually repetitive) statements in the Council chamber (and then often leaving immediately afterwards), adding or taking away words from an increasing number of draft resolutions, decrying human rights abuses elsewhere while failing to reflect openly on their own human rights challenges or constructively exchange with others on how those challenges might be overcome.

Except everything has changed. In the world outside the Palais des Nations, at least. The UN and multilateralism more widely are on the ropes. Battered by the adverse winds of nationalism, conflict, extreme social conservatism, stagnation or regression across many of the SDGs and targets, falling respect for international norms and international law, and a growing propensity, especially amongst certain permanent members of the Security Council, to favour might over right.

The outgoing Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, to his credit, has put forward firm proposals (called UN80) to steady the ship, and reform the UN to strengthen its impact on the ground – for ’the Peoples’ of the United Nations, and thereby rebuild confidence in multilateralism as the best solution to the world’s problems.

In New York at least, they appear to be taking those UN80 reform proposals with the seriousness they merit. While the results of those deliberations will by definition be gradual and partial (the nature of multilateralism), delegates in New York are at least willing to reflect on how to make the different parts of the UN more efficient and effective, thereby delivering value for money for member States and, ultimately, for tax payers, and making the institution more accountable to the People. That has even included, over recent weeks, consideration (e.g., during a recent ‘Greentree retreat’) of what UN80 should mean for the human rights pillar.

That is New York. In Geneva, the small (though important) number of reflections that took place in 2025 on how the Human Rights Council should respond to the current crisis of multilateralism, and reform itself in line with the vision set out in UN80, have been replaced by almost complete silence. Across the three regular sessions of 2026, there has been almost no meaningful reflection as to how to make the Council more efficient, more streamlined, more focused on the domestic implementation of existing norms, more focused on securing positive impact on people’s lives and rights, and more able to bring success stories back to Geneva and demonstrate impact. Nor has there been any discussion at all as to how the human rights pillar is investing its (limited) financial resources and whether that is consistent with the need to secure impact – as explained in URG’s recent blog on the subject.

Instead, the Council is suffused with an overwhelming sense of inertia. Keep calm and carry on. Everything will get back to normal as soon as Donald Trump has left the White House.

Omnia mutantur. Except at the Council, nothing does.

Adopted texts

The 63rd session of the Council concluded with the adoption of 37 texts (34 resolutions, 2 decisions, and one President’s statement).

25 were adopted by consensus (68%).

20 had Programme Budget Implications (54%).

Adopted texts listed in order of L numbers

Agenda item	Title	Sponsors	PBI	Total	Means of adoption
1	Report of the Advisory Committee	President of the Human Rights Council	✗		Adopted by consensus
2	Situation of human rights in Afghanistan	Ireland (on behalf of the European Union)	✓	$2,254,000	Adopted by consensus
2	Responding to the human rights and humanitarian crisis caused by the ongoing armed conflict in the Sudan	United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands (Kingdom of the), Norway	✗		Adopted by a recorded vote (28-10-9)
3	The right to development	Uganda (on behalf of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries)	✓	$9,200	Adopted by a recorded vote (28-14-5)
3	Mandate of Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights	Uganda (on behalf of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries)	✗		Adopted by a recorded vote (27-16-4)
3	Use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination	Cuba	✗		Adopted by a recorded vote (26-17-3)
3	Mandate of Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order	Cuba	✗		Adopted by a recorded vote (26-16-5)
3	Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence	Switzerland, Argentina, Morocco	✗		Adopted by consensus
3	Youth and human rights	El Salvador, Côte d’Ivoire, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Morocco, Philippines, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Tunisia, Uzbekistan	✓	$116,700	Adopted by consensus
3	Countering cyberbullying	Argentina	✓	$96,800	Adopted by consensus
3	Promoting accessibility for the full enjoyment of all human rights by all	China, Burundi, Cameroon, Pakistan, Türkiye	✗		Adopted by consensus
3	Working Group on the rights of peasants and other people working in rural areas	Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Cuba, Gambia, Indonesia, Luxembourg, South Africa	✓	$48,200	Adopted by a recorded vote (33-0-14)
3	The role of good governance in the promotion and protection of human rights	Poland, Australia, Chile, Republic of Korea, South Africa	✓	$303,000	Adopted by consensus
3	Strengthening international cooperation for promoting and protecting the rights of women and girls in the context of digital technologies	Armenia, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Rwanda, Senegal, Sweden, Uruguay	✓	$140,100	Adopted by consensus
3	Human rights and Indigenous Peoples	Guatemala, Mexico	✓	$44,000	Adopted by consensus
3	Implications of artificial intelligence for the promotion and protection of human rights	Bangladesh, Algeria, Austria, Egypt, Greece, Guyana, Kuwait, Nepal	✓	$169,000	Adopted by consensus
3	Mandate of Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes	Kenya (on behalf of the Group of African States)	✓	$451,000	Adopted by consensus
3	Mandate of the open-ended intergovernmental working group to elaborate the content of an international regulatory framework on the regulation, monitoring and oversight of the activities of private military and security companies	Kenya (on behalf of the Group of African States)	✗		Adopted by consensus
3	Enhancing equal access of children to adequate nutritious food	Indonesia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Cuba, Finland, France, Rwanda	✗		Adopted by consensus
3	The human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation	Spain, Germany	✗		Adopted by consensus
3	The impact of anti-personnel mines on the full enjoyment of all human rights: strengthening victim assistance	Algeria, Croatia, Mozambique, Peru, South Africa, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Vanuatu	✓	$37,900	Adopted by consensus
3	Human rights of migrants	Mexico	✓	$332,500	Adopted by consensus
3	Human rights and transitional justice	Switzerland, Morocco	✓	$666,100	Adopted by consensus
3	Enforced or involuntary disappearances	France, Argentina, Japan, Morocco	✓	$1,166,500	Adopted by consensus
3	Open-ended intergovernmental working group on an optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the rights to early childhood education, free pre-primary education and free secondary education, established by Human Rights Council resolution 56/5				Adopted by consensus
4	Situation of human rights in the Russian Federation	Ireland (on behalf of the European Union)	✗		Adopted by a recorded vote (21-5-21)
4	Situation of human rights in Burundi	Ireland (on behalf of the European Union)	✗		Adopted by a recorded vote (22-7-17)
4	Situation of human rights in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela	Chile, Argentina, Canada, Ecuador, Guatemala, Paraguay, Uruguay	✓	$925,300	Adopted by a recorded vote (25-5-17)
6	Continued non-cooperation of a State under review with the universal periodic review mechanism				Adopted by consensus
8	National human rights institutions	Australia, Timor-Leste	✓	$757,000	Adopted by consensus
9	Mandate of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent	Kenya (on behalf of the Group of African States)	✓	$4,000,600	Adopted by consensus
9	From rhetoric to reality: a global call for concrete action against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance	Kenya (on behalf of the Group of African States)	✓	$132,600	Adopted by a recorded vote (30-0-17)
10	Technical assistance and capacity-building in the field of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo	Democratic Republic of the Congo	✗		Adopted by consensus
10	Cooperation with Georgia	Georgia	✗		Adopted by consensus
10	Technical assistance and capacity-building to address the human rights implications of the nuclear legacy in the Marshall Islands	Marshall Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Micronesia (Federated States of), Naoero, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Vanuatu	✓	$238,200	Adopted by consensus
10	Technical assistance and capacity-building in the field of human rights in the Central African Republic	Kenya (on behalf of the Group of African States)	✓	$426,500	Adopted by consensus
10	Technical assistance and capacity-building for Yemen in the field of human rights	Iraq (on behalf of the Group of Arab States)	✗		Adopted by consensus