Quick summary
- The 56th regular session of the Human Rights Council (HRC56) started on Tuesday, 18 June and will be held until Friday, 12 July 2024.
- On 18 June, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Volker Türk, opened HRC56 by presenting his global update on the state of human rights followed by an interactive dialogue, in which he discussed the raging conflicts, inequalities, environmental crises and called for better integration of human rights into economic, social and environmental policy.
- More than 50 reports under the Council’s various agenda items were considered.
- During HRC56, 24 interactive dialogues with Special Procedures mandate-holders (18 thematic, 6 country-specific), 5 interactive dialogues with the High Commissioner (on Myanmar, his annual report, Venezuela, and Ukraine), and three interactive dialogues with investigative mechanisms (for Sudan, Syrian Arabn Republic, and on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and Israel).
- The outcome reports of the UPR Working Group of the following 14 States were adopted: Belize, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Congo, Jordan, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, and Senegal.
- Three new Special Procedures mandate-holders were appointed to the following mandates: the Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran; one member to the Working Group on the use of mercenaries (from WEOG); one member to the Working Group on business and human rights (from EEG);
- 25 texts (22 resolutions and 3 decisions) were considered by the Council. This represents a 17% decrease in the number of adopted texts compared to one-year prior (HRC53). Of the 25 adopted texts, 22 were adopted by consensus (88%), and 3 by a recorded vote (12%).
- The Council also decided to establish an open-ended intergovernmental working group with the mandate of exploring the possibility of elaborating and submitting to the Council a draft optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the right to education.
- 30 written amendments were put forward by States during the consideration of texts: 20 were rejected by vote and five were withdrawn by the main sponsor. The Council didn’t take action on another five amendments.
- 20 (80%) of the texts adopted by the Council had Programme Budget Implications (PBI).
High Commissioner’s briefing
On 18 June 2024, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr. Volker Türk, presented his global update on the state of human rights. He underscored the cruelty of war and the impacts of worsening conflicts worldwide, and called for finding ‘our way back to peace, in line with the UN Charter and international law.’ He further pointed to the stark contrast between humanitarian funding gaps and increasing global military expenditure, emphasising that ‘war comes with a hefty price tag.’
He began his address by decrying the situation in Gaza, where over 120,000 casualties have resulted from Israel’s ‘relentless strikes,’ causing immense suffering and widespread destruction. He denounced Israel’s ‘arbitrary denial and obstruction of humanitarian aid,’ and called for an end to the occupation and the realisation of the two-State solution. Mr. Türk further stressed the escalation of violence between Lebanon and Israel, where at least 400 people have been killed and over 150,000 have been displaced.
Turning to other conflict contexts, the High Commissioner stressed how in Ukraine entire communities have been decimated by a recent Russian ground offensive, adding to the prior destruction of electricity, water and food systems. Mr. Türk then highlighted the destruction in Sudan caused by two warring parties and underscored the responsibility of the leaders of both factions in the commission of possible war crimes and other atrocity crimes, pointing at the need for mediation efforts and transition initiatives to come to fruition.
Mr. Türk also called for accountability in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, notably in the country’s east, where displacement, violence, and hate speech based on ethnicity are causing ‘immense suffering of civilians.’
The High Commissioner further spoke about situations of entrenched violence and protracted transitions, such as the Syrian Arab Republic, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, in which ‘civilians bear the brunt’ and militarised approaches are not yielding sustainable results. Similarly, Mr. Türk noted the widespread inter-communal violence, extrajudicial killings, conflict-related sexual violence, food insecurity, mass displacement and overall fragility in South Sudan, and reiterated his calls for accountability and justice. Pointing to the interlinkages between entrenched inequalities, poor governance, corruption, trafficking, and gang violence in Haiti, the High Commissioner called for human rights safeguards to be integrated into any security support.
Segueing from the human suffering caused by war into the harms caused by environmental degradation, Mr. Türk turned to the climate emergency and the impacts felt by people in Latin America and the Caribbean and countries in southern Africa, where millions are facing droughts and other extreme weather conditions. The High Commissioner stressed the disproportionate impact of these phenomena on the poor and most marginalised communities in countries that have contributed the least to the climate emergency – SIDS, LDCs and landlocked developing countries. He called for the integration of human rights into environmental analyses and for accountability for environmental harm.
Mr. Türk then turned to the role of human rights as a tool for early warning and prevention and highlighted the need to consider the root causes of tensions, violence and conflict, including entrenched and rising inequalities, lack of access to basic rights, deficient governance, and systemic discrimination. In that regard, he highlighted the need for investing in health and education systems, noting how austerity measures, debt, and cuts to public spending in countries like Sri Lanka and Lao People’s Democratic Republic are impacting human rights protection and the delivery of social services. In that regard, he stressed the role of a human rights economy as a ‘lever for social justice’ that promotes equal opportunities, meaningful participation, and investment in essential services, thereby reinforcing the social contract. He pointed to some ‘promising initiatives’ such as the proposal for a Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, the OECD 15% global minimum tax rate and the global 2% minimum wealth tax on billionaires proposed by Brazil, the current G-20 chair.
Speaking about systemic human rights issues, the High Commissioner called out racism against people of African descent, noting outstanding issues despite progress in Brazil, Colombia, the United States of America, and EU countries. Likewise, Mr. Türk deplored push backs against women and girls’ rights in Afghanistan and the Islamic Republic of Iran, and warned that ‘no country is immune from regression in women’s rights.’ Along the same lines, the High Commissioner decried and called for accountability for attacks against human rights defenders, activists, and journalists, notably the 42 Indigenous human rights defenders killed in 2023, and warned that so-called ‘foreign influence laws’ can entail ‘chilling effects’ on civic space freedoms and liberties. Mr. Türk further raised concerns about the potential undermining of transitional justice and freedom of expression in Peru, China, and the Southeast Asia region.
Ending on a more positive note, Mr. Türk highlighted the progress achieved following the almost 800 pledges made last December in the commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including 29 treaty ratifications, the launch of the international network of NMIRFs, and the adoption and amendment of legislation against discrimination and gender-based violence. The High Commissioner finally underscored the importance of global mobilisations to uphold human rights, particularly youth-led movements, and stressed that human rights systems continue to deliver for people. He commended the openness of Ecuador, Honduras, Mozambique, and the Caribbean Community to strengthen collaboration with OHCHR, and called out the growing attacks against international institutions.
He ended by urging States to ensure that human rights are strongly reflected in the upcoming Pact for the Future, recalling that a strong and effective human rights system is key to ‘building a better future for people and planet.’
The official transcript of Mr. Türk’s speech can be found here.
The High Commissioner, Volker Türk, during the interactive dialogue. Credit: UN Web TV
Panel discussions
A total of five panel discussions were held during the 56th session. The panels were focused on the following topics:
1-2. Annual full-day discussion on the human rights of women
- Panel 1: Economic violence against women and girls (28th June; concept note)
The first panel was opened by the High Commissioner, Mr. Volker Türk, who began by highlighting that violence against women and girls is ‘an egregious expression of power domination and patriarchy’ that is sustained by widespread and longstanding toxic masculinity and misogyny, transcending cultures, regions, and religions.
Türk noted that almost one in three women globally have been subject to gender-based violence – physical, sexual, psychological, or economic – throughout their lives, noting that economic violence is among the most invisible and unregulated forms of violence. Around the world, women’s access to their money and assets, and their ability to have financial independence and make decisions are curtailed through gender norms that place men as the sole financial decision-makers. On top of this, gender wage gaps (women earn 77 cents to each dollar earned by men) lead to gender wealth gaps (men own a ‘staggering USD 100 trillion’ more than women), all of which calls for policy measures that protect and empower women’s economic, social and cultural rights: from access to decent work and education, to equal ownership rights, equal access to financial resources, and shared care responsibilities, paired with proper grievance redress mechanisms and economic and social support systems that allow women to seek justice whenever economic violence occurs.
Speaking at the panel were Ms. Agata Szypulska, Seconded National Expert in Gender-Based Violence at the European Institute for Gender Equality; Ms. Anne-Sophie Parent , Chair of Older Women’s Network Europe, and Ms. Esther Waweru, Senior Legal Advisor at Equality Now.
Ms. Parent focused her address on institutionalised economic violence against older women, noting how pension reforms are disproportionately impacting older women by failing to provide adequate compensation for the disadvantages faced due to childbearing and raising. She also touched upon the restrictions of financial independence faced by elder women, exacerbated by digital barriers that put elder women at increased risk of suffering domestic violence. She called for policies to provide financial literacy training to older women, oblige banks to provide non-digital alternatives to their services, and train staff of help centres to tackle domestic financial violence.
Ms. Szypulska highlighted how sometimes a lack of conceptual clarity leads to the invisibilisation of certain forms of economic violence, including economic control, economic exploitation or sabotage. In her speech, Ms. Szypulska provided some evidence-based solutions to economic violence against women. Such solutions include funding new research on economic violence, in order to understand it as a phenomenon, its emerging forms, and its differentiated impacts on different groups of women; developing common definitions for economic violence and centring victims’ voices. She also called for facilitating mutual learning and the exchange of good practices among States when it comes to legislative initiatives or experiences conducting national surveys.
Ms. Waweru spoke about inequality within families, and how it is a root cause of economic violence. She commended the Maputo Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights for including economic harm and the need to ensure protection against economic violence as a prerequiste for the fulfilment of human rights. Ms. Waweru highlighted the intersectional nature of economic violence against women, and the different forms it may take, from financial control, prohibition to study or work, failure to pay alimony, or unpaid care work, among many others. She further called for the enactment of legislation to criminalise economic violence, the repealing of marital power clauses the translate into economic violence against women, and the safeguarding of women’s labour rights, as well as equality in inheritance regimes, fiscal and monetary policies.
Ms. Hyshyama Hamin, Campaign Manager of the Global Campaign for Equality in Family Law Credit: UN Web TV
- Panel 2: Human rights economy and women’s rights (28th June; concept note)
The second panel was opened by Ms. Nada Al-Nashif, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, who stressed that the current economic, legal and policy frameworks hinder the achievement of gender equality. She highlighted the plight of women being denied inheritance and pension rights around the world, propitiated in many cases by gender stereotypes that pigeonhole women and girls and result in the denial of their rights. In that regard, she underscored how the persisting perception of women and girls as primary caregivers, performing unpaid and undervalued work, translates into them being left unprotected as care work is not recognised nor equally distributed. This leads to the hindering of full enjoyment of women’s rights, in response to which, Ms. Al-Nashif said, we need to reform economic systems so they guarantee women’s rights and gender equality. Human rights economies, she said, are the shift needed to realise women’s rights, but also to put people and the planet in the centre of economic, social and environmental policies more broadly.
Speaking at the panel were Ms. Emanuela Pozzan, Senior Gender Specialist at the International Labour Organization; Ms. Hyshyama Hamin, Campaign Manager of the Global Campaign for Equality in Family Law; and Ms. Savitri Bisnath, Senior Director of Global Policy at the Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy at the New School.
Ms. Pozzan spoke about the importance of investments in a human rights-based care and support economy to advance gender equality, noting the heterogeneity of care work around the world and the need to understand the care economy in order to achieve gender equality. She stressed that the current social organisation of care places a disproportionate burden on women, thereby hindering their economic inclusion and effective participation in the labour market, and pointed at the resolution recently adopted by the International Labour Conference in Geneva on decent work and the care economy. The resolution, as Ms. Pozzan emphasised, makes it clear that labour in the care economy is not a commodity and that the high feminisation of care work has a significant impact on gender equality and the realisation of women’s rights.
Ms. Hamin began her speech by emphasising that no country in the world has achieved full legal equality between men and women, and noted that ‘inequality starts in the family,’ with discriminatory family laws and practices that limit women and girls’ right to education, work, economic independence, property, inheritance, and full participation in society, as well as their autonomy and ability to make their own decisions. She highlighted that the invisibilised burden of unpaid care, exacerbated by economic crises, pandemics, and conflict, renders women and girls particularly vulnerable to multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. She called on member States to priortise egalitarian family laws and practices in line with CEDAW’s Article 16, ensuring that child marriage is prohibited without conditionalities, and that there are equitable distributions of marital property and inheritance.
Ms. Bisnath underscored that the current economic model is not delivering economic prosperity for all, where it should contribute to human development and the flourishing of societies that centre all people and their human rights, as well as contributing to tackling inequalities and enabling the advancement of women’s rights. She highlighted that inequalities of opportunities and outcomes are influenced by a person’s socioeconomic context and perpetuated across generations through the transmission of wealth and the lack of upward social mobility. She further stressed the crucial role of the public sector in reducing inequalities and, noting the reality that most low- and middle-income countries spend much of their resources in debt servicing, called for a reform of the global debt architecture, paired with the alignment of economic policy with human rights and environmental justice.
Ms. Nada Al-Nashif, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights Credit: UN Web TV
3. Quadrennial panel discussion on promoting human rights through sport and the Olympic ideal. Theme: Promoting inclusiveness in and through sports (1st July; concept note)
The panel was opened by Mr. Thomas Bach, President of the International Olympic Committee, who recalled the Olympic spirit as a symbol of peace and union and highlighted the links between the Olympics and human rights, namely the fundamental values of non-discrimination, diversity, peace and understanding.
He noted the IOC’s efforts to strengthen the contributions of sport to the SDGs in terms of social inclusion, gender equality, tolerance, and peace. The IOC, he said, is ‘walking the talk when it comes to inclusion and human rights’ by aligning with the UNGPs, promoting good governance, ethics, and integrity. Importantly, the upcoming Olympic Games in Paris will be the first with full gender parity and will see a record number of refugee athletes. A better world, Mr. Bach said, can be built through sport.
The High Commissioner, Mr. Volker Türk, also spoke to highlight that this year’s Olympics are happening against the backdrop of conflict and recalled the tradition of observing an Olympic Truce during the Games. Türk stressed that both sport and human rights are a common language of humanity, and that both have transformative power, trigger societal change, and inspire and promote inclusion. He noted the progress made by businesses in the sports field that are aligning with the UNGPs, by the inclusion of human rights policies and grievance mechanisms in sports events, and by action being taken with regard to racism in sports. Türk called on States to collaborate with OHCHR in order to ‘amplify the promise of human rights and sports to unite our human family and to promote a culture of peace.’
The panel, which included Mr. Yiech Pur Biel, Olympic Refuge Foundation Board Member and Member of the first Refugee Olympic Team Rio 2016; Ms. Alexandra Xanthaki, Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights; Ms. Ginous Alford, Director of Sport and Human Rights at the World Players Association; and Ms. Najlah Imad Al-Dayyeni, Table Tennis Paralympian in Paralympic Games Tokyo 2020 and Paris 2024, highlighted the role of the Olympic movement in uniting people and including those often left behind, such as refugees, and, in all, changing the world through connection, hope, and breaking down of barriers and discrimination.
Mr. Thomas Bach, President of the International Olympic Committee Credit: UN Web TV
4. Annual panel discussion on the adverse impacts of climate change on human rights. Theme: Ensuring livelihood resilience in the context of the risk of loss and damage relating to the adverse effects of climate change (1st July; concept note)
The panel was opened by Mr. Volker Türk, High Commissioner for Human Rights, who highlighted that the planet, our human rights, and our future are in profound danger due to the impacts of climate change. He noted the wide range of negative impacts of climate change, from melting glaciers to warming oceans, to burning rainforests and drying lakes and rivers, in addition to slow-onset events. He noted that there is an 80 per cent chance that in one of the next five years, the global annual average temperature will surpass 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Mr. Türk noted that loss and damage resulting from climate change is now hitting people in vulnerable situations and developing countries the hardest, despite that they have contributed the least to it, and that Indigenous Peoples and others who depend on the land and environment for their livelihoods are facing dying and depleted ecosystems. He highlighted that climate change, however, is impacting and will increasingly impact the human rights of all people, across the planet, endangering the rights to food, health, adequate standard of living, the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, and the right to life.
The High Commissioner continued by noting that the climate crisis is accelerating, and that the world must increase action to prevent it from becoming worse, while also improving the response to the extensive loss and damage being caused by climate change. He noted that the countries most responsible for climate change have an obligation to provide climate financing to remedy harms caused by climate change, and that this financing must be grant-based and directly accessible to affected communities.
Next, Mr. Eric Mwezi Manzi, Deputy General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation, focused his intervention specifically on workers and their rights to a healthy environment, including the right to a just transition at the intersection of the climate emergency, human rights, and labour rights.
Mr. Mwezi noted that climate change has already caused job losses, increased deaths, workplace accidents and occupational diseases, and that the rising global temperatures have impacted workers, their families and communities, highlighting that the International Labour Organisation estimated that in 2020 there were nearly 20,000 workplace deaths attributed to heat exposure.
He continued that climate change is causing and will continue to cause internal and international labour migration, which could worsen the situation of prejudices and violations already felt by migrant workers. Further, the promotion and protection of human and labour rights are essential to the right to a just transition, which requires responsible policies and public and private resources to invest in clean, resilient energy industries, resilient agriculture, and more. While many jobs will be lost in the transition, many jobs will be created, and these jobs must be ones that respect fundamental rights. Mr. Mwezi noted that States have an obligation to respect, protect and ensure respect for fundamental labour and human rights, which require Member States to develop a normative framework that addresses climate change and its impact on the world of work.
Next, Mr. Kaveh Zahedi, Director of the Office of Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment at the Food and Agriculture Organization highlighted the cascading crises of conflict, economic stagnation, growing inequalities and climate extremes, which are all contributing to an increase in food security, with over 700 million people now living in hunger. He stated that in 2023, close to 72 million people in 18 different countries were subject to acute food insecurity primarily due to climate related shocks, up from 57 million in 12 countries the year before. Mr. Zahedi stated that by 2030, more than 100 million people could be pushed into extreme poverty by climate change.
Climate change has caused not only widespread economic losses, but have also negatively impacted the food and knowledge systems of Indigenous Peoples and health impacts on agricultural workers.
Mr. Zahedi proposed three action pathways to address the mounting climate challenges: promote cross-sectoral policies and laws to avert, minimise, and address both economic and non-economic loss and damage in agrifood systems; implement equity-based and people-centred solutions that can strengthen inclusivity, sustainability, and resilience in agrifood systems; and increasing climate finance to avert, minimise, and address economic and non-economic loss and damage in agrifood systems.
The next panellist, Mr. Romell Antonio O. Cuenca, Deputy Executive Director of the Climate Change Commission, detailed the increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, which are putting lives, livelihoods and the world’s collective future at stake. Using the example of the Philippines, he highlighted a number of typhoons that have affected the country, before arguing that human rights -as both an object and instrument of transformative climate action- are the correct approach for a country like the Philippines, which has a clear vision of the different objectives it wants to achieve.
Mr. Cuenca called on all to fulfil their commitments, including mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, providing means of implementation to developing nations, and supporting climate resilience initiatives. Livelihood resilience must be recognised not only as an outcome but as a continuous process involving the participation of local communities, the innovation of sustainable practices, and the steadfast commitment of national and international bodies.
Next, Ms. Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, Associate Professor of Sustainability Law at the University of Amsterdam and Counsel at Blue Ocean Law, focused on the legal dimensions of the climate crisis, notably the evolving landscape of climate litigation and its potential to address loss and damage, and enhance livelihood resilience.
Ms. Wewerinke-Singh cited a recent advisory opinion from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which affirmed that anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases constitute marine pollution, reminding the world that oceans are not simply carbon sinks, but also vital ecosystems the world must protect and preserve. ITLOS further recognised that compliance with the Paris Agreement isn’t enough for compliance with international law relating to climate change.
Next, she discussed how the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) is currently considering an advisory opinion on the climate emergency and human rights, for which many youth groups and States have made submissions articulating how loss and damage from climate change engages the responsibility of States under human rights law. She noted that acts and omissions worsening loss and damage can in fact be attributed to specific actors.
Ms. Wewerinke-Singh noted that by clarifying legal frameworks around climate change, judicial processes can assist in giving effect to States’ human rights obligations, including those to mobilise resources for livelihood resilience. She noted that the legal framework, scientific understanding and moral imperative already exist to ensure livelihood resilience for all in the face of loss and damage, but what is now needed is the political will to deliver rights-based responses.
Ms. Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh, Associate Professor of Sustainability Law at the University of Amsterdam and Counsel at Blue Ocean Law Credit: UN Web TV
5. Annual thematic panel discussion on technical cooperation and capacity-building. Theme: Enhancing technical cooperation and capacity- building in the implementation of universal periodic review recommendations (9th July; concept note)
The last panel provided a scenario to reflect on good practices and challenges to support States’ efforts to implement UPR recommendations through South-South, North-South and triangular cooperation, and the critical role that partnerships play to make assistance and capacity-building timely, coherent, effective and efficient.
Speaking at the panel were Mr. Mahamane Cisse-Gouro, Director of the Human Rights Council and Treaty Mechanisms Division at OHCHR; H.E. Mr. Tormod C. Endresen, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Norway to the UN and other international organisations in Geneva; Ms. Adriana Quiñones, Head of Human Rights and Development and Deputy Head of UN-Women Geneva Office; and Ms. Mona M’Bikay, Executive Director of UPR Info.
Opening the panel, Mr. Cissé-Gouro praised the greater and more consistent engagement of Resident Coordinators and UN Country Teams with the UPR during the fourth cycle. Such engagement – which is exemplified through the greater alignment and integration of UPR recommendations into UN Country Teams programming, the increasing number of submissions from UN Country Teams or interventions of Resident Coordinators during UPR adoptions – underscores the critical role of the UN in supporting States’ efforts to implement accepted recommendations. Mr. Cissé-Gouro highlighted that the effective implementation of UPR recommendations relies on the delivery of relevant technical assistance and capacity-building, in collaboration with development cooperation entities. The panellist explained that the online repository of technical cooperation and capacity-building activities for the implementation of UPR recommendations, once it is established, will present a tremendous opportunity to showcase how human rights mechanisms can advance human rights, mapping expertise and facilitating collaboration and partnerships.
H.E. Endresen underscored how jointly these two key strands of the work of the Council (i.e., UPR recommendations reinforced through technical cooperation and capacity building) contribute to the promotion and protection of human rights on the ground. In the words of the Permanent Representative, ‘UPR recommendations offer a road map for technical cooperation and capacity-building in the field of human rights.’ At the end of his intervention, the panellist highlighted the key role of the UPR Voluntary Fund supporting countries in the implementation of recommendations, as well as the contribution of UPR regional advisers on the increased incorporation of UPR recommendations in country assessments and frameworks.
Ms. Adriana Quiñones, Head of Human Rights and Development and Deputy Head of UN-Women Geneva Office exposed the different venues through which the UN agency engages in the UPR process, including through supporting governments to prepare their national report; encouraging the participation of civil society and other relevant actors in dialogues for the preparation of the State report; advocating with recommending States to submit advance questions and prepare recommendations on women’s human rights and gender equality issues; or advocating for the acceptance of recommendations. The panellists also provided some examples of the initiatives undertaken by UN Women to support the implementation of the accepted recommendations, including developing tracking mechanisms for monitoring implementation; supporting the State to take stock of progress in implementation; or analysing gender equality and women’s empowerment-related recommendations made each cycle.
The last panellist, Ms. Mona M’Bikay, Executive Director of UPR Info listed three key factors that can help to fully harness the potential of the UPR in its fourth cycle and achieve transformative changes that enhance human rights. First, it is essential to raise the percentage of Official Development Assistance (ODA) directly allocated to human rights and local organisations. Second, it is crucial to enhance and build the capacity of national actors and engage all three branches of the State, ensuring they can effectively prevent and respond to human rights violations. Lastly, it is vital to cultivate a culture of dialogue and cooperation between the State under Review and Recommending States, as well as among national actors.
UN Women, Ms. Adriana Quinones Credit: UN Web TV
Commissions of Inquiry, Fact-Finding Missions and Independent investigations
Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan
On 18 June, Mohamed Chande Othman, the Chairperson of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan, presented an oral update to the Council on the progress made by the mechanism since its establishment in October 2023, which was followed by an enhanced interactive dialogue.
Since the outbreak of the conflict in April 2023, Sudan has been engulfed in widespread violence, concentrated in urban areas – particularly in Darfur – and targeting the civilian population on the basis of ethnicity, leading to the forced displacement of almost nine million individuals.
The Chairperson also raised the FFM’s concerns about the looming famine threatening nearly 18 million individuals, including children and pregnant women at risk of starvation. The acute situation is being met with a minimal response, as warring parties continue to obstruct humanitarian access. The FFM stressed the urgent importance of the Humanitarian Response Plan, noting that it remains severely underfunded with only 16% of the required funds having been received.
The FFM also related reports of conflict-related sexual violence, with women and girls being subject to rape, abduction and forced marriage, and amid a generalised lack of support for survivors of this type of violence. Furthermore, the Chairperson stressed the dangers faced by children, who are at risk of forced recruitment to be used at checkpoints for intelligence-gathering purposes and to participate in direct combat and commit violent crimes.
Given the FFM’s mandate to examine the root causes of all alleged violations, the Chairperson noted the existence of several structural issues, including the uncontrolled arming of civilians, the mobilisation of armed groups on an ethnic basis, and the impunity for atrocious crimes, that not only fuel into the current violence but are also laying the ground for future cycles of violations. Mr. Othman thus underscored the importance of combating impunity.
The FFM called first and foremost on an immediate ceasefire and the protection of civilians. The mechanism also appealed to States with influence over the warring parties to step up their efforts to bring the parties back to the negotiation table and put an end to the violence. Furthermore, it called on all States to abide by the arms embargo imposed on Darfur by Security Council resolution 1556.
Speaking at the interactive dialogue, the Chief Prosecutor of the Republic of Sudan, intervening on behalf of the country concerned, highlighted the severe violations committed by the rebel Rapid Support Forces, including killings, massacres and systematic attacks amounting to genocide. He called for international support, assistance in establishing a compensation fund, and respect for Sudan’s sovereignty in addressing these issues, while reiterating that the country was ready to engage in technical cooperation.
During the discussion, State representatives and NGOs underscored the importance of maintaining Sudanese State institutions and preventing their collapse.
Gambia, speaking on behalf of the African Group, and Jordan, speaking on behalf of the Arab Group, urged parties to implement the Jeddah Agreement to protect civilians and ensure humanitarian aid in Sudan.
The EU appealed to the warring parties to agree to an immediate and durable ceasefire and reiterated its continuous support for regional and international mediation efforts to bring peace to Sudan.
Among civil society intervening in the interactive dialogue, Defend Defenders underscored the importance of protecting civilians, finding a way to halt the violence and the obstruction of food relief. They further recalled that 80 NGOs have urged states to adopt a resolution extending the FFM’s mandate for at least one year.
The Chief of the FFM, Mohamed Chande Othman, during the interactive dialogue. Credit: UN Web TV
Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic
On 3 July 2024, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic (COI), composed of Mr. Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro (Chair), Mr. Hanny Megally, and Ms. Lynn Welchman, delivered an oral update to the Council, followed by an interactive dialogue with States and NGOs on the country’s human rights situation.
Mr. Pinheiro opened by reminding the Council of the fact that the Commission has documented extensive human rights violations and war crimes across Syria by all parties to the conflict for more than a decade. He detailed how the situation has become increasingly complex, with contributing factors including a crumbling economy, devastating humanitarian situation -further worsened with the past year’s earthquake-, and a State that is both unwilling and to a certain extent unable to ensure the safety and security of its people. The fact that six foreign armies are operating in the country, as well as the risks posed by the Israel-Palestinian conflict and its potential escalation, further complicate the situation.
Next, Mr. Pinheiro highlighted that while the conflict’s tempo has ebbed and flowed, its root causes still remain, with appalling cycles of violence continuing throughout the country. He stressed the need for accountability and rule of law, noting that predatory security forces and militias are extorting monetary gains from civilians instead of ensuring their protection, while incommunicado detention and enforced disappearances continue. According to Mr. Pinheiro, impunity and lawlessness have created a grim reality for Syrians, with no end in sight, as world leaders involved in the country’s conflict continue to fail to achieve progress towards peaceful settlement of the conflict. He argued that while the government and international community seem bizarrely content to maintain the status quo, this is not a viable option for Syrians, both inside and outside of the country.
Mr. Pinheiro mentioned that outside of Syria, however, there have been some positive developments – Syrian civil society has been leading creative accountability initiatives, which have led to a guilty verdict of three high-ranking Syrian officials of complicity in crimes against humanity and war crimes in a French court. Further, civil society has been actively supporting the International Court of Justice proceedings concerning Syrian State torture. Another positive development mentioned by Mr. Pinheiro was the establishment of an institution dedicated to assisting the families of the thousands of missing and disappeared in Syria to determine the fate of their loved ones.
Next, Mr. Pinheiro turned to what the Council can do to assist the Syrian people, which includes continuing to support accountability efforts and the institution for the missing, as well as: addressing the situation of those arbitrarily detained since 2019 in northeast Syria; conducting urgent reviews of the imposition of unilateral coercive measures on Syria, which Mr. Pinheiro noted increased costs and delays for humanitarian organisations operating in the country; and finally, addressing the alarming lack of support for the 2024 humanitarian response plan, with only 13% of the 4.07 billion USD needed raised so far.
The Syrian Arab Republic, speaking as the country concerned, argued that the methodology and conclusions of the Commission are detached from reality, while the countries supporting the CoI are participating in the killing and displacement of Syrians. The representative argued that unilateral coercive measures are negatively affecting the human rights of all Syrians, and that the Syrian State continues to work to liberate the country from terrorism and to restore security, stability and the rule of law, and that it further continues to continue its constructive cooperation with the UN and other partners to improve the humanitarian situation of all Syrians. He concluded by saying that the government will continue its engagement with all States that believe in international law and the UN Charter.
Mr. Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry Credit: UN Web TV
Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and Israel
On 19 June 2024, Ms. Navi Pillay, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, presented an oral update to examine violations of international human rights law (IHRL), international humanitarian law (IHL) and possible international crimes committed by all parties between 7 October and 31 December 2023, which was followed by an enhanced interactive dialogue.
Ms. Pillay started by highlighting that since 7 October 2023, tens of thousands of children, women and men have been killed, and thousands of Palestinians have been detained and are being held incommunicado, while 120 Israelis are still being held in Gaza. Ms. Pillay noted that the 7 October attack and Israel’s subsequent military operation in Gaza have not occurred in a vacuum – they were preceded by decades of violence and retribution, dispossession, unlawful occupation and denial of the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.
Ms. Pillay then detailed how the Commission has carried out two parallel investigations since 7 October – the first into attacks by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups on 7-8 October, and the second into Israeli military operations and attacks in Gaza between 7 October and 31 December.
Next, Ms. Pillay detailed the conclusions of the Commission’s report. The Commission concluded that Israeli authorities are responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity and violations of international humanitarian and human rights law -including extermination, intentionally directing attacks against civilians and civilian objects, murder and willful killing, using starvation as a method of war, forcible transfer, gender persecution targeting Palestinian men and boys, sexual and gender-based violence amounting to torture, and cruel or inhuman treatment. Further, the ‘total siege’ carried out by Israel in the Gaza Strip -cutting off supplies of water, food, electricity, fuel and humanitarian assistance- has weaponized the provision of life-sustaining necessities for strategic and political gains, and constitutes collective punishment, and has caused starvation-related deaths.
Ms. Pillay highlighted that the Commission found that the immense number of civilian casualties in Gaza were the result of Israel’s intentional strategy to cause maximum damage and disregard the legal obligations of distinction, proportionality, and adequate precautions. She also noted that Israel has forcibly transferred almost the entirety of the civilian population into small spaces that are unsafe and uninhabitable, and that the Commission found that Israeli forces have committed sexual and gender-based violence with the intent to humiliate and further subordinate the Palestinian community. Further, although Israeli officials have repeatedly stated that the objective of their operations in Gaza are to destroy Hamas and release those held, neither of those aims have been largely achieved, while resulting in the deaths of thousands of people.
Finally, Ms. Pillay stated that while the situation in the Gaza Strip has overshadowed the situation in the West Bank, Palestinian fatalities in the West Bank since 7 October have exceeded any other time period following increasingly militarised Israeli operations. She highlighted that Israel’s blatant disregard for international law across the entire Occupied Palestinian Territory has disproportionately impacted children, especially in Gaza, where Israeli forces have killed and maimed tens of thousands of children, with thousands more likely under the rubble.
Next, in discussing the 7 October attack in Israel, Ms. Pillay highlighted that the Commission found that Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups are responsible for the war crimes of intentionally directing attacks against civilians, murder or willful killing, torture, inhuman or cruel treatment, destroying or seizing the property of an adversary, outrages upon personal dignity, and taking hostages.
Echoing the Security Council resolution the prior week calling for an immediate, full and complete ceasefire, Ms. Pillay called for a complete cessation of hostilities, including an immediate and full end of the siege, the release of all detainees, and the end of indiscriminate firing of rockets into Israel.
Finally, Ms. Pillay stated that the Commission will continue its investigation into all international crimes, and that while it requested access to the Gaza Strip, Israel has ignored the request. She highlighted that the Commission welcomes and is cooperating with the accountability processes at the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.
Israel, as a country concerned, said that the report of the COI has failed to properly address the accounts of Israelis, called on those held in the Gaza Strip to be released, and asked for the UN’s assistance.
Palestine, as a country concerned, thanked the Commission for its report, even with the difficulties of Israel not allowing access to the territories. The Palestinian representative reiterated Palestine’s opposition to the targeting of civilians and the importance of releasing administrative detainees held in Israel, as well as resolving cases of enforced disappearances. He highlighted that over 37,400 people have been killed by the Israeli operations in Gaza, with 80,000 wounded – 72% of them women and children, with thousands still under the rubble. In the West Bank 553 Palestinians have been killed, including 130 children. Further, 3,700 Palestinians are currently in Israeli prisons, including 640 children. He condemned the occupying power’s ongoing aggression and genocide, and demanded the implementation of a ceasefire, an end to civilian massacres, the lifting of the Gaza siege, and the delivery of aid. To conclude, he stressed the need for States to uphold their obligations under the Geneva Conventions, including conducting investigations, stopping the transfer of arms to Israel, and supporting the International Criminal Court’s efforts.
The Chief of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, Navi Pillay, during the interactive dialogue. Credit: UN Web TV
Universal Periodic Review
Adoption of the UPR Working Group outcome reports
The Council adopted the UPR outcome reports of Belize, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Congo, Jordan, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, and Senegal. A total of 3,973 recommendations were made to these fourteen States, out of which 3,139 were supported, 750 were noted, and 84 were partially supported/noted.
In the debate during the adoption of UPR outcomes, many States under review in this cycle reaffirmed their commitment to this mechanism and stressed the importance of the UPR mechanism and its contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights worldwide. Malta highlighted that the UPR provides a unique system of interaction amongst States to gauge adherence to international human rights obligations. Mauritius also emphasised the State-driven nature of the UPR mechanism and underscored its importance as an enabler of information sharing and as a useful tool for peer learning. Senegal noted that the UPR represents a unique framework for dialogue both at the national as well as at the international level amongst a variety of stakeholders including States, national human rights institutions and civil society and acts as a lever for the establishment and strengthening of institutions, policies, laws, programs and initiatives by States in the fulfilment of their human rights commitments. Other Council members and observing States such as Australia and Canada during the debate also referred to the value of the UPR mechanism in enabling all States to share and consider human rights concerns in a transparent, open and constructive manner and in providing the opportunity to assess the human rights records of States based on dialogue and help ensure that all States are continually improving upon their commitments to respect, protect and fulfil human rights.
Many of the States under review in this cycle also elaborated on their engagement with the UPR process and detailed the action and commitments towards implementation of recommendations emanating through the UPR mechanism. Nigeria informed the Council of the integration of accepted recommendations by the relevant government institutions to facilitate their implementation. In response to the accepted UPR recommendations, Mauritius also assured the Council that its legal structure was continuously being enhanced, the institutional set up improved and policies adjusted to support efforts in fulfilling human rights obligations and aligning them to international norms and standards. Various States such as Belize and Congo reaffirmed their commitment towards the implementation of the UPR recommendations to ensure protection and promotion of human rights. Malaysia while reiterating its commitment to the full and effective implementation of the UPR recommendations to translate them into meaningful and tangible impact on ground, highlighted a range of efforts including its National Recommendations Tracking Database (NRTD) and a National Working Committee on the UPR to streamline efforts to monitor and coordinate implementation of UPR recommendations and ensure follow-up and reporting. However, Malaysia also called for building and strengthening State’s capacity and resources in the implementation of UPR recommendations and also noted that the existing practice of determining States’ position on each recommendation should be expanded beyond ‘accepted’ and ‘noted’ to accommodate nuances in States’ positions with respect to the varying content and contexts of recommendations.
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, Mr. Tengku Mohamed Fauzi Tengku Abdul Hamid Credit: UN Web TV
Special Procedures
Interactive Dialogues
24 mandate holders (18 thematic, 6 country-specific) presented annual reports or oral updates to HRC56 (the written reports are available here). During 24 interactive dialogues, 146 States delivered statements (either individually or jointly), of which 30% were from the African Group, 24% from APG, 12% from EEG, 16% from GRULAC, 17% from WEOG, and less than 1% from other countries (namely the State of Palestine, the Holy See and the Sovereign Order of Malta).
Appointment of new mandate-holders
On the final day of the session, the following three Special Procedures mandate-holders were appointed to fill positions on existing mandates:
- Ms. Mai SATO (Japan) was appointed as the Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
- Ms. Joana Rita LOPES DE DEUS PEREIRA (Portugal) as a member of the Working Group on the use of mercenaries.
- Ms. Lyra JAKULEVIČIENĖ (Lithuania) as a member of the Working Group on business and human rights.
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 14 government officials at HRC56, from Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Burkina Faso, Gambia, Council Members, Guyana, Maldives, Mali, Somalia, Suriname and Vanuatu. A small proportion of delegates (28%) come from States that are currently members of the Council.
Adopted texts
The 56th session of the Council concluded with the adoption of 25 texts (22 resolutions and 3 decisions). This is 5 texts less than the number of texts (30) adopted at the 53rd session in 2023 or a decrease of 17%.
22 tabled resolutions (88%) at HRC56 were adopted by consensus. Only 3 tabled resolutions were adopted by vote (12%).
Resolutions and decisions listed in order of L numbers
Analysis and conclusions
The 56th session of the Human Rights Council (HRC56), as is the norm for June sessions, saw a heavy focus, and considerable disagreement, on women’s rights and gender issues. The session also saw a number of new initiatives (e.g., on plastic pollution, on UN human rights advisors, and the rights of seafarers); although the total number of texts (25) dropped by five compared with HRC53, one year ago. What is more, 22 of those texts (88%) were adopted by consensus, suggesting a possible reduction in polarisation at the Council (though there were a considerable number of voted amendments to some of the draft texts).
Incitement to religious hatred
One of the more surprising developments at HRC56 was the very late decision (at the very end of the session) by the OIC to withdraw its draft resolution on Countering religious hatred constituting incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence. This decision came just one session after the OIC had decided, towards the end of HRC55, not to table its regular resolution on Combatting religious intolerance (resolution 16/18).
The context of both decisions is ongoing disagreement, especially between the OIC and the EU, about how States should respond to acts of religious hatred such as public burning of holy texts. Specifically, do such acts constitute incitement to religious hatred, discrimination, or violence, and, therefore, should States prohibit such acts in line with their obligations under the ICCPR? Some EU member States hold that they do not, and therefore such acts should not be prohibited/criminalised in law. OIC States, unsurprisingly, disagree; hence their decision one year ago, during HRC53, to call for an urgent debate to ‘discuss the alarming rise in premeditated and public acts of religious hatred as manifested by recurrent desecration of the Holy Quran in some European and other countries,’ and to secure the adoption of resolution 53/1 on the subject (adopted by vote, with an overwhelming majority in favour, but with Western States against).
At the time of the urgent debate and negotiation of resolution 53/1, Western – especially EU – States complained that it would have been possible for them to join consensus, if the OIC had agreed to prolong consultations. EU actions since suggest such claims to be disingenuous.
First, during HRC55 in March, the EU (or, at least, certain States within the EU) refused to consider any changes to the annual OIC-led draft resolution on combatting religious intolerance (resolution 16/18). The OIC had wanted that resolution to reflect new or evolving incidents of religious intolerance and/or hatred in the world, including Quran burnings. However, the EU disagreed and refused to consider any changes to the OIC’s text or (to maintain balance) to its own resolution on freedom of religion. Because of differences within the OIC over how to respond to the EU’s position, in the end, Pakistan, the OIC coordinator at the Council, did not table the OIC draft at all.
Now, at HRC56, a similar story played out. Some OIC States, sensitive to EU/Western claims that more time should have been spent, at HRC53, in finding common ground and securing the consensus adoption of resolution 53/1, urged their OIC partners to reach out to and work with the US and EU on a consensus-based follow-up resolution to 53/1. Unfortunately, while agreement with the US seemed within reach, EU States tabled a series of amendments:
- Rejecting OIC compromise language recognising only that the desecration of, or attacks on, ‘sacred books, places of worship as well as religious symbols, […] could constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence.’
- Rejecting the notion that the burning of the Quran or other holy books constitutes incitement to religious discrimination, hostility, or violence, and thus shall be prohibited, as per States’ obligations under the ICCPR. (The EU did, however, agree that such incidents are ‘offensive, disrespectful and a clear act of provocation.’)
- Opposing explicit reference to the burning of holy texts, in favour of broader references to condemning and rejecting ‘all instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence in all regions of the world.’
Perhaps due to concern that some of these amendments may have passed, or perhaps due to a wish to secure cross-regional consensus on an issue of great importance to Muslim-majority States, the OIC decided to withdraw its draft resolution.
It is not clear what will happen next, though there does appear to be growing anger, within the OIC, at the EU’s approach.
Women’s rights
As is usual at June Council sessions, there was considerable focus, at HRC56, on women’s rights and gender issues. The annual full-day discussion on women’s rights included two panels: one on economic violence against women and girls; and one on the human rights economy and women’s rights. There were also four resolutions linked with women’s rights and/or gender: two new resolutions on Accelerating progress towards preventing adolescent girls’ pregnancy (Mauritius, Panama), and Technology-facilitated gender-based violence (Belgium, Albania, Bolivia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Morocco); and two recurring texts on the Elimination of all forms of discrimination against women and girls, (Mexico, Chile), and Menstrual hygiene management, human rights and gender equality (Gambia, on behalf of the African Group).
All were eventually adopted by consensus, though the Belgian-led resolution attracted two (minor) amendments (both rejected by the Council), and the Mexican-led text attracted seven amendments (mostly focused on sexual and reproductive health and rights, and gender issues, and mostly tabled by Russia) – five of which were rejected by the Council and two of which were withdrawn.
Children’s rights
A highly-significantly, though not universally-welcomed (by child rights experts), new resolution at HRC56 was presented by Luxembourg (penholder), Armenia, Bulgaria, Colombia, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Gambia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Nauru, Panama, Romania, and Sierra Leone, and established an Open-ended intergovernmental working group [to draft] 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.
The idea of a fourth optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child was pushed heavily by some civil society actors, most notably Human Rights Watch. The new optional protocol would inter alia:
- Recognise that the right to education includes early childhood care and education.
- Call on States to make public pre-primary education (beginning with at least one year) and public secondary education available free to all.
- Ensure participation of children / that children’s views are taken into account in the discussions on the optional protocol.
Opposition to the proposals, including from some child rights experts, centred on two concerns: first, that the right to free primary and secondary education is already included in and protected by the Convention on the Rights of the Child (either explicitly in the text, and/or through interpretative general comments), and thus to open this issue to intergovernmental negotiation may actually lead to a rolling back of children’s right to education; and second, regarding pre-primary childcare, that making such pre-school care free to all, even (to begin with) for just one year, would be well beyond the reach of many developing countries, especially LDCs and SIDS.
Two amendments were tabled to the draft resolution, both by the Russian Federation (one on the rights of parents to choose their children’s school, and one replacing a call to consult children in the drafting of the optional protocol with a call to do so while considering the evolving capacities of children). Both were rejected, and the resolution was eventually adopted by consensus.
Human rights in the context of HIV and AIDS
The resolution that attracted the most hostile amendments during HRC46 (though in the end, was still adopted by consensus), was tabled by Brazil, Colombia, Portugal, and Thailand, and focused on the human rights implications of HIV and AIDS. The aim of the resolution was simply to call for a panel discussion on the subject at HRC58, and to ask OHCHR to prepare two reports. Notwithstanding these simple objectives, because the text necessarily dealt with SRHR issues such as comprehensive sexuality education, as well as gender issues, it attracted eight amendments. Of these six were rejected by vote, one was withdrawn, and one saw no action.
Technical assistance and capacity-building
HRC56 saw the adoption of an important new resolution Informing the Human Rights Council on the Human Rights Advisers Programme, tabled by Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Paraguay, Sierra Leone, Sweden, and the UK. This recognised the important role of human rights advisers in developing countries, expressed concern at funding shortages to the Human Rights Advisers Programme, and noted that such shortages would directly impact OHCHR’s ability to provide technical assistance and capacity-building support in countries around the world.
The session also saw the delivery, by Gambia on behalf of a group of States, of an important joint statement calling for significant reform of the manner in which the Council delivers capacity-building support to those countries that so need and so request it (under agenda item 10).
Environment
The Council has regularly adopted resolutions on human rights and environment broadly, as well as on specific aspects of the triple environmental crisis (e.g., regular resolutions on human rights and climate change). However, it has not before adopted a resolution on the other dimensions of that crisis: namely, pollution or biodiversity loss. That changed at HRC56, when Panama, Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Peru tabled a next draft resolution on Plastic pollution implications on the full enjoyment of human rights. This was adopted by consensus.
Featured picture: On 24 June, H.E. Omar Zniber, President of the Human Rights Council, UN Women and the Permanent Mission of Bolivia organised an event at the UN to mark International Women in Diplomacy Day. Credit: X @ONUGeneve
Share this Post
