Foreword

The third edition of Human Wrongs, Human Rights, published jointly by British Irish RIGHTS WATCH and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, is very welcome.

This completely updated guide will help NGOs, lawyers and individuals to find their way around the various human rights mechanisms of the United Nations. The mechanisms can seem complex to those who are not familiar with them but, as this guide shows, they are in fact accessible and simple to use.

Although primarily aimed at readers in Britain and Ireland, much of the information and the insights contained in the guide will be useful to people in many countries around the world.

I congratulate British Irish RIGHTS WATCH and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission for continuing to publish this useful guide and I encourage anyone whose human rights have been violated, or who is helping victims of such violations, to make imaginative use of the mechanisms the United Nations offers.

Mary Robinson
High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations
Geneva
September 2001

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, for contributing a foreword to this guide, and to Mel James for her contribution towards the chapter on resolutions.

Thanks also to the following staff at the United Nations: Affaf Abbass, Daniel Atchebro, Martine Anstett, Jean-Nicolas Beuze, Fiona Blyth-Kubota, Alessio Bruni, Jane Connors, Mac Darrow, Paulo David, Carla Edelenbos, Patrice Gillibert, Rio Hada, Fatou Houel, María Francísca Ize-Charrin, Miguel de la Lama, Guennadi Lebakine, Greg Mayne, Koh Miyaoi, Cecilian Möller, Jacqueline Nzoyihera, Jennifer Philpot-Nissen, Carmen Ruda Castañon, Christina Saunders, Markus Schmidt, Eleanor Solo, Henrik Stenman, Myriam Tebourbi, Cecilia Thompson, Alexandre Tikhonov, Carlos Villan-Duran.

We also thank Karen Davies of the UN Office and Information Centre in London.

Grateful thanks to the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, especially Stephen Pittam, for their grant towards the development of the first edition of this guide, and to all those whose comments and ideas have been carried over into this edition.

Introduction

Most people associate the United Nations with its peace-keeping role, seeing it as the body that tries - and often fails - to deal with problems such as those that have arisen in Kosovo. What they are aware of is the UN’s political role.

Generally speaking, people are much less aware of the UN’s role in setting international human rights standards and monitoring governments’ adherence to them.

Indeed, if you were to ask people in Britain or Ireland what their rights are under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, very few of them would even have heard of the Declaration, let alone be aware of their rights.

Yet human rights are extremely important. Everyone has the right to live their life free from torture, to receive a fair trial if they are accused of a crime, to practice their religion, to enjoy family life, and to exercise their rights free from racial or other forms of discrimination. Anyone whose human rights have been denied knows that without needing to study international human rights law. At a more general level, human rights matter because they represent guarantees by governments to those they govern that the state will not abuse its power and will respect people’s rights and recognise their dignity as human beings.

However, because people have little knowledge of what their human rights are, they do not know how to enforce their rights if things go wrong. The UN has a whole array of mechanisms for helping people to obtain their rights and redress their wrongs, but lawyers, advice agencies, and voluntary and community groups usually know very little about them.

This guide sets out to change all that. It explains where to find out about human rights, how the UN human rights machinery works, and how to make effective use of it.

The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission is particularly pleased to be

associated with the production and dissemination of the third edition of
this unique guide. The Commission hopes it will be widely distributed so
that individuals and groups around the world will be able to make much more effective use of the numerous United Nations mechanisms for protecting human rights.

The guide has drawn on the experience of many individuals who have been kind enough to share their knowledge. Future editions will benefit greatly from comments from readers, and especially users, which should be sent to:

Jane Winter Professor Brice Dickson
Director Chief Commissioner

British Irish RIGHTS WATCH Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission
13b Hillgate Place Temple Court
London SW12 9ES 39 North Street
Belfast BT1 1NA

Glossary

Please look through this glossary before reading the rest of this guide. It will help you get to grips with the jargon you need in order to operate effectively within the UN. If you see a word in the explanation column with which you are unfamiliar, you should find it explained elsewhere in the glossary itself.

term	explanation	examples
adoption	The process of agreeing to be bound by a human rights instrument that falls short of ratifying a treaty.	The Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers have been adopted by the UK.
article	The term used to describe the various clauses that make up Conventions and Covenants.	Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights protects the right to a fair trial.
the committees	The six bodies that oversee the implementation of the six human rights treaties: the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Committee on the Rights of the Child, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, and the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights.	The Human Rights Committee is considered by many to be the most important of the committees, although it is not the oldest committee. The Committees are serviced by six Secretaries in the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
the commission	The UN Commission on Human Rights.	The Special Rapporteur on Torture reports to the Commission.
consultative status	Large NGOs who regularly work with the UN can apply for recognition as an NGO that the UN will consult about human rights matters. Some UN bodies, such as the Commission and Sub-Commission, only allow NGOs with consultative status to have access to them. See Appendix A for a list of NGOs in Britain and Ireland with consultative status.	In Ireland, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties is a member of the International Federation of Human Rights, an NGO with consultative status at the UN. Their counterpart in Northern Ireland is the Committee on the Administration of Justice.
country rapporteur	Someone appointed by a human rights body to report on the human rights situation in a given country, either because that country’s human rights record is giving cause for concern, or because that country’s record is due for examination after submitting a periodic report. The Country Rapporteur is normally a member of the body itself. Confusingly, Special Rapporteurs of the Commission can also be appointed to oversee the human rights situation in a particular country.	Committee member Professor Peter Burns was one of two Country Rapporteurs on the UK when the Committee against Torture met in November 1995.
Covenants	The two human rights treaties made to expand upon the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the other is the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.	The right to self-determination appears in both Covenants.
conventions	The human rights treaties that spell out detailed rights. The four conventions covered by this guide are those against torture, racial discrimination, and discrimination against women and for the protection of the rights of the child.	In November 1995 the Committee against Torture considered the UK’s second periodic report on its observance of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment.
declarations	These are policy statements adopted by the various UN bodies. They are essentially statements of intent. They lay down human rights standards and they frequently lead to the drawing up of basic principles or rules and/or the appointment of a Special Rapporteur.	The best known of the declarations is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
delegations	The term used to refer to those representing the government before UN bodies. NGOs may think of themselves as delegates, but are usually referred to as representatives.	UK delegations are usually made up of civil servants, whereas Ireland sometimes sends the relevant government minister.
fundamental freedoms	These are human rights which involve basic freedoms that are held to be inherent, such as freedom from torture, freedom of expression, and freedom of association.	The right to join a trade union is a fundamental freedom arising from the right to freedom of association. · The Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects human rights and fundamental freedoms.
human rights	The rights set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments. These rights include what are commonly called civil liberties (i.e. civil and political rights such as the right to vote), as well as economic and social rights and fundamental freedoms.	Freedom from torture, the right to a fair trial, and the right to adequate health care are all human rights.
human rights defenders	People who protect the human rights of others or campaign on human rights issues.	Both British Irish Rights Watch and the members of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission are human rights defenders.
implementation	Put into practice, applied.	The implementation of human rights instruments such as the Convention against Torture are the responsibility of governments.
inter-sessional	The term used to describe meetings that take place between sessions.	· The Working Group on Minorities has an annual inter-sessional meeting between Sub-Commission meetings.
instruments	The term that covers all the different documents that embody human rights standards: Declarations, Covenants, Conventions, Basic Principles, etc.	The various types of human rights instruments are explained in the human rights machinery of the un.
mandate	The remit and authority given to a body or officer to carry out their functions. The mandate is usually specified in a resolution passed by the authorising body.	The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women was created by a resolution of the Commission passed in 1994.
member states	The governments who belong to the UN.	Uzbekistan became a Member State in 1992.
MISSION	A visit to a Member State by a UN official. The word is also used to describe the offices maintained by member states in Geneva and New York.	The Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers undertook a mission to the UK in 1997.
ngo	Non-governmental organisation. This includes voluntary groups, community groups, pressure groups, campaigns, charities, trade unions, and virtually any other group that is not part of the government. It does not include commercial organisations, although a group representing, for example, small businesses would be recognised as an NGO. It also probably does not include quangos appointed by the government, such as the Commission for Racial Equality. French and Spanish speakers refer to NGOs as ONGs.	NGOs are the best source of independent information concerning the human rights situation in a country. · Irresponsible NGOs can get others a bad name. · British Irish rights watch is an NGO but the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission is not.
office of the high commissioner for human rights	The office within the UN in Geneva that deals with human rights.	The Secretaries to the Committees and Working Groups and the Assistants to the Rapporteurs all work in the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. · Mary Robinson is the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
optional protocol	An addition to a human rights instrument that States Party can ratify if they wish to, but do not have to do so. The term usually applies to the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which allows individuals to complain to the Human Rights Committee about their government’s failure to respect or implement the Covenant, but optional protocols to other treaties also exist.	Ireland has ratified the Optional Protocol, but the UK has not. · The Commission is discussing a draft optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Cultural and Social Rights.
periodic report	A report made by a government to one of the Committees that monitor human rights treaties explaining how it has implemented the relevant Convention or Covenant. Such reports are made at regular intervals, usually every 2, 4 or 5 years.	tates Party must make a periodic report to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination every 2 years.
pre-sessional	A term used to describe a meeting that takes place before the start of a session.	The Human Rights Committee has a pre-sessional meeting to discuss the questions it will put to governments appearing before it at the next-but-one session.
1503 procedure	The confidential procedure for complaining about consistent patterns of gross human rights violations - see making a complaint under the 1503 procedure.	The 1503 procedure has been invoked against many countries.
rapporteur	Reporter. A rapporteur is usually a member of a Committee or Working Group who has been delegated to report to that body on a particular matter. See also Special Rapporteur and Country Rapporteur.	The Human Rights Committee appoints one of its members to act as its Rapporteur on complaints under the Optional Protocol.
ratification	The process whereby a government agrees to be bound by a human rights treaty.	Ireland ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1992.
realisation	Translation into reality. When a human right is implemented so that people can actually enjoy it, it has been realised.	Some countries are more advanced than others in achieving the realisation of economic and social rights.
session	Meeting. Usually used to describe the whole period of days or weeks during which a particular committee, working group, or other UN body meets. Sessions are often described numerically, to indicate how often the particular body has met since it was set up. Confusingly, the three-hour long sittings of such bodies each morning and afternoon are also often referred to as sessions.	The fifty-seventh session of the Commission on Human Rights took place between 19 March and 27 April 1999. · The press release for the morning session of the Human Rights Committee will be available at the afternoon session.
special rapporteur	Someone appointed to report to a human rights body, usually the Commission and sometimes the Sub-Commission, on a particular issue or country. The Special Rapporteur will usually be a human rights expert who either serves on the body itself or is appointed by the body.	Special Rapporteurs are serviced by Assistants in the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
special representative	A Special Representative is very like a Special Rapporteur, but is appointed by the Secretary-General to the UN rather than by the Commission or Sub-Commission.	Hina Jilani is the Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders.
state(s) party	A government that has become a party to (agreed to be bound by) a UN treaty.	Ireland is a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
the sub-commission	The UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights - see table.	The Sub-Commission is composed of 26 human rights experts and it reports to the Commission.
submission	A written report from an NGO describing human rights violations.	British Irish rights watch has made many submissions to the UN concerning human rights violations in Northern Ireland.
thematic	Some of the UN working groups and rapporteurs investigate particular themes or topics within human rights, such as the disposal of toxic waste or the rights of minorities. Their mandate is described as thematic, as opposed to country-specific. Some have an investigative role, which means that they not only report to their parent body within the UN, but that they can actively examine complaints by raising them with the government against which the complaint is made.	The Special Rapporteur on Religious Intolerance has a thematic mandate, but the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Racism is confined to submitting a report.
treaties	The six instruments which have the status of international treaties. They include the two Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, and the four Conventions against torture, racial discrimination, discrimination against women, and on children’s rights. The Committees that monitor these treaties are often referred to as being treaty-based or treaty-monitoring bodies, or simply as treaty bodies.	· The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the most recent of the treaties (1990).
UK	United Kingdom
UN	United Nations
Violation	Breach, contravention, infraction, infringement. Any failure to uphold a human right, or any denial of that right, is called a violation.	The human rights machinery of the UN is designed to deal with human rights violations.
working groups	Working parties made up of five or more members of a human rights body, appointed to investigate or study a particular country or human rights issue, or to draw up new sets of standards. Some report to the Commission and some to the Sub-Commission.	The Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery reports to the Sub-Commission.

How to Use this Guide

To get the most out of this guide, it is suggested that you first read the following items:

• SOME BASIC POINTS ABOUT THE UN – see page 3;
  
• GLOSSARY – see page 7;
  
• THE HUMAN RIGHTS MACHINERY OF THE UN – see pages 15 and 17;
  
• MAKING A SUBMISSION – see page 27;
  
• LOBBYING – see page 35.

These five sections will give you a feel for how the UN works and the human rights jargon with which you will need to become familiar. It is worth looking through them now, before reading the rest of this section. It is suggested that you read them in full, rather than just looking for issues of immediate interest to you or your organisation, as key points made under one heading are not repeated under others even though they may be relevant.

They will also help you to make the best use of the 27 tables towards the end of this guide which deal with specific human rights mechanisms:

• the Commission – see pages 63 – 65;
  
• the Sub-Commission – see pages 66 – 68;
  
• the Commission on the Status of Women – see pages 69 – 70;
  
• the Committees – see pages 71 – 84;
  
• the Special Rapporteurs – see pages 85 – 98; and
  
• the Working Groups – see pages 100 – 105.

This guide does not take an issue-based approach. It will not, therefore, tell you which of the tables you need to consult if, say, you want to raise issues to do with immigration or asylum. This simply reflects the fact that the UN is not organised in that way. The way to work out which mechanisms are most relevant to your concerns is to look through the contents page of this guide, where all the tables are listed. It will nearly always be worth turning to the tables on the Commission, the Sub-Commission, and the Human Rights Committee, as these all deal with human rights issues generally, and they are likely to include something that touches on your interests. For example, if you look at the table on the Human Rights Committee under the heading TYPES OF ISSUES CONSIDERED, you will see mention of freedom of movement, limited immigration rights and the right to family life, all of which may be relevant to immigration matters. Amongst the list of Special Rapporteurs you will see the topics of freedom of religion and racism, both of which may be relevant. If racism is an aspect of immigration policy that you wish to raise, you will find other relevant items on the provisional agendas for the Commission and the Sub-Commission, and in the table on the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. To take another example, if you are concerned about deaths in custody, you would look for mentions of prisoners, conditions in detention and the right to life.

Another way to find relevant mechanisms is to go straight to the provisional agendas for the Commission and the Sub-Commission and to the section headed TYPES OF ISSUES CONSIDERED in the other tables.

This guide is intended primarily for use by people in Northern Ireland, Britain and the Republic of Ireland, and concentrates on the mechanisms most likely to be of interest to them. If you cannot find any reference to your concerns, have a look at the UN’s website. A copy of its current site map can be found at page 59. This will help you to locate other mechanisms, whether they relate to a particular country or to a particular violation of human rights. If you want to contact someone whose telephone number is not in this guide, call the switchboard of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on 00 41 22 917 9000.

If you need advice on which mechanism or mechanisms are most appropriate (whether covered by this guide or not), the NGOs listed in Appendix A may be able to help, or you could contact the International Service for Human Rights - see Appendix C.

If you have an urgent case, see URGENT CASES – see page 53.

If you want to know about using special procedures for making complaints, have a look at:

• MAKING A COMPLAINT UNDER THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS (for Ireland only) - see page 45; and
  

• USING THE 1503 PROCEDURE - see page 49.

Basic Points

THE UN IS POLITICAL

Although international human rights are meant to be above politics, the UN is the single most powerful forum where most of the world’s governments talk to one another, and this colours its human rights mechanisms just as much as it colours its political machinery. The issues that divide the world - east versus west, north versus south, the developed world versus the so-called third world, etc - also affect the way that the human rights machinery works. For example, China is criticised by many western democracies over its human rights record. China may therefore be ready to support criticisms levelled against a western democracy over human rights violations. Many countries oppose American imperialism. If criticising America or her allies on human rights grounds furthers their aim, they may be ready to do so. Fundamentalist Islamic states may support the rights of Islamic parents to establish separate schools for their children, but may be less supportive on other matters, such as prisoners’ rights. When lobbying the UN you need to be aware of these tensions, and choose your allies with care.

THE UN IS INTERNATIONAL

When it comes to human rights, there is nothing you can tell anyone at the UN that they have not heard before and no situation you can describe of which there has not been a worse example somewhere else in the world. It particularly pays for people in Ireland and the UK to be sensitive to that fact. Our countries, although they include oppressed and discriminated against individuals and communities, are seen by the rest of the world as privileged countries with few serious human rights problems. Our governments, naturally, do everything in their power to maintain this impression. In countering it, we need to keep a sense of proportion. It does not help to describe a beating-up in a police station, however brutal, as “torture”. Much better to call it “ill-treatment” and let the UN decide that you have understated your case.

LANGUAGE MATTERS

The language of international human rights is peppered with obscure jargon. No matter how much you support the use of plain English, you will need to learn this jargon. The reason for this is that the jargon crosses international language barriers. Once you know what is meant by an “extrajudicial execution” (a killing carried out with government involvement that is not capital punishment) it is much easier to use that phrase because everyone else will understand you, whatever language they speak. That is why this guide contains a glossary and then goes on to use the jargon. However, this does not mean that you should abandon plain English altogether. The more you use it to explain, for instance, the facts behind a case, the better. This is because anything you put in writing will probably have to be translated into at least some of the UN’s six official languages: French, Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Russian (English being the sixth). If what you say is unclear to begin with, you run the risk of it being even less clear in translation. So far as speaking to people at the UN is concerned, English speakers have an advantage. Almost everyone there speaks English, although it helps if you also know some French and/or Spanish.

THE UN IS NOT USER-FRIENDLY

This is not the fault of the staff, who are over-worked, under-resourced and often employed on short-term contracts. Despite these handicaps, they are usually very friendly and as helpful as they can be given the acute lack of resources at the UN. Generally speaking, you will get further by face-to-face or telephone discussions than by attempts to correspond (although faxes or e-mail can be useful for imparting information, especially in an emergency, so long as you do not expect a reply). Otherwise, dealing with the UN is extremely frustrating. If you send a written submission, do not expect an acknowledgement. Do not expect that the person you sent it to will necessarily have received it, or that anyone has read it - it may be sitting in that person’s assistant’s in-tray in a large pile of documents waiting to be read. If it is considered by an official or a committee, do not expect to be sent a copy of their report. If they take the matter up with the government, do not expect to hear about or be told what the government said in reply. Some of these things may happen, but do not count on it. If you want to know what happened to your submission, you will have to follow it up yourself, and this guide will explain how to do that where appropriate.

THE UN DEALS WITH GOVERNMENTS

UN human rights machinery is directed at governments. It is governments who sign up to international human rights treaties and instruments and it is governments who are obliged to uphold them. “Government” includes all those individuals and bodies who make up the state, such as parliament and the Dáil, government ministers, civil servants acting in an official capacity, the courts, the police, and the army. It also includes officials appointed under statutes and quangos carrying out state functions. However, it does not include private individuals, companies, membership groups carrying out non-governmental functions (e.g. trade unions), terrorists, criminals etc. You may consider, for example, that the refusal of a building society or bank to give you a mortgage infringes various human rights, but the UN will not think so. The only way that the UN human rights machinery will consider complaints about non-state people or bodies is if you can show that the government has failed in some way to protect your human rights by regulating their behaviour effectively and appropriately. For instance, a gay group might legitimately complain that thier right to life was not adequately protected if the police refused to investigate complaints about attacks on gays. Equally, Travellers might complain that their rights were being infringed if private landowners barred them from using their land but the government did nothing to provide them with places to stop overnight.

THE UN WORKS ON TRUST

The human rights machinery is basically about the UN monitoring what governments do. Governments make reports to the UN and reply to their questions. They are expected to be honest in their replies, but of course they are often selective and sometimes downright economical with the truth. The UN has to accept what governments say as being in good faith unless they have evidence to the contrary. Such evidence is usually supplied by NGOs (non-governmental organisations - that probably means you: see GLOSSARY). Just as the UN does not have the resources to test or check what governments say to them, they also have to take what NGOs tell them on trust. UN human rights experts are not pleased if they put a point made by an NGO to the government, only to find that it was inaccurate, exaggerated or unfair. Always back up what you say if you can by quoting statistics or official sources (e.g. the Census, Home Office statistics, a report by the Department of Foreign Affairs etc). See MAKING A SUBMISSION for more guidance on this. Also, the UN feels more confident about an NGO they already know than one they do not. You can create confidence in your own organisation by regularly making submissions to the UN, so that you build up a reputation for providing reliable information. You can also create confidence if you obtain the sponsorship of another NGO with consultative status (see GLOSSARY), such as the International Federation of Human Rights or the International Commission of Jurists - see Appendix A for their representatives in Britain and Ireland.

THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS MACHINERY IS NOT STATIC

The UN is constantly working on new human rights standards, and constantly refining its understanding of established standards. New human rights posts are constantly being created, and old posts are not always renewed. Newer committees and post-holders may be much more NGO-friendly than ones that have been established longer. Committees reflect the individuals who make up their membership, which is constantly changing. A recently-appointed post-holder may take a very different approach from his or her predecessor. The staff who service a particular mechanism may change. This guide therefore reflects a snapshot of how things stand in March 2002. You must be prepared to find that things have changed, especially the names of UN staff members and members of committees. If you want to check on the latest position, see the UN’s website (see site map on page 59) or telephone the International Service for Human Rights in Geneva (see Appendix C for details).

THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS HEADQUARTERS IS NOT AT THEIR POSTAL ADDRESS

All mail to the UN in Geneva goes to the main UN building, the Palais des Nations, so this address is given for postal communications in the tables at the end of this guide. However, the human rights staff do not work in the Palais des Nations, but in the Palais Wilson, 52 Rue des Pacquis, CH-1201 Geneva. Room numbers and telephone numbers in the tables at the end of this guide relate to the Palais Wilson. Some committee meetings and hearings are held at the Palais Wilson, while others are held at the Palais des Nations. Very large meetings, such as the Commission and Sub-Commission, always take place at the Palais des Nations; otherwise, you will need to check. The two buildings are 30 minutes’ walk apart, so it pays to get it right.

Machinery

Please see the diagram on page 15 for a somewhat simplified picture of the UN human rights machinery.

The supreme governing body of the UN is the General Assembly, which includes representatives of each Member State. It elects the members of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which is the source of almost all the human rights mechanisms within the UN.

The bulk of the UN’s human rights work, however, goes on at the third tier of the structure. There are five mechanisms for carrying out this work:

• the committees, or treaty bodies: the Human Rights Committee, which covers civil and political rights; the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and the four thematic committees on racial discrimination, torture, and women’s and children’s rights,
  
• the Commission and its Sub-Commission,
  
• Special Rapporteurs,
  
• Independent Experts and
  
• Working Groups.

A general description of these mechanisms is given below. In the rest of this guide more detailed information is supplied on those mechanisms most likely to be useful to readers in Ireland and the UK. For further information about these mechanisms, see the UN’s Manual for Special Rapporteurs/Representatives/Experts and Chairpersos of Working Groups of the Special Procedures of the Commission on Human Rights and of the Advisory Services Programme, E/CN.4/200/4, available on the UN’s website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see their site map at page 53, or from the UN Information Centre in London – see Appendix B.

HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES AND THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER

The UN’s human rights machinery exists in order to implement international human rights standards and monitor compliance with them by Member States. The Commission and Sub-Commission are established under the UN Charter, which contains general commitments to upholding human rights. The Human Rights Committee and other committees have been set up to monitor compliance with human rights treaties and other documents developed by the UN. Chief amongst these is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the General Assembly in 1948. It affirms the freedom, equality and dignity of all human beings, sets out basic principles such as equality before the law and freedom from discrimination, and defines basic human rights, such as the right to life, and fundamental freedoms, such as freedom from torture and slavery.

All other human rights standards developed by the UN flow from the Universal Declaration, and they usually elaborate on rights set out in it. In 1976, two covenants were adopted by the UN: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which spells out in detail the civil and political rights established by the Declaration, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICECSR), which concentrates on rights relating to work, health, education and so on. Since then, various other treaties have been adopted, notably on racial discrimination, torture, the rights of the child and discrimination against women. Shamefully, neither the United Kingdom nor Ireland has signed up to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families.

Over the years, a great many other human rights instruments have been developed, including

• sets of Basic Principles e.g. on the treatment of prisoners
  
• Standard Minimum Rules e.g. on the administration of justice for juveniles
  
• Codes of Conduct e.g. for law enforcement officers
  
• Safeguards e.g. for those facing the death penalty
  
• Guidelines e.g. on the role of prosecutors
  
• Model Treaties e.g. on the supervision of prisoners released on parole
  

and so on.

The text of all these documents is available from a number of sources, including leaflets issued by the UN, and details are given in this guide. You may also be able to obtain copies from the UN Information Centre in London (see Appendix B). Many human rights instruments are available on the UN’s website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see their site map at page 53.

THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE

The Human Rights Committee monitors implementation by Member States of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

It receives periodic reports from all the Member States who have signed up to the ICCPR and can ask questions about their implementation of the Covenant. It then produces a report, which can be highly critical of the government’s record and practices. The government cannot be forced to implement the Committee’s recommendations, but its failure to do so can be embarrassing when it comes to the rest of its dealings within the UN. If it has failed to take account of the Committee’s report, the Committee is likely to criticise the government more heavily when it next appears before them.

The Committee consists of 18 independent human rights experts nominated by Member States and elected by them. Members of the Committee are not supposed to participate in any consideration of a report from the government who nominated them. At the moment, the United Kingdom has a nominee on the Committee but Ireland does not.

Any NGO may make a written submission to the Committee when it is due to consider a periodic report from a country. See MAKING A SUBMISSION. Sessions of the Committee are open to the public and NGOs can lobby members of the Committee - see LOBBYING. The Committee also holds a closed session during the week before the session prior to that in which a country report is due for consideration. During that week, NGOs may make written and oral representations about what questions the think the Committee should put to the government concerned.

The Committee can also consider complaints from individuals who allege that their human rights have been violated by any Member State that has agreed to be bound by the first Optional Protocol to the ICCPR. Ireland has done so but the United Kingdom has not. Thus anyone who is under the jurisdiction of the Irish government can make a complaint against it to the Committee. The Committee will not accept complaints by Irish people against the UK’s actions in Northern Ireland because the UK has not ratified the first Optional Protocol. See MAKING A COMPLAINT UNDER THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS.

OTHER COMMITTEES

The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (not to be confused with ECOSOC, the Economic and Social Council of the UN) monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). It is not such a powerful committee as the Human Rights Committee, although the ICCPR and ICESCR are supposed to carry equal weight. This is probably because Member States have tended to pay more attention to civil and political rights, which are more easily defined and enforced, than economic, social and cultural rights, which often carry very heavy resource implications - it is cheaper to guarantee the right to freedom from torture than it is to ensure a roof over everyone’s head. Also, there is not yet any equivalent under the ICESCR of the Optional Protocol procedure for making individual complaints, although a draft is under consideration.

The other significant human rights committees are:

• the Committee against Torture, which monitors the implementation of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
  
• the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which monitors the implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination;
  
• the Committee on the Rights of the Child, which monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child; and
  
• the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, which monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

These five committees all operate along similar lines to the Human Rights Committee, with various differences of detail that are spelled out in the sections on each committee. See also MAKING A SUBMISSION and LOBBYING.

THE COMMISSION

The Commission on Human Rights, usually referred to as “the Commission”, is the powerhouse of the UN’s human rights machinery. It takes the lead in setting international human rights standards, and many of the conventions and other human rights standards have been developed by the Commission or its Sub-Commission (see below).

It is the most overtly political of the mechanisms, being made up of 53 Member States, rather than independent human rights experts. The UK is currently represented on the Commission, but Ireland is not. It meets annually in Geneva during the spring for a session lasting six weeks.

The Commission has a standing agenda, which includes such matters as

• world-wide implementation of the various human rights Covenants and Conventions;
  

• the difficulties faced by developing countries and ex-colonies in implementing human rights;
  
• the human rights situations in particular countries, such as the Occupied Arab Territories;
  
• future developments in human rights, such as the drawing up of draft Declarations, like the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and draft Optional Protocols to the various conventions, like that on the Convention against Torture;
  
• particular human rights issues, such as the rights of migrant workers and racism; and
  
• the effectiveness or otherwise of international human rights machinery.
  

The Commission also receives reports from its Working Groups, Special Rapporteurs and Independent Experts (see below). New items are added to the agenda by way of resolutions passed by the Commission – see RESOLUTIONS, and the agenda for the next session is finalised by a working group at the previous session. The provisional agenda for 2001 is included in this guide at page 59.

Only NGOs with consultative status have access to the Commission (see LOBBYING for more details). Much of what goes on at the Commission is concerned with issues that are generally considered to be serious, such as the human rights situation in a particular country, or issues that are of general interest, such as the formulation of a new set of human rights standards. The mechanism for furthering this sort of work is the passing of a resolution by the Commission – see RESOLUTIONS.

THE SUB-COMMISSION

The Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights is a subsidiary body of the Commission. It is composed of 26 independent human rights experts nominated by Member States and elected by the Commission. It meets annually in Geneva in August for a session lasting three weeks. It currently includes an expert nominated by the United Kingdom, but no-one nominated by the Irish government.

The Sub-Commission is the Commission’s thinktank. Like the Commission, the Sub-Commission has a standing agenda, which tends to concentrate on the implementation and development of human rights standards, the investigation of specific problems, and reports from Working Groups. The provisional agenda for 2001 is on page 63.

It is supposed to be less political than the Commission, being made up of experts, but the nomination of experts is often politically charged, and the same process of passing resolutions is employed. Some theoretically independent experts behave as if they are representing the government that nominated them, and some governments appear to consider a nomination to the Sub-Commission as a reward for political or other services rendered. This is not to suggest that the Sub-Commission does not do very important work, or that it does not have some very distinguished members, but it is badly in need of reform and the success of your lobbying will depend on your recognition of these matters.

NGO access to the Sub-Commission is identical to that described above for the Commission, and the same considerations apply.

SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS

The Commission and Sub-Commission have appointed a number of Special Rapporteurs to work on their behalf. Independent experts who serve on the Sub-Commission can act as Special Rapporteurs, and external experts are also appointed. Special Rapporteurs are appointed for periods of three years and any individual can serve for a maximum of six years. Although the UN pays their expenses, they do not receive salaries. Most of them have other jobs, and they receive only part-time assistance from UN staff. In the circumstances, most of them do quite miraculous work. The majority of Special Rapporteurs are country specific, in other words they are appointed to report on the human rights situation in a particular country, such as Iraq and Iran. The others have thematic mandates which charge them with looking into a specific human rights issue, such as racism. This guide is concerned with those rapporteurs who have thematic mandates. For more information about Special Rapporteurs, see UN Fact Sheet No. 27, Seventeen frequently asked questions about the United Nations special rapporteurs, available on the UN’s website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see their site map at page 53, or from the UN Information Centre in London – see Appendix B.

Special Rapporteurs appointed by the Commission can have three types of mandate: thematic/investigative, where they study both a general issue and individual cases; thematic/reporting, where they examine a problem but do not consider cases; and country-specific. This guide only deals with relevant mandates.

The Special Rapporteurs with thematic/investigative mandates reporting to the Commission cover:

• extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary executions;
  
• torture;
  
• freedom of religion or belief;
  

• the use of mercenaries to thwart the right to self-determination (not covered by this guide);
  
• the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography;
  
• the dumping of toxic waste;
  
• the right to freedom of opinion and expression;
  
• the human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people (not covered by this guide);
  
• the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors and the independence of lawyers; and
  
• internally displaced persons (not covered by this guide).

These Special Rapporteurs will examine any complaint sent to them. They are not able to investigate complaints, in the true sense of the word, but they will make an assessment about whether they think the complaint is genuine. In doing so, they will take into account what they know about the person or body making the complaint, and they will also look at it against the background of similar complaints from the same country or about the same issue. See MAKING A SUBMISSION for ways of enhancing the credibility of your complaint. If they are satisfied that the complaint is authentic, they will transmit it to the government. The government then has an opportunity to put its side of the story. Special Rapporteurs have no powers to force governments to respond. If they do so, the Rapporteur may send you a copy of the response for your comments, and may relay those comments to the government, but this does not always happen. The exchange of correspondence with the government will be reported by the Rapporteur in his or her next report, and s/he may criticise the government or make recommendations for avoiding a similar situation or putting matters right. See MAKING A SUBMISSION for ideas about how to make this process work as well as it can.

If a Special Rapporteur is convinced that a problem is sufficiently serious, he or she may undertake a mission (visit) to the country concerned to investigate the issue in greater depth. Special Rapporteurs will only visit a country where the Member State has agree to co-operate with the mission. The Special Rapporteur then presents a report of his or her findings to the Commission. Mission reports carry considerably more weight than mere mention of a country in the Special Rapporteur’s general report.

Someone whose role is very similar to a Special Rapporteur is the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders. She is there to protect NGOs and individuals who find their own human rights being violated as they work to defend the rights of others.

The Commission has also appointed the following five Special Rapporteurs with thematic/reporting mandates:

• the elimination of violence against women;
  

• contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia and related discrimination;
  
• adequate housing;
  
• the right to food; and
  
• the right to education.

These Special Rapporteurs will not examine individual complaints, but they will accept submissions and may incorporate points that you have made in their next report. They may also carry out missions to individual countries.

The Sub-Commission’s Special Rapporteurs only have reporting mandates, where they prepare a report for the Sub-Commission but do not take up individual cases. They are currently working on:

• traditional practices affecting the health of women and female children;
  
• the concept and practice of affirmative action;
  
• indigenous peoples and their relationship to land;
  
• the rights of non-citizens;
  
• globilization and its impact on human rights and
  
• human rights and terrorism.

INDEPENDENT EXPERTS

The Commission has also appointed various experts to consider particular problems. Currently, such experts are examining the following issues:

• the protection of persons from enforced or involuntary disappearance;
  
• extreme poverty;
  
• internally displaced persons;
  
• a draft optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;
  
• the right to development; and
  
• structural adjustment.

Individual experts on the Sub-Commission are also looking at a wide range of human rights issues, including:

• domestic implementation of the obligation to provide remedies for human rights violations;
  
• military tribunals and other exceptional forms of jurisdiction;
  
• measures for the promotion and consolidation of democracy;
  
• discrimination in criminal justice.

None of these studies is covered by this guide. Submissions can be made to these experts in the same way as to Special Rapporteurs with reporting mandates.

WORKING GROUPS

Both the Commission and the Sub-Commission have established various Working Groups that report to them. Working Groups are made up of international human rights experts appointed by the Commission or Sub-Commission. Some of them have regional representatives from different areas of the world. There are three types of Working Groups: groups that are working on drawing up new human rights standards or studying particular human rights problems; thematic groups, that look at particular problems wherever they may occur in the world; and groups set up to consider the human rights situation of a particular country. This guide only goes into detail about those thematic groups most likely to be of interest to readers.

The following thematic Working Groups currently report to the Commission:

• the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. This deals with allegations concerning people who have disappeared.
  
• the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which examines allegations that people have been wrongfully imprisoned, often for political reasons.
  

• the Working Group on Situations, to which the Sub-Commission’s Working Group on Communications reports (not covered in this guide because there is no access to this group except via the Sub-Commission).

These thematic Working Groups currently report to the Sub-Commission:

• the Working Group on Communications, formerly known as the Working Group on Consistent Patterns of Gross Human Rights Violations. This deals with complaints made on the basis of Resolution 1503 where it is alleged that a Member State is violating human rights on a grand scale. (The Commission also has such a Working Group, but the only access to it is via the Sub-Commission’s Working Group.) See USING THE 1503 PROCEDURE.
  
• the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, which looks at issues such as indentured and child labour.
  
• the Working Group on Minorities, which promotes the rights of members of national, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities.
  
• the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (not covered in this guide).

Anyone can complain to these working groups provided the complaint comes within their mandate. See MAKING A SUBMISSION. The procedure for dealing with complaints is similar to that adopted by Special Rapporteurs. Working Groups can carry more weight than Special Rapporteurs because they are made up of several experts, they have been set up to deal with specific problems, and Member States are anxious to avoid appearing on their agendas.

The groups that are working on new human rights standards or studying particular problems will not look into individual complaints but will receive written submissions and may take them into account when preparing their reports.

Such Working Groups currently working for the Commission are looking at issues including:

• the right to development;
  
• the Draft Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture;
  

• the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; and
  
• the effects of structural adjustment programmes on economic, social and cultural rights.
  

Similar Sub-Commission Working Groups are considering:

• the administration of justice; and
  
• the methods and activities of transnational corporations.

THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

The post of High Commissioner for Human Rights was established in February 1994. Its creation shows a determination on the part of the UN to accord very high status to its human rights work. It is a measure of that resolve that the Commissioner is the first high-level official to be able to take initiatives without the Commission having adopted an explicit resolution beforehand. In his first report to the Commission in 1995, the first ever High Commissioner, José Ayalo Lasso of Ecuador, recalled that the General Assembly had given his role “unprecedented moral and political authority to express ... the voice of the moral conscience of mankind”.

The present High Commissioner is Mary Robinson, the former President of Ireland and an experienced human rights lawyer. Her background means that she has an intimate knowledge and understanding of human rights issues throughout the island of Ireland, but she is scrupulous about not giving undue weight to issues arising in her own country. Mary Robinson has carried on the tradition she established when she was President of using her position to highlight issues that attract less of the limelight as well as focussing on the major issues of the day.

She is responsible for the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which employs all the staff working on human rights, such as Committee secretaries and assistants to Special Rapporteurs. However, her primary role is to enable the UN to have an overview of the many human rights issues arising around the world, and to respond to human rights crises. She is charged with promoting international co-operation, strengthening the implementation of human rights, preventing violations, improving human rights mechanisms, and assisting countries in the throes of transition to democracy.

In the vast majority of cases, it will be more appropriate to invoke directly one of the mechanisms described in this guide, rather than going through the High Commissioner’s office.

SOME USEFUL BOOKS

In addition to the “further reading section” in the tables at the back of this guide, the following more general books are worth obtaining:

A good general textbook (expensive, but widely available in law libraries) is the Guide to International Human Rights Practice, Hurst Hannam (editor), 2nd Edition, Pennsylvania University Press.

Much cheaper and very accessible is The Human Rights Handbook: A Practical Guide to Monitoring Human Rights, Human Rights Centre, University of Essex, obtainable at a cost of £15 sterling including postage and packaging from The Human Rights Handbook, Dept AMM, P O Box 1995, Burgess Hill, West Sussex, RH15 8QY, UK.

Many of the human rights instruments referred to in this guide, together with useful annotation, can be found in International Human Rights: Documents and Interpretative Notes, Evmacora, Nowak and Tretter (editors), available in law libraries. They can also be found on the UN’s website at http://www.
unhchr.ch – see their site map at page 53. The UN Information Centre in London can also help in obtaining copies of instruments – see Appendix B.

The New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade produces an annual United Nations Handbook, obtainable from their embassies, which contains basic information about all the functions of the UN, including the human rights machinery.

See also Appendix C for details of very useful publications by the International Service for Human Rights.

For Ireland, see the Irish Human Rights Review, Dennis Driscoll (editor), 1999, Round Hall Sweet & Maxwell, Brehon House, 4 Upper Ormond Quay, Dublin 7, Ireland; and the IPA Administration Yearbook and Diary (published annually) which contains an excellent section on NGOs. See also the chapter on human rights in the Department of Foreign Affair’s white paper on foreign policy, entitled Challenges and Opportunities Abroad.

Amnesty International has produced three very good guides. Their Fair Trials Manual, published in 1998, costs £23 including postage and packing (quote order number PB254). The United Nations Thematic Mechanisms, produced jointly with the Law Society of England and Wales, costs £8.05 inclusive (quote Amnesty International Index IOR40/20/00). Their handbook Using the international human rights system to combat racial discrimination costs £8.04 inclusive (order number PB253). All three publications can be obtained from Amnesty International UK, P.O. Box 4, Rugby, Warwickshire, CV21 1RU (telephone number: 01788 545553).

Submissions

Everything that is said below applies to ordinary submissions. If your case is urgent, see URGENT CASES.

Many of the human rights mechanisms now offer guidance on how to make a submission, which can be obtained by writing to the relevant person

COMMITTEES

The very first thing to check before making a submission is that the government has signed up to the relevant Covenant or Convention and that it has come into force domestically (see table on each Committee).

Secondly, read the Covenant or Convention and make sure that the issue(s) about which you want to make a submission are relevant to that particular Committee.

Thirdly, check the timetable. You need to work out when is the latest time for sending in your own submission and work backwards from that date. See the tables at the back of this guide for deadlines, but you may also need to check with the Secretary of the Committee.

Although UN Committees will accept submissions sent to them at any time, they will not actually be considered until such time as the government’s next periodic report is due to be considered. It makes sense to wait until the government’s report is available, and to obtain it and read it before making your own submission, so that you can counter any inaccuracies it may contain and highlight any omissions.

In the UK, the government does not usually publicise the fact that a periodic report is available. You will need to keep an eye on the date (see NEXT UK REPORT section in the table about the relevant Committee), and around about the time when you think it is likely to be ready, start telephoning the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Human Rights Unit (see Appendix D) to find out whether it is available. They will send you a free copy. If the report is not ready when you contact them, they should put you on the mailing list but if you have not heard from them by the time they told you the report would be ready, it is worth calling them again.

In Ireland, you need to adopt the same approach in relation to the Department of Foreign Affairs (see Appendix D). As you will notice from the NEXT IRELAND REPORT section in the tables on the Committees, Ireland is behind with some of its reports. This is partly because Ireland only ratified some of the treaties relatively recently and it takes time to produce a first-ever report to a Committee (see below). Also, the Committees themselves are behind schedule in examining reports.

Once the report is available, telephone the Secretary of the relevant Committee (see table for telephone number) and check when the report is likely to be considered. You may be told the date of the session or you may receive the reply that no date has been set but it will not be before such-and-such a date. Either way, you will need to check with the Secretary two or three times in order to be certain of the date. Even when a report has been allocated to a particular session, the date may slip, and sometimes reports are considered rather earlier than expected if other states have failed to submit reports on time.

Your own submission need not necessarily refer to the content of the government’s report, unless you wish to correct or augment it in some way. So long as your submission is relevant to the government’s implementation of the particular Covenant or Convention under consideration by the Committee, you are free to make the points you wish, regardless of anything the government has or has not said.

However, you need to be aware of the pattern of periodic reporting. The first report a government ever makes to the Committee once the Covenant or Convention has come into force domestically will be very comprehensive, and the Committee’s examination of the report will also be thorough. Second and subsequent reports will tend to concentrate on those areas the Committee highlighted in its questions at the previous hearing, and new areas covered in later reports or successfully raised by NGOs. If the government has submitted a number of reports over the years (this is more likely to be true for the UK than for Ireland, which tended to ratify more recently), it is worth obtaining the earlier reports and the minutes of the Committee hearings from the UN Office library in London - see Appendix B - or from the Documentation Unit of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva - see tables for the address, or from their website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see site map at page 59. This will enable you to see whether the government has consistently defaulted on an issue that you want to raise, or has ignored recommendations made previously by the Committee. The Committee’s criticism tends to be stronger in such circumstances.

Submissions should be sent to the Secretary to the Committee. Ideally, you should send multiple copies of your submission, one for each member of the Committee, one for the Secretary, and one for the representative of the Secretary-General of the UN, who attends the session. If you cannot afford to do this, the Secretary will make copies, but may only get round to doing so rather late in the day, which means members will have less time to read it. Also, if you intend to go and lobby at the session, the Secretary will remember you as having helpfully saved him or her a lot of photocopying.

Submissions should be sent two months before the government’s report is due to be discussed. If you send them in late, you run the risk that they will not be distributed to Committee members. Four of the Committees – the Human Rights Committee and the Committees on women, children and economic, social and cultural rights – allow NGOs to attend the pre-sessional meetings at which they draw up the list of questions to be put to the government when its report is considered. See the tables at the end of this guide for details. If you want to influence the questions put to the government, you must get your submission, including your own list of questions, to the Secretary two months before the pre-sessional meeting.

Remember that not all the members speak English. In theory, the UN will translate submissions, although recent experience suggests that this is beyond their present resources. It is therefore a good idea to provide copies in French and/or Spanish if you can. Providing your own translations also means that you can be sure the submission has been translated accurately. If you are not able to provide translations, try to use English clearly and simply, especially in the summary at the beginning, so that those for whom English is not their first language can grasp the gist of it.

Depending on the Secretary in question, you may or may not receive an acknowledgement of your submission. To be on the safe side, telephone the Secretary about three weeks after sending off the submission to make sure it has been received. If it has still not been received within a month of the hearing, send it in again and check that it has arrived.

There are five golden rules about making submissions:
1. keep it short. Submissions that are more than 30 pages long, including any additional material, are unlikely to be read in full (most UN reports are now confined to a maximum of 30 pages). Ideally, submissions should be much shorter than that - 10 to 12 pages at most.

2. make sure you explain how your submission relates to the Convention. Read through the Covenant or Convention and work out which articles are relevant to the issues you want to raise. When you first mention the issue in your submission, use a phrase like:
“This practice violates Article X of the Convention”
or
“The use of unnecessary force during deportations is a
breach of Article Y”.
Committees tend to go through the Covenant or Convention in order, so if possible make your submission in the same order, and put the article number in the heading. Some issues involve more than one article, so use your judgement as to which is the main article, and then mention in the text that other articles are also relevant.
3. be accurate. Check your facts, get them right, and do not exaggerate. Be as specific as you can - it is better to say:

“X% of all people stopped by the police in London in 2001
were males under the age of 25 from the Afro-Caribbean community”
than
“It is well known that young black men are more likely than
anyone else to be stopped by the police in London.”
If members feel they cannot rely on your material, they will not take any notice of it.

4. do not expect Committee members to have prior knowledge about your country, the issue you are highlighting, or the background to it. You will need to spell out for them things that you might take for granted. If you use acronyms or words that they may not recognise, explain what you mean - for example, “the RUC (the Northern Ireland police force)” or “several Gardaí (Irish police officers) were involved in the incident”.
5. put a short executive summary at the beginning of the submission, and cross-reference it to the main body of the text. Members will read this if they read nothing else, so make sure it is very clear and that it covers all your main points, as briefly as possible.

Always start your submission by explaining who you are. This is your opportunity to establish your credentials and to make sure the members take your submission seriously. If you are making a submission on behalf of an organisation, say something like:
“ [Name of organisation] is an independent non-governmental organisation set up in [year] in order to [set out main aims of organisation]. We have X years’ experience of [e.g. researching and monitoring the issues you want to raise].”

Next, you should summarise very succinctly, ideally in one paragraph, what your submission is about, before going into detail.

Although in theory the Committee will be examining the government’s record over the few years since the last periodic report, in practice Committee members are more concerned with the present situation. It is not worth complaining about matters which have since been put right, although it is perfectly acceptable to mention long-standing problems which have never been addressed.

It is very important to substantiate your case as far as possible. If your claims can be verified from an official source, quote it. If your concerns are shared by organisations that are better known than your own, especially another NGO with consultative status, quote them. If there is a newspaper cutting that neatly sums up the facts of a case, or the reaction of the community, it can be worth including it if space permits. Photographs, official documents such as death certificates, medical reports and so on, should also be considered. If you are short of space, you can summarise the evidence but say that you have copies of the full documents and can supply them if required. Try to read your submission with a critical eye: if you think someone sceptical about you would query something you have said, or would consider something you have said to be contentious, make it clear that your point is based on factual evidence, not unsubstantiated rumour or opinion. If you agree with something that the government has said in its report, or can praise something the government has done (even though you may consider they have not done enough), it does no harm to say so. The more responsible, balanced, factual and accurate your submission is, the better.

If you mention named individuals in your submission, mention that you are doing so with their permission, as Committee members are often concerned about confidentiality, especially if you are dealing with a sensitive issue such as rape or sexual assault/abuse. The only exception to this is when you are referring to well-known cases that have received a lot of publicity.

At the end of your submission, include a list of questions that you would like the Committee to put to the government. There is no guarantee that they will in fact ask your questions, but you may well prompt them to do so, especially if you keep your questions short, specific and precise.

Make your submission look as smart as possible. Even if you cannot afford to spend very much on it, make sure that it is neatly typed, and that the spelling is correct. If you have a word processor, or can get access to one, make good use of its ability to create headings of different sizes, and use boxes and bullet points. Give your submission a cover, page numbers and an index. Make it as easy to read and to follow as possible.

If you can, use an eye-catching logo or picture on the cover. Use colour if you can. If you are restricted to a stapled document made up of photocopied pages, consider having a cover which is on coloured paper rather than white. If the report falls into distinct sections, you could use different colours to mark them out. However, stick to pale colours that will photocopy easily. If members can easily recognise your report as “the one with the yellow cover” or “the one with the Celtic designs” or whatever, there is a better chance that they will remember its contents.

Your submission is your property, and you can do what you like with it. You can put out a press release saying that you have made the submission, and you can send copies to anyone you think should see it. You should also consider whether there are other parts of the UN human rights machinery to whom you should send your submission, for example, a relevant Special Rapporteur.

You should also consider sending the government a copy of your submission. If you do so, their delegation will come armed to answer the points you have raised, and you may feel that this is a disadvantage. However, the UN is not an adversarial arena. Indeed, the exchanges between committees and governments are usually described, not always accurately, as dialogues. The advantage of letting the government see your submission in advance lies in the possibility that they will look at the issues you raise afresh. They may even take steps to remedy your complaint before the committee meets, or, if not, they may give the committee an assurance that they will do so. If you decide to send your submission to the government, mention that you have done so in the submission itself and then refer to any response (or lack of one) you have had from the government when you are lobbying at the UN.

If you decide to attend the session in Geneva in order to lobby the Committee in person, your submission will be your starting point and the means of introducing yourself to members of the Committee. If you are not able to attend, then all you can do is hope that the Committee will have taken note of your submission and will ask the government questions based on it and make findings or recommendations accordingly.

If you are able to be present, you will be able to take notes of the Committee’s comments and recommendations. The written version is not usually available until a day or so afterwards. The easiest way to obtain a copy is from the website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see site map at page 59 – although there is often a time lag before documents are posted on the web. Otherwise, you can obtain a copy by asking a friendly NGO based in Geneva to fax it to you, or by telephoning the Secretary and asking them to do so. The former is preferable to the latter, because if the session is continuing the Secretary will be busy with another country’s report and may not be able to give your request any priority. Other domestic NGOs may have better access to the written version than you, in which case they may be able to help – see Appendix A.

The UN also produces daily press releases of committee proceedings, usually reporting the morning and afternoon meetings separately. These are usually available on the following day, although sometimes the morning reports are available by the end of the same day. These press releases summarise what has been said during the session. They are selective, so may not include the issue that is of greatest concern to you, and are not always completely accurate because they are produced so quickly, but it is always worth getting hold of them. It is also possible to obtain tape-recordings of meetings. You can request the original language or the English translation. There is a charge for each cassette and it is essential to order them in advance from the Secretary to the Committee.

See MAKING A COMPLAINT UNDER THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS for how to make an individual complaint to the Human Rights Committee or the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (Ireland only).

SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS

Much of what is said above about making submissions to Committees also applies to making submissions to Special Rapporteurs, whether their mandate is thematic/investigative or reporting.

The thematic/investigative Rapporteurs all make their reports to the Commission, which meets in the early part of each year. The actual date varies, so you will need to check with the assistant to the particular Rapporteur (see table for telephone number) when the Rapporteur will be submitting his or her report. You should send in your submission at least two months before that in order to give the Rapporteur as much time as possible to consider it.

If you want the Rapporteur to look into a particular complaint, you can send it in at any time, but be aware that towards the end of the year, while the Rapporteur may take the matter up, it is unlikely to appear in that year’s report to the Commission.

You will probably not receive an acknowledgement, and you should check with the assistant to ensure that it has been received.

In the case of individual complaints, if the Rapporteur is satisfied that it is a genuine case falling within the mandate, s/he will submit it to the government for their comments. Governments are often slow to respond. If, as will almost certainly be the case, you have heard nothing six months after sending in your submission, telephone the assistant to enquire whether the case has been transmitted to the government, and whether any reply has been received. This will have a number of potential effects;
• it may galvanise the Rapporteur to transmit your submission to the government, if this has not already happened;
• it may cause the Rapporteur to chase up the government, if they have not replied;
• it will let the assistant know that you are interested in hearing about progress, and that you wish to see the government’s reply and to comment on it.

However, do not rely on the assistant to keep you informed - s/he will probably be far too busy. You will need to strike a balance between maintaining a visible interest in the progress of your complaint and harassing an already-harassed assistant. A monthly telephone call or e-mail may be acceptable; more frequent calls are very unlikely to be appreciated. At the opposite extreme, if you take no interest in what is happening, you will probably never hear of your case again, unless it happens to be mentioned in the report to the Commission.

Do not expect to be told when the report to the Commission is ready. You will not be able to obtain a copy until after it has been officially submitted to the Commission. In theory, but not always in practice, reports are available on the website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see site map at page 59 – a few days before it is due to be presented. Paper copies of reports are usually available at the UN on the morning of the day when they are to be discussed, and if you attend the Commission (or know someone else who is going), you can obtain a copy then. Copies will also be available from the documentation desk at the UN, which may have the report in advance of the actual day on which it is to be discussed. Otherwise, you will have to obtain one by post from the Office of the High Commissioner Human Rights (see table on the Commission for address).

If you are sending your submission to a Special Rapporteur with a reporting mandate, the most that you can hope for is that mention will be made of the issues it raises in his or her report to the Commission or Sub-Commission. While it may be wise to check that it has been received, there is no point in chasing progress, as in effect you are merely supplying it for information.

For Special Rapporteurs with a thematic/investigative mandate, the very fact that they have questioned the government about your submission is useful. For both types of Rapporteur, a mention in their reports is especially useful, as you can quote any criticism they may make in any other context, including legal proceedings.

Those thematic/investigative Rapporteurs who are most likely to receive complaints about individuals – that is, those who cover torture, extra-judicial executions, violence against women and human rights defenders – have issued a model questionnaire or guidelines for use by people sending in complaints, or “communications” as the UN calls them. These can be obtained from the relevant assistant or from the UN website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see site map at page 59. It is not vital to use the actual questionnaire so long as you provide all the information it seeks.

Special Rapporteurs vary in their degree of proactivity, but the most proactive will intervene vigorously in individual cases. If your case is urgent, see URGENT CASES.

Special Rapporteurs will not normally investigate issues that are the subject of a complaint under the first Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Ireland only) – see USING THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS – or the 1503 procedure – see USING THE 1503 PRODECURE.

WORKING GROUPS

The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances also issue guidelines and have a questionnaire for complainants to complete - contact the Secretary (see relevant table) for details, or look at the website.

The Working Group on Communications also requires a particular type of submission - see USING THE 1503 PROCEDURE.

Otherwise, what has been said about making submissions to Committees and Special Rapporteurs will be relevant. Remember to check whether the Working Group is reporting to the Commission or the Sub-Commission, and time your submission accordingly, liaising with the Secretary to find out when the Working Group will be writing its report and sending in your submission at least two months beforehand.

The Working Group on Minorities is particularly NGO-friendly and encourages submissions and participation from those with expert knowledge, whether the NGO has consultative status at the UN or not.

Lobbying

COMMITTEES

The ultimate goal in lobbying a Committee is to persuade the Committee firstly to question the government about your concerns and secondly to comment on it in their final statement.

If you want to be certain that your written submission is taken on board by a Committee, you need to go to the hearing and lobby Committee members. This is expensive both in terms of time and money, but is worth considering if the issue is very important or your organisation will be regularly using the UN human rights machinery. If you cannot afford to attend a hearing, see below for some alternative ideas.

Four of the Committees – the Human Rights Committee and the Committees on women, children and economic, social and cultural rights – allow NGOs to attend the pre-sessional meetings at which they draw up the list of questions to be put to the government when its report is considered. See the tables at the end of this guide for details. If you want to influence the questions put to the government, it is well worth attending this meeting also, despite the extra cost involved. Strictly speaking, you cannot lobby at this meeting, but you can address the Committee directly and enter into a dialogue with them, which is extremely useful. Only a couple of hours will be allocated to the NGOs, so how much time you have will depend on how many NGOs attend. As a general rule, it is best to keep your presentation as short as possible, in order to allow more time for discussion. If other NGOs are attending, liaise with them and co-ordinate your presentations so that you make the best use of the time available. Try to avoid repeating one another unless you feel that a particular point needs to be emphasised or reinforced.

What follows applies to lobbying at the full hearing, although some of it will also be relevant to attendance at a pre-sessional meeting.

If you do decide to lobby, the first thing to do is to find out who else is likely to be going to the same hearing. NGOs with consultative status (see Appendix A for domestic representatives) will probably be able to tell you. NGOs are increasingly beginning to co-ordinate their lobbying, and there may well be an informal group of NGOs planning to attend a particular hearing. By getting in touch with others, you can exchange information and make sure that your lobbying activities compliment each other rather than cancelling each other out. This is vitally important, as the opportunities for lobbying are very limited and you need to make the most of them.

Talking to other NGOs is the best way to find out what is known about individual Committee members: what their particular interests are, how much weight they carry on the Committee, how they react to lobbying, and so on. The International Service for Human Rights – see APPENDIX C – can also provide information about Committee members, as can members of the United Kingdom’s and Ireland’s permanent missions at the UN – see APPENDIX D.

Next, find out when and where - Geneva or New York - the Committee will be discussing the item in which you are interested. If the hearing is in Geneva, find out whether it is in the Palais des Nations or the Palais Wilson (see page 5). Although the dates beginning and ending a Committee session will be fixed reasonably far in advance, the date on which a particular country or item will come up for consideration can vary. You will need to liaise closely with the Committee Secretary to keep track of this, and check just before you leave to make sure that the date has not slipped. Incidentally, this makes booking cheap aeroplane tickets difficult, but there is no point in having a non-variable ticket booked months in advance for entirely the wrong dates. You will usually be reasonably safe booking a fortnight in advance, but it is risky to book much earlier than that. If you are going at a busy time of year for the UN, such as during the Commission or Sub-Commission, it is advisable to book a hotel in advance.

Make sure that you understand the Committee’s procedures. This varies from one Committee to another (see tables on each Committee for outline details) - what follows is a general description that may not apply exactly to any particular Committee. The Committee will have a standard procedure for considering periodic reports from countries. This is set out in writing and you can obtain details from the Secretary to the Committee (see relevant table) or the website at http://www.unhchr.ch – see site map at page 59. Usually, the Committee appoints one or two of its members to act as Country Rapporteur. This Rapporteur will make a particular study of the government’s report and any NGO submissions. He or she, or sometimes the whole Committee or a working party made up of Committee members, will then draw up a list of questions to put to the government. This usually happens at a pre-sessional meeting before the full hearing, but for the Committees on torture and racial discrimination it may happen at the beginning of the session, or at some point during the session. Sometimes, only the Country Rapporteur reads all the submissions on a particular country.

At the hearing, the Committee chairperson will invite the government delegation to introduce its report. The UK always sends civil servants as its delegation, whereas the Irish government has tended to send a mixture of civil servants and government ministers. The government delegation introduces the report and updates the Committee on any developments that have occurred since it was submitted, usually many months previously. The government delegation usually begins by answering the questions that have been notified to them in advance of the hearing. The Country Rapporteur then asks further questions, followed by other members of the Committee. The chairperson does not usually ask questions, and nor does any member of the Committee who has been nominated by the government whose report is under consideration. There is little point, therefore, in lobbying either of these members. The government delegation then replies to the further questions, and Committee members make final comments on their presentation. The Committee then goes into closed (private) session, in order to draw up its final statement, which is then publicly read out. This whole process can happen in a single day, or can take place over two or more days, depending on the amount of time allocated. In particular, the reading out of the final statement may be deferred if time has become short. It is not unusual for the statement to be issued a week after the hearing, or right at the end of the Committee session.

As can be seen from the above description, NGOs’ opportunity to be involved in Committee proceedings is limited. You may attend public sessions of Committees, but only in order to observe. You may not address the Committee and you may not attempt to communicate with Committee members inside the committee room while the committee is in session, even by passing them notes. While the Committee is considering your own country, you may sit in the seats round the edge of the committee room; at other times, you should use the public gallery and leave those seats for other NGOs whose country is under discussion.

There are two opportunities for lobbying a Committee: when the Country Rapporteur or working party is drawing up the list of questions, and during the session itself. If you can find out who the Country Rapporteur is, and how to contact him or her other than care of the UN, there is nothing to stop you getting in touch in advance and offering to provide a list of draft issues on which to base questions. You can also offer to meet the Rapporteur, either at the UN or in your own or a nearby country, should s/he happen to be visiting. If the Rapporteur is visiting your country, you can offer not just a meeting, but a site visit to a project that illustrates the problem you wish to highlight. Another useful tactic is to include in your written submission a list of questions you would like to see put to the government. If there is to be a pre-sessional meeting to draw up questions, you should consider being present as this is the best way to influence what questions are asked.

So far as lobbying during the session is concerned, timing is important. If a Committee is receiving, say, half a dozen country reports during one session, if you lobby too early in the session members’ minds will be on another country altogether, and you may also find yourself competing with NGOs from other countries who are engaged in lobbying on their own behalf. Equally, you cannot leave your lobbying until the actual day when your item is being discussed, because by then Committee members will have decided what additional questions to ask. Ideally, therefore, you need to be present a couple of days before your item is due for discussion, assuming that your item is not the first on the agenda.

On the first day, you can sit in the public gallery and listen to the proceedings on another item. This will help you to identify the Committee members and to gain some idea of what sort of issues are of concern to them. Headphones are supplied to enable you to listen to translations - an English translation is always available. The acoustics are very bad in some of the rooms at the UN, so sometimes it is necessary to use the headphones even though a person is speaking English. When it comes to identifying Committee members, it is useful to know that they usually sit in alphabetical order, so once you have identified one person you can usually identify his or her neighbours, bearing in mind that someone may be temporarily absent from the room or prevented from attending the session. The chairperson often addresses Committee members by name, which assists in identifying them.

On the second day, you will have four opportunities to lobby: before the session starts, during coffee breaks, at lunch time and after the session. Committees usually sit between 10:00 am and 1:00 pm and between 3:00 pm and 6:00 pm. Coffee breaks are often informal and it is simply a matter of noticing that a member is slipping out of the room. You are probably best situated in the corridor outside the committee room rather than in the public gallery, for these purposes. On a practical point, find out the difference, if any, between the direction of the coffee room and that of the lavatories, and accost members on their way to the former and the way back from the latter! Bearing in mind that the Committee members are still concentrating on another item, it is best to introduce yourself, saying why you have come, and ask whether you can talk to them then and there, or make an appointment to see them later. Very often, if you approach someone before the start of the session, they will make such an appointment. Keep a note of appointments - otherwise you may become double-booked - and make sure that you keep them; you will not get a second chance. Obviously, you can start lobbying on the first day, if opportunity permits.

When you do get a chance to actually lobby someone, you may have as little as five or ten minutes in which to do so. You will rarely get more than half an hour at maximum. Also, do not assume that the member will have read your submission. Committee members often do not receive all the papers until they physically arrive at the UN, and they often have no opportunity to read submissions until the night before the day on which they are due for consideration. Successful lobbying, therefore, consists in being able to summarise, very briefly and clearly, your major concerns, and being clear about what you are asking the member to do. It can be helpful to have a single sheet of paper, clearly laid out with good use of headings and bullet points, that summarises your concerns and the questions you would like raised. However, do not forget that you are dealing with independent experts. They will need to be convinced, and do not usually accept spoon-feeding. You must be ready to answer questions, and to change tack in response to the member’s reactions to your initial approach. Most members are very open to being lobbied, but if someone refuses to speak to you, perhaps because they are too busy, it is counterproductive to argue.

If there are a number of NGOs present, it is helpful to co-ordinate your lobbying, either meeting a member together in a group, or splitting up the lobbying and exchanging information with one another. There is everything to be said for co-operating with other NGOs, and much to be lost by competing with them. It is always worth jointly requesting the Secretary of the Committee to organise an informal meeting with NGOs who can provide information on a particular country. Not all the Committee members may attend, but those who do are likely to take up your concerns if they are well presented. If such a meeting takes place at lunchtime, it is worth investing in providing sandwiches for Committee members, who are much more likely to attend if it does not mean missing their lunch. Only NGOs with consultative status can book rooms at the UN for meetings, so you will need their help.

If a Rapporteur is visiting your own country, organising a joint NGO meeting with him or her, perhaps followed by a tour of relevant projects, if this does not involve too much travelling, can help to deepen the Rapportuer’s understanding of a range of problems and the context in which they arise.

Attending the UN and lobbying gives you a number of further opportunities or media coverage. You can press release the fact that you will be attending, and that you have attended. If a Committee meeting is especially important, or of particular importance to a given publication or programme, you can sometimes persuade domestic journalists to attend the hearing and send back reports, including radio and television coverage. The UN has a press office and has good facilities for journalists. Journalists who want to film or record UN proceedings will need to liaise with the Press Office. It is also worth trying to obtain media coverage in Geneva or, especially, New York.

If the Committee meeting is in the Palais des Nations, you will need to obtain a security pass. In theory, Committee meetings are open to the public, but access to the Palais will be much simper if you acquire a pass. Write to the Secretary of the Committee giving the names of your representatives exactly as they appear on their passports, and the dates when they will be present. Ask the Secretary to ensure that the staff at the Villa Les Feuillantines (in the avenue de la Paix, close to the Place des Nations) have their names. Send your letter on headed paper, describe your representative as “our accredited representative”, and give the dates when they will be in Geneva. Passes should be obtained from the Villa before going to the Palais, and at least 45 minutes should be allowed for this. Your representatives will need a copy of your letter and their passports. If the meeting is in the Palais Wilson, ask the Secretary to give your name to the guards at the security gate. They will issue you with a pass. You will need to show your passport, and they will probably keep it until you return your pass.

THE COMMISSION AND SUB-COMMISSION

The ultimate goal in lobbying the Commission and Sub-Commission is to persuade members to ask questions about your concerns, ideally during the session, or, failing that, privately. If the government is stung into exercising its right of reply, you will know that you have been very successful. You will also want the staff of the permanent mission to raise your concerns with the civil servants back home.

Only NGOs with consultative status have access to the Commission and Sub-Commission. They can circulate written statements related to an item on the agenda, of 2,000 words if they have category I status and 1,500 words if category II. They can also make oral statements of up to 5 minutes while the session is in progress, and can lobby members about resolutions. Member States can reply to both written and oral statements by NGOs, and, of course, by Commission members.

Since the Commission is made up of representatives of Member States, it is one of the few places where it is possible to engage in public dialogue with the government. The United Kingdom is currently a member of the Commission, but Ireland is not. In practice this makes little difference, as non-Member States are entitled to attend as observers and can speak and reply to points raised.

Although the Sub-Commission is made up of independent human rights experts, every Member State is entitled to attend sessional hearings, and to reply to statements made by members of the Sub-Commission or NGOs, so indirect dialogue is also possible here.

It is worth lobbying your own country’s delegation, even though they will obviously not criticise their own government publicly. Not only will what you say to them be reported back to the government at home, but comments made by other delegations will also be reported. It will do your issue no harm if a report is received saying that there was considerable concern on the floor of the UN about your particular topic.

The staff of the permanent missions of the United Kingdom and Ireland at the UN (see APPENDIX D for contact details) can provide valuable information about which countries to lobby and can also perform introductions to members of other missions. The Irish mission appear to regard it as part of their work to assist, and even entertain when time permits, NGOs from Ireland or working on Irish issues. The UK mission staff seem to be more focussed on other work. Bear in mind that staff from both missions are usually very busy, although they can usually find the time to answer a quick question.

NGOs that do not have consultative status are dependent upon those that do for access to the Commission and Sub-Commission. The domestic representatives of such NGOs (see Appendix A for list) can ask those with consultative status to raise issues on their behalf, circulate statements prepared by them, and allow them to use some of their speaking time. NGOs that are not domestic representatives will usually need to obtain the co-operation of those that are if they want access. Sometimes, though, an NGO with consultative status will deal directly with an NGO that is not their domestic representative, if that NGO can assist them on a specific issue. NGOs that want to attend sessions must be accredited by an NGO with consultative status, in order to obtain the necessary security pass. Passes for the Commission and Sub-Commission are obtained from the Villa Les Feuillantines in the avenue de la Paix, close to the Place des Nations. You need to obtain your pass before going to the Palais, and you should allow at least 45 minutes for this. Also, make sure that the NGO that accredits you has your name spelled exactly as it appears on your passport, otherwise you will be refused a pass. If your name is unusual, or would seem unusual, for example, to someone unfamiliar with the spelling of Irish names, you will need to impress upon the accrediting NGO the need for accuracy.

NGOs with consultative status are usually working to a broader agenda than that which you may want to raise, and it may therefore be better to take your issue up directly with a Special Rapporteur or a Working Group (see below). However, if you are working with an NGO with consultative status at the Commission or Sub-Commission, you will have to co-ordinate your lobbying through them. Such sponsoring NGOs can assist you by identifying members of the Commission or Sub-Commission and introducing you, and helping you to lobby. They will probably have other NGOs to look after as well as you, though, so you may find yourself on your own, especially during agenda items that do not concern you. The general information about lobbying given above in relation to Committees will apply, especially in terms of how to approach members. As with Committees, you are not supposed to lobby members in the chamber itself, although occasionally members may approach you or pass you a note asking for information, in which case it is acceptable to have a brief, quiet discussion or to pass them a note in reply.

Timing at the Commission and Sub-Commission is even more difficult to predict than it is for Committees, because the agenda is not always taken in the published order. You will need to keep in close touch with your sponsoring NGO, and to be flexible about travelling arrangements.

Both the Commission and the Sub-Commission take place in much larger chambers than the Committees, with many hundreds of people present. You will have to find a seat in the limited number of seats reserved for NGOs with consultative status, and be sensitive about giving up those seats to other NGOs when necessary. The only way to hear what is going on is to use the headphones. Before people speak, they raise their hands so that the interpreters can see them and switch to their individual microphones; in this way, you can at least tell from what part of the chamber a speech is coming. Members sit in a single or multiple horseshoe at the front of the chamber, arranged alphabetically by name, flanked by an outer ring of government representatives, also arranged alphabetically by the French name of the country - the UK is thus under “R” for “Royaume Uni”. The only way to identify members is to stand unobtrusively near the front for a while until you can recognise them. Beyond them is a ring of advisors, then government observers (again in French alphabetical order), other observers such as specialist agencies, intergovernmental organisations and so on, and finally there are seats for NGOs with consultative status.

WORKING GROUPS AND SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS

It is not usually necessary or appropriate to lobby Working Groups or Special Rapporteurs. Most of their work is done on paper, and, with the exception of Working Group meetings, away from the UN.

However, Special Rapporteurs often travel considerably in pursuit of their work, and there is no harm in offering to meet them in your own or a nearby country, especially if you have referred a number of cases to them. Similarly, they will be present at the UN when they are reporting to the Commission or Sub-Commission, and it is often possible to meet them then. Such opportunities should be used to impress upon the Rapporteur and his or her assistant your own reliability as a source of information, and to gently chase progress on submissions. However, bear in mind that they are greatly overloaded and under-resourced and that a critical approach on your part may well prove counter-productive.

It is equally important to build up a relationship with the assistants to Special Rapporteurs and the Secretaries of Working Groups as it is with the Rapporteurs or Groups themselves. See MAKING A SUBMISSION for how to chase progress on a submission.

NGOs usually have one of two gaols when they refer cases to Special Rapporteurs. They either want the rapporteur to raise the case with the government, or, in very serious situations, they want to persuade the rapporteur to undertake a mission to the United Kingdom or Ireland to report on the situation.

Most of the Working Groups of the Commission meet in closed session, and do not expect to be lobbied, whereas all but one of the Working Groups of the Sub-Commission are open to NGO participation.

Resolutions

The passing of resolutions is the means by which the Commission and Sub-Commission set up new human rights mechanisms, for example by appointing a new Special Rapporteur to focus on a particular country or a specific human rights violation.

It is only government delegations who can put down resolutions, although they will sometimes agree to sponsor a resolution proposed to them by an NGO. Working on resolutions can be a highly complex and political process and it is very much the province of NGOs with consultative status. They often work together on these matters, and are sometimes more concerned about them than country- or issue-specific affairs. Other NGOs will find that raising an issue prior to the Commission with a Special Rapporteur or a Working Group, to whom they can have direct access, is a more productive way of working.

It can be particularly difficult to persuade the Commission to take up the human rights situation in a particular country. It should be kept in mind that UN members (i.e. governments) see human rights as a facet of national pride and prestige. They will go to considerable lengths to avoid criticism in front of, let alone by, their peers. Human rights concerns are frequently used as a means of political point-scoring over other states and almost always take second place to a state’s perceived economic and security interests.

As a rule – and there are occasional exceptions, both more and less deserving – the Commission will only take action on individual countries where there are serious and long standing human rights violations and the government concerned is internationally isolated. This is not solely a result of current globalised economic dependency: the Commission from its earliest days has been reluctant to tackle country situations. Indeed, at its very first meeting in 1947 it decided that “it had no power to take action in regard to any complaints concerning human rights”. Two years later its Secretariat, presumably embarrassed by the number of complaints that it was anyway receiving, commented that this decision was “bound to lower the prestige and authority not only of the Commission on Human Rights but of the United Nations … This irritates the general public and brings disappointment and disillusionment to thousands of people all over the world.”

And so it continues. Press releases issued by two major international NGOs for the 1999 session of the Commission will demonstrate the Commission’s approach to the adoption of resolutions criticising the human rights’ record of named countries.

Amnesty international, at the start of the session, said, “The UN Commission on Human Rights should have the courage once and for all to make human rights and not politics the yardstick of its work.” The then Secretary General Pierre Sané continued, “By putting powerful political and economic interests above their obligation to protect and promote human rights, Commission members have seriously hampered the effectiveness and credibility of the Commission throughout its history.”

Six weeks later, as the session ended, NGO confidence was no higher. Human Rights Watch called the Commission’s decision to take no action on a resolution on China “deeply disappointing”. Their summary of government excuses for taking no action on China will sound only too familiar to regular Commission watchers: “The European Union, Australia and Canada all said that their ongoing human rights dialogues with China were more productive than public criticism. Some Asian countries quietly said that they could not take on China politically. The Japanese press suggested the US only introduced the motion to appease a domestic constituency. Some countries remembered the treatment Denmark received when it co-sponsored a China resolution in 1997 – China threatened to cancel all business deals with Danish companies, a threat that was never carried out.”

For human rights campaigners from Britain and Ireland, this may seem like an interesting lobbying opportunity denied, but bear in mind that in many countries whose human rights record the Commission persistently ignores, NGOs may not be allowed to organise, let alone to travel to Geneva to make their views on their government known. In reality, the chances of getting the Commission to pass a resolution singling out either Ireland or the UK for condemnation on their human rights record are virtually zero.

As for resolutions on particular human rights issues, the only chance of the UN passing resolutions that reflect the concerns of NGOs and others in the UK and/or Ireland is if there is international concern about those issues. In such cases, the scale of concern is likely to be much greater in other countries. Although the situation in Northern Ireland has caused anxiety, for instance, over the safety of lawyers and allegations of a shoot-to-kill policy, the resolutions giving rise to the appointments of Special Rapporteurs on the independence of lawyers and on extrajudicial executions had their origins in far more serious situations in other countries. The scope for influence in these matters by domestic NGOs, campaigns etc is small. The construction and promotion of resolutions is best left to the professionals, i.e. the international NGOs with consultative status.

1503 Procedures

The 1503 procedure is named after the number of the resolution passed by the Economic and Social Council of the UN in 1970 establishing a mechanism for complaints about “situations which appear to reveal a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights” in a country. In 2000 it was substantially revised by another resolution, 2000/3.

Although it has been invoked against both Ireland and the UK in the past, neither country is a natural target for the procedure, because human rights violations there pale by comparison with those in other more oppressive countries around the world (but it has been invoked against the USA in recent years). However, it may be useful in order to highlight laws or practices that have a particularly detrimental impact on particular groups, especially racial or religious minorities. The procedure may be more useful, though, for groups based here who want to draw attention to serious human rights violations elsewhere in the world.

As with many of the UN human rights mechanisms, the procedure is cumbersome and slow. If your case is urgent, see URGENT CASES.

All complaints should be sent in writing to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva (see table on the WORKING GROUP ON COMMUNICATIONS for the address).

Complaints should include:

• the name of the person making the complaint (although requests to treat the name as confidential will be respected);
  
• the facts on which the complaint is based;
  
• what steps have been taken to exhaust domestic remedies (see MAKING A COMPLAINT UNDER THE OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS), and with what outcome;
  
• which human rights it is alleged have been violated;
  
• why these violations constitute a consistent pattern of gross violations;
  

• what evidence exists to show that the violations are reliably attested. Media reports alone are unlikely to constitute sufficient evidence. Eyewitness reports, medical evidence and so on should be included;
  
• what remedy is sought.

The Secretariat will filter complaints and weed out any that they find to be manifestly ill-founded. The following criteria have been developed for deciding whether or not a case is acceptable:

• No communication will be admitted if it runs counter to the principles of the United Nations Charter or it shows political motivation.
  
• A communication will only be admitted if consideration shows there are reasonable grounds to believe - also taking into account any replies sent by the Government concerned - that there is a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
  
• Communications may come from individuals or groups who claim to be victims of human rights violations or who have direct, reliable knowledge of violations. Anonymous communications are inadmissible as are those based only on reports in the mass media.
  
• Each communication must describe the facts, the purpose of the petition and the rights that have been violated. As a rule, communications containing abusive language or insulting remarks about the State against which the complaint is directed will not be considered.
  

• Domestic remedies must have been exhausted before a communication is considered - unless it can be shown convincingly that solutions at the national level would be ineffective or that they would extend over an unreasonable length of time.

The Working Group receives 20 - 25,000 complaints a year, sometimes in the form of mass postcard campaigns. Only well-presented complaints backed by hard evidence are likely to be successful.

There is no time limit, but complaints must be submitted within a reasonable time of domestic remedies having been exhausted or proved useless. In order to be considered in August, complaints must reach the UN by early to mid May. Complaints received after that may not be considered until the following year. Also, governments must be given twelve weeks to comment on the complaint before the Working Group can consider them.

Complaints are passed by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to the Sub-Commission’s five-person Working Group on Communications (see table). Copies of complaints are always sent to the relevant government, which is asked to comment. The Working Group meets for two weeks immediately after the Sub-Commission’s August session in Geneva. It considers the complaints, and decides, by majority vote of the whole group - not simply the majority of those present - whether to pass them on to the Commission’s Working Group on Situations (not included in this guide as there is no direct access to it) for consideration. This group is made up of five Commission members nominated by the five regional groups, with due attention being paid to rotation of members. It meets prior to the Commission session in the spring and makes recommendations to the Commission about how to deal with complaints.

Under the terms of the 1503 resolution, the Commission has the power to mount a “thorough study” of a situation or to send a fact-finding body to investigate, but in practice it uses these powers rarely if ever. The Commission tends instead to adopt other measures, and its established practice has now been codified in Resolution 2000/3, which sets out the following options:
(i) to discontinue consideration of the matter when further consideration or action is not warranted;
(ii) to keep the situation under review in the light of any further information received from the Government concerned and any further information which may reach the Commission under the 1503 procedure;
(iii) to keep the situation under review and to appoint an independent expert;
(iv) to discontinue consideration of the matter under the confidential procedure governed by Council resolution 1503 in order to take up consideration of the same matter under the public procedure governed by Council resolution 1235.

The procedure is confidential, which means that, beyond an acknowledgement that it has been received, the complainant will hear no more about it. The Working Groups and the Commission all meet in closed (private) session. Unlike the complainant, the government is kept informed, in the sense that the complaint is sent to them and they are given an opportunity to comment. When the Commission meets to consider complaints, the government is present and can put its case. The only information made public by the UN is a list of which countries, or more properly which human rights situations, were considered under the 1503 procedure by the Commission during the session and a list of which countries were dropped.

Although a frustrating procedure from the point of view of the complainant, the 1503 procedure is taken very seriously within the UN and governments prefer not to be under investigation. If a case gets through to the Commission, the government will have to explain itself before the UN’s most prestigious human rights body, made up not of experts but of representatives of 53 Member States.

In the unlikely event that the UK or Ireland were to appear on the list of countries under consideration in the future, questions could be asked in parliament or in the Dáil to try to penetrate the confidentiality of the procedure.

Optionals Protocols

It is possible to make individual complaints to the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, but only if the government has agreed to be bound by Optional Protocols to the relevant convention. An Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is currently being devised. In practice, the United Kingdom has not agreed to any of the three existing Optional Protocols. Ireland has signed up to two of them, those on human rights (known as the first Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and women. Ireland has not yet ratified the International Convention against Torture; when she does so, it is expected that she will also agree to be bound by its Optional Protocol.

Thus the Human Rights Committee and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women can consider complaints from individuals who allege that their human rights have been violated by Ireland but people under the jurisdiction of the UK cannot complain to the Committees about anything the UK government has done or has failed to do. Anyone who is under the jurisdiction of the Irish government, however, can make a complaint against it to the Committees, although the Committees will not accept complaints by Irish people against the UK’s actions in Northern Ireland because the UK has not ratified the relevant Optional Protocols.

People wishing to make a complaint (complainants) must have exhausted their domestic remedies. This means that they must have taken all possible legal steps within their own country which might provide them with an effective remedy for their complaint. In Ireland, this might include an action for compensation and/or an action for breach of constitutional rights. However, if obtaining such a remedy would be “unreasonably prolonged” it need not be pursued. Also, the absence of legal aid in most civil cases and cases of judicial review in Ireland may mean that, although a domestic remedy exists, in practice it is not available, in which case the Optional Protocols can be invoked. Complainants can only take their case to the Committees if it is not being examined under any other procedure of international investigation or settlement, such as proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice.

Complaints must be made in writing. They should include:

• the name, address, age and occupation of the complainant;
  
• the name of the government against whom the complaint is made;
  
• which provisions of the ICCPR or CEDAW are alleged to have been violated;
  
• the facts on which the complaint is based;
  
• what steps have been taken to exhaust domestic remedies, and with what outcome;
  
• whether the matter is being or has been considered by any other international human rights body, and with what result.

Complaints will not be accepted if they are anonymous. An NGO or lawyer - practising or academic - can make a complaint on someone else’s behalf, but must include the complainant’s authority to do so.

Complaints which are incompatible with the ICCPR or CEDAW or which constitute an abuse of the right to make a complaint under the Protocols will not succeed. For example, a racist group complaining that its freedom of expression had been violated because it was prevented from circulating pamphlets that incited racial hatred would be dismissed.

There is no time limit for making a complaint, but unreasonable delay might be considered by the Committee as being an abuse of the right to make a complaint.

If a complaint is found admissible (accepted), it is transmitted (sent) to the respondent government (the Member State against whom the complaint has been made). The government has six months to reply with an explanation, clarification, and/or a description of the remedies that it has already made available to the complainant. This reply is sent to the complainant, who has six weeks to make any final comments.

The matter is then considered by the Committee in closed (private) session. Neither the complainant nor the respondent government is present. There is no oral hearing. If a member of the Committee has any personal interest in a case, s/he will take no part in its consideration.

The Committee then expresses its views on the case. These are not legally binding but have moral and political impact. Although the proceedings of the Committee are confidential, their views are made public and a summary of their activities under the Optional Protocol is included in their annual report to the UN. While the Committee is considering a case, no publicity is allowed, but complainants are free to publicise the fact that they have won their case once the Committee’s views are made public. The Committee will protect the anonymity of a complainant if asked to do so, or if the Committee itself decides to do so.

While a case is going through the procedures, the Committee can inform the government that in its view interim measures are required to avoid irreparable damage to the victim, regardless of its final views on the complaint. This might be very useful in cases of, for example, deportation or extradition. If your case is very urgent, see URGENT CASES.

There is no legal aid from the UN to pay for the costs of preparing a complaint. Whether legal aid is available is a matter for individual governments. The Irish government has not made legal aid available for these purposes.

Complaints should be sent to the Secretary of the relevant Committee (see table).

Under Articles 8 and 9 of the Optional Protocol to the International Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the Committee has the power to conduct inquires into allegations of grave or systematic violations. Governments can opt out of these provisions, but Ireland has not done so. If the Committee receives reliable information of grave or systematic violations, it will invite the government to make submissions. Once these submissions have been considered, the Committee can designate one or more of its members to conduct an inquiry and make an urgent report. If it is necessary and the government agrees, the designated member(s) may visit the country concerned. The Committee then transmits its findings and recommendations to the government, who have six months to respond. Although the procedure is entirely confidential, the Committee can invite the government to report on any measures it has taken in response to the inquiry in its next periodic report to the Committee.

Urgent Cases

Generally speaking, the UN human rights machinery is very slow and is therefore unsuitable for very urgent cases.

However, some of the mechanisms can and do act relatively swiftly in very serious cases, and these are explained below. It is worth reading the whole of this section, rather than just looking at one procedure, as no two urgent cases are the same and this section taken as a whole is designed to convey the UN’s general approach to urgency.

Bear in mind that the UN polices activities by governments. You can not use the urgent machinery to complain about the actions of a private person or body, a company, or a terrorist group, although it may be legitimate to complain about the government’s failure to act against them.

It is important not to abuse such urgent processes as are available. Just as it is unhelpful to misuse words like “torture”, it is unwise and unfair to demand urgent action in any except the most grave and pressing of cases. If you do so, you may prevent or delay action being taken in a really urgent case, and if you are found to have wasted UN time you will never succeed in getting any other case accepted as urgent. Also, bear in mind the very limited resources at the disposal of those responsible for implementing the human rights machinery at the UN.

Even where the UN does act swiftly, there is no guarantee that the action taken will succeed. All the human rights machinery is based on the concept that member states voluntarily sign up to the various treaties and declarations etc, and that they will co-operate with any UN committee or official who asks questions about a case. Sadly, the reports of committees, special rapporteurs and working groups are peppered with accounts of total refusal by governments to reply to communications.

In the case of the UK and Ireland, urgent action against them is exceptionally rare, and it is possible that they would respond more positively than some other governments. However, any responsible complainant will already have done their utmost to bring the matter to the attention of the relevant domestic authorities, and already made use of any urgent procedure that may be available locally, such as judicial review. In such a situation, the government is unlikely to be countenancing a major human rights abuse simply because it is ignorant of what, for example, a police officer or prison governor has done, so it will probably be a policy that is being challenged. If so, the government has merely to reply politely to any enquiries made of it by the UN, justifying its position. The UN can criticise the government and call on it to change its policy, but there is no obligation on the government to comply and no method by which the UN can enforce its findings.

As is the case with many of the human rights mechanisms, embarrassment in an international arena in which the government sets itself up as a shining example to others is the most potent remedy the UN can offer. If you are pursuing an urgent action, it is therefore worth combining it with any other pressure that you can bring to bear, including diplomatic pressure and media coverage both at home and abroad. However, it is only necessary to recall the tragic case of Ken Sarowiwa, executed in Nigeria, to realise that even these lengths will not always work.

The following mechanisms have some capacity for urgent action:

• the Special Rapporteur on Torture;
  
• the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention;
  
• the Special Rapporteur on Extra-Judicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions;
  
• the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances;
  
• the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers;
  
• the Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders;
  

• the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief;
  
• the Human Rights Committee.

As a general rule of thumb, these mechanisms will only act urgently in order to prevent a serious human rights violation. Once someone has actually been tortured or killed, the complaint becomes no more urgent than any other case. Inevitably, it is harder to establish the risk of a violation than an actual violation, and it is necessary to make as strong a case as possible. The following factors may help to strengthen a case:

• evidence that the person concerned has suffered violations in similar circumstances in the past;
  
• evidence that s/he is a member of a group that has done so;
  
• evidence that the institution involved has perpetrated violations before; and/or
  
• evidence that an individual responsible for the person’s safety is a habitual violator.

As with any submission to the UN, you need to supply enough information to establish your own credentials and to substantiate your case. Much of the advice contained in MAKING A SUBMISSION will be relevant, the difference being that you will have to work much more quickly than usual. It is no good faxing or e-mailing a brief note and expecting the UN to respond urgently.

In all urgent cases, check that the complaint does fall within the remit of the mechanism in question (see the relevant table), and fax or e-mail your submission. Mark your submission “FOR URGENT ACTION” at the top of the first page. In very serious cases, it is worth considering actually going to Geneva to deliver your petition in person. This will impress the urgency and gravity of the case upon the relevant person, and it will enable you to raise the case with as many appropriate people as possible.

SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON TORTURE

The Special Rapporteur on Torture will act urgently in cases where there is evidence that someone has been arrested and there is a fear that s/he will be subjected to torture. Such evidence may take the form of eyewitness accounts from relatives, lawyers, doctors etc who have seen the detainee’s physical condition, or may spring from the fact that the person is being kept incommunicado, which is recognised as being a situation conducive to torture. The Special Rapporteur will have regard to the following factors:

• the previous reliability of the source of the information;
  
• the internal consistency of the information;
  
• the consistency of the information with information on other cases from the country in question;
  
• the existence of authoritative reports of torture practices from national sources, such as official commissions of inquiry;
  
• the findings of other international bodies, such as UN Country Rapporteurs and representatives, the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture and regional human rights bodies, in particular, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
  
• the existence of national legislation, such as that permitting prolonged incommunicado detention, that can have the effect of facilitating torture; and
  
• the threat of extradition or deportation, directly or indirectly, to a State or territory where one or more of the above elements is present.
  

Although not identified in this list, which is not in any case intended to be exhaustive, authoritative reports from NGOs, especially those with consultative status such as Amnesty International, ought also to be useful.

The only urgent action taken by the Special Rapporteur is that he will ask the government to give him an assurance that the detainee’s physical and mental integrity will be guaranteed.

THE WORKING GROUP ON ARBITRARY DETENTION

Given the availability of habeas corpus in English and Irish law, recourse to this Working Group is likely to be exceptionally rare, although it may be appropriate if such an action has failed.

The Working Group will only act urgently where there is reason to believe that someone is being detained arbitrarily (i.e. for no legitimate reason) and that as a result their health or their life may be in danger, or where there is some other compelling reason for urgent action.

The Working Group has a questionnaire that it uses to assess cases, and wherever possible this should be used in urgent cases. If that is not possible, your fax or e-mail should include at least the following information:

1. the name of the person making the complaint, plus address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address, and details of status (i.e. the individual concerned, a relative, a lawyer, an NGO etc);
   
2. the full name of the person on whose behalf the complaint is made and other details that help with identification, such as date of birth, marital status, gender etc;
   
3. the date and place of the arrest, the identity of those presumed responsible, and any other relevant details;
   
4. the reasons given by the authorities for the arrest;
   
5. any relevant legislation that has been applied;
   
6. any domestic remedies pursued, and the outcome;
   
7. brief reasons why the detention is considered to be arbitrary and why the person’s health or life is in danger.

The Working Group itself can take action or, between sessions, the Chair or Vice-Chair can do so, in consultation with two other members of the Working Party where it is not alleged that the person’s life or health is at risk. The action takes the form of transmitting the communication (sending a copy of the complaint) to the relevant Minister for Foreign Affairs, accompanied by an urgent appeal to the government to safeguard the person’s right to life and physical integrity. Where appropriate, this appeal will include a request to consider releasing the detainee and/or ensuring that adequate medical treatment is administered.

SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON EXTRA-JUDICIAL, SUMMARY OR ARBITRARY EXECUTIONS

Many of the complaints received by the Special Rapporteur take the form of appeals for urgent action where an execution is threatened. Since Ireland has abolished the death penalty altogether and the UK retains it only for the crime of treason, such cases are unlikely to arise in these countries. However, this may be a relevant mechanism where there is a real fear that someone is about to die in custody, either because he or she has been injured during arrest or because he or she is suicidal and receiving inadequate care.

If NGOs in Britain and Ireland want to raise such cases here or in other countries, they need to follow the advice given for the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention above. The Special Rapporteur also has a questionnaire, available from the UN website – see page 59 for site map. If you are unable to obtain a copy quickly, you should send at least the following information:

1. the name of the person making the complaint, plus address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address, and details of status (i.e. the individual concerned, a relative, a lawyer, an NGO etc);
   
2. the full name of the person on whose behalf the complaint is made and other details that help with identification, such as date of birth, marital status, gender etc;
   
3. his or her profession, especially if it is relevant to the situation, e.g. trade unionist, politician, minister of religion, human rights defender etc;
   
4. whether there is a link to any other case;
   
5. the date, time and place of the incident (e.g. when a person disappeared) and its nature, and why an imminent threat to the person’s life is feared;
   
6. why the government or its agent is responsible;
   
7. all available evidence, including witnesses;
   
8. details of any action taken on the person’s behalf and the outcome.

As with other mechanisms, all that the Rapporteur can do is communicate the complaint to the government and appeal to it to safeguard the person’s right to life.

WORKING GROUP ON ENFORCED OR INVOLUNTARY DISAPPEARANCES

As with the urgent mechanisms, neither Ireland nor the UK is likely to be the subject of complaints to this Working Group, although NGOs based in either country may wish to draw attention to disappearances in other jurisdictions.

However, it is possible that someone who has been arrested here, perhaps by immigration officials, or under anti-terrorism laws, disappears for a few days before the authorities divulge his or her whereabouts, in which case it may be appropriate to invoke this mechanism, although it will be necessary to act very swiftly.

As with all the other mechanisms, it is necessary to give the fullest possible details and a cogent explanation of why you think the case falls within the Working Groups’ remit (see table). It is only suitable in cases where the state is responsible for the person’s detention and disappearance; ordinary cases of kidnapping and custody battles over children will not be taken up.

Once again, all that the Working Group can do is transmit your complaint urgently to the government and seek information as to the location and wellbeing of the missing person.

SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON JUDGES AND LAWYERS AND SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE ON HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS

These two experts play similar roles in relation respectively to lawyers and non-lawyers. The Special Rapporteur on judges and lawyers has been around for longer, and has been known to respond rapidly to reliable information that a lawyer’s life is under threat, faxing letters to governments. It is anticipated that the Special Representative on human rights defenders will also be prepared to act rapidly in serious urgent cases.

The Special Representative has issued guidelines for making ordinary submissions, which are available on the UN website – see page 59 for site map. Any request for urgent action should contain at least the following information:

1. the name of the person making the complaint, plus address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address, and details of status (i.e. the individual concerned, a relative, a lawyer, an NGO etc);
   
2. the full name of the person (or organisation) on whose behalf the complaint is made and other details that help with identification, such as date of birth, marital status, gender etc;
   
3. the nature of the human rights work that the individual or organisation performs;
   
4. the name of any human rights group to which an individual is affiliated, plus details about that group and how to contact it;
   
5. details about the alleged violation of human rights and how that violation is connected with the human rights work of the individual or organisation;
   
6. who is responsible for the alleged violation, e.g. the police, the army etc, and details concerning their names, rank, functions and so on;
   
7. if the incident complained of is an arrest, full details, included the legal basis invoked and where and since when the person has been detained;
   
8. details of the person’s or organisation’s lawyers, if any, and whether they have access to their client;
   
9. details of any action taken on the person’s behalf and the outcome.

SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF

In particularly serious or urgent cases, the Special Rapporteur will fax the government concerned. He has indicated that he would like to receive a reply by fax within two weeks.

This urgent procedure was introduced in 1994. Examples of cases where it has been used include the murder of a member of the clergy, threats of death because of blasphemy against human rights advocates and priests, and a declaration that a writer was a heretic.

Since many cases that fall within the Rapporteur’s mandate may also fall within that of others, such as the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial etc Executions, it may be worth faxing the complaint to them as well. However, make sure that you tell everyone you fax or e-mail who else you have contacted, so that they can work together.

THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE

The Human Rights Committee does not have an urgent procedure as such. However, while a case is going through its procedures, the Committee can inform the government that in its view interim measures are required to avoid irreparable damage to the victim, regardless of its final views on the complaint. This might be very useful in cases of, for example, deportation or extradition. It can also be invoked in cases of execution arising in other parts of the world.

Commission

PROVISIONAL AGENDA 2001

GUIDE TO UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS MACHINERY

remit

See provisional agenda for 2001.

Generally speaking, the Commission:

• considers the human rights situations in Member States
• considers particular human rights issues as they apply around the world
• receives the reports of its Special Rapporteurs and Working Groups
• draws up new human rights standards

established

1946

current members (state, date mandate expires – all mandates expire on 31 december)

latin american and caribbean states

• Argentina
  • 2002
• Brazil
  • 2002
• Colombia
  • 2001
• Costa-Rica
  • 2003
• Cuba
  • 2003
• Ecuador
  • 2002
• Guatemala
  • 2003
• Mexico
  • 2001
• Peru
  • 2003
• Uruguay
  • 2003
• Venezuela
  • 2003

western european and other states

• Belgium
  • 2003
• Canada
  • 2003
• France
  • 2001
• Germany
  • 2002
• Italy
  • 2002
• Norway
  • 2001
• Portugal
  • 2002
• Spain
  • 2002
• United Kingdom
  • 2003
• United States
  • 2001

african states

• Algeria
  • 2003
• Burundi
  • 2002
• Cameroon
  • 2003
• Congo-Kinshasa
  • 2003
• Kenya
  • 2003
• Liberia
  • 2001
• Libya
  • 2003
• Madagascar
  • 2001
• Mauritius
  • 2001
• Niger
  • 2001
• Nigeria
  • 2002
• Senegal
  • 2003
• South Africa
  • 2003
• Swaziland
  • 2002
• Zambia
  • 2002

asian-pacific states

• China
  • 2002
• India
  • 2003
• Indonesia
  • 2002
• Japan
  • 2002
• Malaysia
  • 2003
• Pakistan
  • 2001
• Qatar
  • 2001
• Saudi Arabia
  • 2003
• South Korea
  • 2001
• Syria
  • 2003
• Thailand
  • 2003
• Viet Nam
  • 2003

eastern european states

• Czech Republic
  • 2002
• Latvia
  • 2001
• Poland
  • 2003
• Romania
  • 2001
• Russian Federation
  • 2003

reports to

ECOSOC

meets

Annually in Geneva for 6 weeks. It will meet from 18 March to 26 April 2002.

un address

Office of the

High Commissioner for Human Rights

Palais des

Nations

United Nations

8 -14 Avenue de la

Paix

1211 Geneva 10

Switzerland

submissions by

December - only NGOs with consultative status have access, see the human rights machinery of the un

secretarIAT

Ms María Francísca IZE-CHARRIN Mr Guennadi LEBAKINE

(Also, each Special Rapporteur and Working Group has its own Assistant or Secretary - see relevant table)

room number

1-037

1-053

telephone

00 41 22 917 9260

00 41 22 917 9328

fax

00 41 22 917 9011

E-MAIL

mfize-charrin.hchr@unog.ch

glebakine.hchr@unog.ch

Sub Commissions

PROVISIONAL AGENDA 2001

remit

See provisional agenda for 2001. Generally speaking, the Sub-Commission:

• initiates substantive human rights studies
• receives the reports of its Special Rapporteurs and Working Groups
• draws up new human rights standards.
• identifies violations of human rights throughout the world. There is some overlap with the work of the Commission, for which the Sub-Commission acts as a think-tank, but the Sub-Commission, in some capacities, has functioned as an autonomous body.

established

1947

current members (name, country of origin, date mandate expires)

• Mr Miguel ALFONSO MARTÍNEZ&Mr Juan Antonio Fernández Palacios (Cuba 2004)
• Mr José BENGOA&Mr Alejandro Enrique Salinas Rivera (Chile 2002)
• Ms Erica-Irene DAES&Ms Kalliopi Koufa(Greece 2002)
• Mr Asbjørn Eide&Mr Jan Helgesen(Norway 2004)
• Mr FAN Guoxiang(China 2002)
• Mr Héctor FIX-ZAMUDIO&Mr Alonso Gómez-Robledo Verduzco(Mexico 2002)
• Mr Rajendra Kalidas Wimala GOONESEKERE&Ms Deepika Udagama (Sri Lanka 2002)
• Mr El Hadji GUISSÉ(Senegal 2002)
• Ms Françoise Jane HAMPSON&Ms Helena Cook (UK 2002)
• Mr Louis JOINET&Mr Emmanuel Decaux (France 2002)
• Ms Iulia Antoanella MOTOC&Ms Victoria Sandru-Popescu (Romania 2004)
• Mr Stanislav OGURTSOV(Belarus 2004)
• Mr Joseph OLOKA-ONYANGO (Uganda 2002)
• Mr Soo Gil PARK&Ms Chin Sung Chung (Rep of Korea 2004)
• Mr Paulo Sérgio PINHEIRO&Ms Marília Sardenberg Zelner Gonçalves (Brazil 2002)
• Mr Godfrey Bayour PREWARE&Ms Christy Ezim Mbonu (Nigeria 2004)
• Mr Teimuraz RAMISHVILI&Mr Vladimir Kartashkin Russian Federation 2002)
• Mr Manuel RODRÍGUEZ CUADROS(Peru 2004)
• Mr Yeung Kam Yeung SIK YEUN(Mauritius 2002)
• Mr Soli Jehangir SORABJEE(India 2002)
• Mr Fried VAN HOOF&Ms Lammy Betten(Netherlands 2004)
• Ms Halima Embarek WARZAZI(Morocco 2004)
• Mr David WEISSBRODT&Ms Barbara Frey (USA 2004)
• Mr Fisseha YIMER (Ethiopia 2004)
• Mr Yozo YOKOTA&Ms Yoshiko Terao (Japan 2004)
• Ms Leila&ZERROUGUI (Algeria 2004)

how nominated

Independent experts nominated by Member States

how elected

Elected by the Commission on Human Rights for a period of 4 years. Half the Sub-Commission stands down every 2 years.

reports to

Commission on Human Rights

meets

Annually in Geneva for 3 weeks in August. It will meet from 30th July to 17th August 2001

un address

Office of the

High Commissioner for Human Rights

Palais des Nations

United Nations

8 -14 Avenue de la Paix

1211 Geneva 10

Switzerland

submissions by

May - only NGOs with consultative status have access, see the human rights machinery of the un

secretarIAT

Mr Guennadi LEBAKINE Ms Y POC

(Also, each Special Rapporteur and Working Group has its own Assistant or Secretary – see relevant table)

ROOM NUMBER

1-053/1-043

telephone

00 41 22 917 9328 00 41 22 917 9337

fax

00 41 22 917 9011 00 41 22 917 9011

e-mail

glebakine.hchr@unog.ch

ypoc.hchr@unog.ch

other remarks

See the human rights machinery of the un

Commission on Woman

Remit

Generally speaking, the Commission:

• promotes women’s rights in the fields of politics, economics, social, education and civil rights
• makes recommendations to ECOSOC on urgent problems requiring immediate attention in relation to women’s rights
• promotes the implementation of the principle of equal rights between men and women
• is engaged in following up the Platform for Action developed by the Fourth World Conference on Women held in Beijing in 1995, which included:
  • women and poverty
  • education and training of women
  • women and health
  • violence against women
  • women and armed conflict
  • women and the economy
  • women in power and decision-making
  • institutional mechanisms for the advancement of women
  • human rights of women
  • women and the media
  • women and the environment
  • the girl child

Established

1946

Current members

(state, date mandate expires – all mandates expire on 31 december)

latin american and caribbean states

• Argentina
  • 2004
• Bolivia
  • 2001
• Brazil
  • 2003
• Chile
  • 2003
• Cuba
  • 2001
• Dominican
  • 2003
• Republic
  • 2002
• Mexico
  • 2004
• Peru
  • 2001
• St Lucia
  • 2002

western european and other states

• Belgium
  • 2003
• Denmark
  • 2004
• Germany
  • 2002
• Italy
  • 2004
• Netherlands
  • 2002
• Turkey
  • 2004
• United Kingdom
  • 2003
• United States
  • 2004

eastern european states

• Azerbaijan
  • 2001
• Croatia
  • 2002
• Lithuania
  • 2002
• Russian Federation

african states

• Benin
  • 2003
• Burundi
  • 2002
• Côte d’Ivoire
  • 2001
• Egypt
  • 2002
• Guinea
  • 2004
• Lesotho
  • 2001
• Malawi
  • 2003
• Rwanda
  • 2001
• Senegal
  • 2002
• Sudan
  • 2001
• Tunisia
  • 2004
• United Republic of Tanzania
  • 2004
• one vacancy

asian-pacific states

• China
  • 2003
• Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
  • 2002
• India
  • 2001
• Iran
  • 2004
• Japan
  • 2003
• Kyrgyzstan
  • 2001
• Malaysia
  • 2002
• Mongolia
  • 2004
• Pakistan
  • 2001
• Republic of Korea
  • 2001
• Sri Lanka

reports to

ECOSOC

meets

Annually in New York for 2 weeks, usually in early March

un address

Division for the

Advancement of Women

DC2-1204

United Nations

New York

NY 10017

USA

submissions by

October

secretary

The Secretariat

room number

DC2-1204

telephone

00 1 212 963 8034

fax

00 1 212 963 3463

E-MAIL

daw@un.org

'FURTHER INFORMATION

website:http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw

Committees

* Human Rights Committee * Committee against Torture * Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights * Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination * Committee on the Rights of the Child * Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

The Special Rapporteurs

Please choose from one of the above chapters.