
Table 33: Comparative Evaluation I - CAT, HRC and CERD (General)
|
CAT |
HRC |
CERD |
|||||
|
SR |
IP |
IC |
SR |
IC |
SR |
IC |
|
| To what extent is the mechanism suited to: | |||||||
| => Drawing attention to a situation? |
|||||||
|
Y |
N |
N |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
|
Y |
may be |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
N |
yes |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
- |
may be |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
|||||||
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
- |
N |
- |
|
varies |
Y |
insufficient case-law |
varies |
- |
varies |
- |
|
next report |
no, but could do so on a case by case basis |
no, but not excluded |
being developed |
- |
next report |
- |
|
N |
may publish summary of results |
N |
N |
- |
N |
- |
=> Seeking an individual remedy? |
|||||||
|
From a reporting mechanism: |
|||||||
|
Publicity of an individual case in the context of a general situation |
|||||||
|
Preventing deportation |
|||||||
|
N |
yes, though does not do so often |
N |
N |
|||
|
_ |
N |
_ |
_ |
|||
|
_ |
Y |
_ |
_ |
|||
|
- |
N |
N |
N |
|||
|
- |
Y |
N |
N |
|||
|
- |
N |
|||||
|
- |
Y |
|||||
Key: CAT = Committee Against Torture; HRC = Human Rights Committee; CERD = Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination; SR = State reporting procedure; IP = Inquiry procedure; IC = Individual complaint procedure; Y = Yes; N = No
Table 34: Comparative Evaluation II - CRC, CEDAW, SR-CHR and 1503 (General)
|
CRC |
CEDAW |
SR-CHR |
1503 |
||
|
SR |
SR |
COM |
FF
|
COM |
|
| To what extent is the mechanism suited to: | |||||
=> Drawing attention to a situation? |
|||||
|
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
no, but the fact that a state is under consideration is public |
|
N |
N |
N |
Y |
yes, but does not usually exercise this option |
|
- |
- |
- |
Y |
N |
=> Seeking changes in a general situation? |
|||||
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
yes, but on a confidential basis |
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
varies |
varies |
varies |
often |
varies |
|
next report |
next report |
can continue dialogue |
follow-up dialogue |
can keep state under consideration until the following year |
|
N |
N |
N |
can make statement when presenting report to UNCHR |
may transfer to a public procedure. This may include appointing a Special Rapporteur |
|
|
|||||
|
From a reporting mechanism: |
|||||
|
Publicity of an individual case in the context of a general situation |
|||||
|
Prevent deportation |
|||||
|
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
|
|
_ |
_ |
N |
N |
|
|
_ |
_ |
varies |
regularly |
|
|
N |
N |
opportunity for source to comment on state reply |
can continue dialogue |
|
|
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
|
|
- |
- |
N |
N |
|
|
- |
- |
regularly |
regularly |
|
Key: CRC = Committee on the Rights of the Child; CEDAW = Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women; 1503 = 1503 Procedure; SR-CHR = Special Rapporteurs/Working Groups/Independent Experts/Special Representatives of the UN Commission on Human Rights; SR = State reporting procedure; FF = Fact-finding; COM = Communication procedure; Y = Yes; N = No
Table 35: Comparative Evaluation III - CPT, IACN and IACT (General)
|
CPT |
IACN |
IACT |
||
|
FF |
FF |
IC |
IC |
|
| To what extent is the mechanism suited to: | ||||
=> Drawing attention to a situation? |
||||
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
see fact-finding |
see fact-finding |
not automatically |
Y |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
only if state agrees to publication: in practice most states have |
usually |
not automatically |
referred to in judgment |
=> Seeking changes in a general situation? |
||||
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
N |
N |
N |
Y |
|
Y |
varies |
varies |
Y |
|
follow-up visits and ongoing dialogue |
follow-up visits |
may ask to be informed of steps taken |
may ask to be informed of steps taken |
|
public statement |
N |
public report/ refer to court |
N |
| => Seeking an individual remedy? |
||||
| From a reporting mechanism: | ||||
| Publicity of an individual case in the context of a general situation | ||||
| Prevent deportation | ||||
|
Y |
Y |
||
|
N |
N |
||
|
Y |
varies |
||
|
can happen |
may enquire about case |
||
|
can happen |
Y |
||
|
N |
N |
||
|
Y |
varies |
||
Key: CPT = European Committee for the Prevention of Torture; IACN = Inter-American Commission on Human Rights; IACT = Inter-American Court of Human Rights; FF = Fact-finding; IC = Individual complaint procedure; Y = Yes; N = No
Table 36: Comparative Evaluation IV - ACNHR and SRP (General)
|
ACNHR |
SRP |
||||
|
SR |
FF/IDS |
IC
|
FF |
COM |
|
| To what extent is the mechanism suited to: | |||||
=> Drawing attention to a situation? |
|||||
|
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Y |
usually |
attached to annual report of ACHPR |
Y |
Y |
|
- |
Y |
in relation to groups of complaints |
Y |
Y |
|
- |
usually, but there can be long delays |
can be |
yes but can be delay in publication |
yes but can be delay in publication |
=> Seeking changes in a general situation? |
|||||
|
Y |
Y |
yes if relates to a 'situation' |
Y |
yes if relates to a 'situation' |
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
sometimes |
sometimes |
sometimes |
sometimes |
sometimes |
|
next state report |
may keep the item on the agenda |
possibly through the OAU |
follow-up missions |
not excluded |
|
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
=> Seeking an individual remedy? |
|||||
| From a reporting mechanism: | |||||
| Publicity of an individual case in the context of a general situation | |||||
| Prevent deportation | |||||
|
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
|
- |
N |
N |
N |
|
|
- |
sometimes |
sometimes |
sometimes |
|
|
- |
N |
N |
not excluded |
|
|
- |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
|
- |
N |
N |
N |
|
|
- |
sometimes |
sometimes |
sometimes |
|
Key: ACNHR = African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights; SRP = Special Rapporteur on Prisons and Conditions of Detention in Africa; SR = State reporting procedure; FF = Fact-finding; IDS = In-depth study; IC = Individual complaint procedure; COM = Communication procedure; Y = Yes; N = No
Table 37: Comparative Evaluation IV - CAT, HRC and CERD (Individual Complaint Procedure)
|
CAT |
HRC |
CERD |
|
| To what extent is the mechanism suited to | |||
| => Seeking an individual remedy? |
|||
| From a complaint procedure: | |||
| Legal finding of violation |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Prevent deportation |
Y |
Y |
potentially |
|
indication of action necessary to restore compliance |
indication of action necessary to restore compliance |
indication of action necessary to restore compliance |
|
N |
N |
N |
|
usually |
varies |
varies |
|
no, but may ask to be informed of any steps taken |
N |
N |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
N |
N |
N |
|
usually |
Y |
Y |
Key: CAT = Committee Against Torture; HRC: Human Rights Committee; CERD = Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
Table 38: Comparative Evaluation V - ECTHR, IACN, IACT and ACNHR (Individual Complaint Procedure)
|
ECTHR |
IACN |
IACT |
ACNHR |
|
| To what extent is the mechanism suited to | ||||
=> Seeking an individual remedy? |
||||
| From a complaint procedure: | ||||
| Legal finding of violation |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Prevent deportation |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
can include financial compensation |
- |
can include compensation and other less traditional remedies |
- |
|
Y |
N |
Y |
N |
|
Y |
varies |
Y |
sometimes |
|
may be taken up by the Committee of Ministers |
no, although the potential for referral to the Court or publication of the IACN's findings may motivate compliance |
may be pursued in the domestic courts |
N |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
N |
N |
Y |
N |
|
Y |
varies |
Y |
sometimes |
Key: ECTHR = European Court of Human Rights; IACN = Inter-American Commission on Human Rights; IACT = Inter-American Court of Human Rights; ACNHR = African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights