 |
On this page... |
|
|
|
4.1
Introduction to the United Nations system
- 4.2 Reporting mechanisms within the United Nations
system - 4.3 Complaint procedures within the
United Nations system |
|
|
 |
The United Nations human rights mechanisms are all based at and run from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) at the UN Office in Geneva. There are two general points of which you should be aware if you wish to submit information to the UN mechanisms. One relates to languages, the other to distribution.
Languages: The UN has six official languages (English, French, Spanish, Russian, Chinese and Arabic), but only three working languages (English, French and Spanish) and, in practice, the most widely understood language within the OHCHR is English. The OHCHR, like many international organisations, has very limited resources. See Part III, Chapter 2.2.1, for suggestions concerning the language of submission of your communication in such circumstances.
It is worth knowing, also, that the UN has complicated rules about the translation of official documents which mean that in general a report will not be made public until it has been translated into all the official languages. This can sometimes create lengthy delays, and is often the reason for the failure of a document to appear in advance of the Commission on Human Rights sessions.
Distribution: If you want your communication to be sent to more than one procedure at the OHCHR, the most reliable approach is to send one copy to each yourself. There are two reasons for this: 1) like any large organisation, it can sometimes happen that information is not passed on from one procedure to another within the OHCHR; and 2) you will usually need to emphasise different points for the different procedures.
If you do not have the resources to send more than one copy, you should mark very clearly who you wish to receive the information, in order to guarantee that it is distributed to all of the procedures you have chosen. This will be particularly relevant where you want the information to be sent to several Special Rapporteurs (see Part III, Chapter 4.2.1.2.1). Some organisations who submit information to the OHCHR on a regular basis have prepared a standard form listing all the available procedures, and mark the ones which they would like to contact in any particular case.
The two principal bodies responsible for questions relating to human rights within the UN system are the Commission on Human Rights and the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. One of the ways in which they carry out their tasks is to create and supervise subsidiary procedures which assist them by carrying out studies, drafting and engaging in monitoring. Such subsidiary procedures usually report to the Commission or Sub-Commission on their activities. The procedures which follow below are of this type, created by the Commission on Human Rights, and dependent on it and the Sub-Commission for the purpose of any enforcement.
The Commission and Sub-Commission are both bodies which are especially suited to lobbying (see Part III, Chapter 7). In both cases, individual members or Member States can have a significant impact on the matters considered during their sessions, and lobbying can influence the issues which they are willing to support. This is a very effective way of drawing attention to human rights violations in a country. Only NGOs with consultative status have direct access to the Commission and Sub-Commission, but some of those are willing to assist other NGOs to attend sessions. See Appendix 2 for details of Geneva-based NGOs who may provide assistance.
Table 5: Basic Facts: UN Commission on Human Rights
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The UN Commission on Human Rights | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By two 1946 resolutions of the UN Economic and Social Council |
| When did it become operational? | 1947 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | The diplomatic representatives of 53 States |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | State representatives | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To consider questions relating to human rights, both in relation to Member States and from a general perspective, and to adopt measures with a view to improving the situation of human rights across the world. |
Table 6: Basic Facts: UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (formerly known as the Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities) | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By a 1947 UN Commission on Human Rights resolution under the authority of the Economic and Social Council |
| When did it become operational? | 1947 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | 26 |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | Independent experts elected in respect of specific states | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To undertake studies, make recommendations and draft standards relating to human rights, for the purpose of referring them to the Commission on Human Rights for further consideration and possible adoption. |
Note: The 1503 procedure is currently undergoing review, and it is possible that significant changes may be introduced in the near future.
The 1503 procedure takes its name from the number of the Commission on Human Rights resolution which created it. Its purpose is to examine complaints of gross violations of human rights in a country in order to identify patterns of violation. It is not the responsibility of a special body, but is implemented instead by the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and the Commission on Human Rights. The most notable characteristic of the procedure is that it is confidential and those who submit information are not informed of the outcome.
Table 7: Basic Chronology: 1503 Procedure
| BASIC CHRONOLOGY OF: 1503 Procedure | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 8: Basic Facts: 1503 Procedure
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The 1503 Procedure | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By a 1970 resolution of the UN Economic and Social Council |
| When did it become operational? | 1972 | |
| Composition: | The 1503 Procedure is implemented by the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and the UN Commission on Human Rights | |
| Purpose: | General objective | Confidential examination of complaints of gross violations of human rights in a country in order to identify patterns of violations. |
| Functions |
|
|
The effectiveness of the 1503 Procedure is clearly handicapped by its confidential nature. However, the practice, which the Commission on Human Rights has developed, of announcing the names of the states under consideration, and indicating the ones which have been dropped from consideration, goes some way towards improving this. It means at least that the fact that a state is under consideration becomes public knowledge.
Even within the constraints of the confidential procedure, a state can be made to account for and respond to allegations. As an incidental result of the procedure, the mere transmission of a complaint to a Government may motivate it to investigate and rectify the situation complained of, or may prompt it to suspend or terminate a practice, in order to avoid drawing attention to itself and discourage referral of the complaint to the Sub-Commission. For those complaints and replies which do make their way past the Sub-Commission, the Commission identifies issues of concern during its consideration of 'situations', and might ask the states in question to make improvements. It might request answers to specific questions. The Commission has the power to initiate a study or to set up an ad-hoc investigatory body with the express consent of the Government concerned but, over the years, it has developed its own ways of dealing with serious cases by appointing an independent expert who carries out field missions and submits a confidential report to the Commission at its next session.
In exceptionally serious cases, the Commission on Human Rights may choose to transfer the situation to a public procedure. This may include the appointment of a Special Rapporteur. (see Part III, Chapter 4.2.1.2)
The 1503 Procedure can be used to:
It is not suitable if you wish to:
A communication to the 1503 Procedure must:
A communication to the 1503 Procedure must not:
The 1503 procedure is designed to identify and follow up on "situations which appear to reveal a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights".
This means that the following considerations should be taken into account when preparing a communication under 1503:
When setting out your account of each allegation, you should follow the guidelines set out in Part III, Chapter 2.2.2, for the content of a standard communication as much as possible, but in addition, you should:
The name of the author of the communication will be deleted for transmission to the Government unless the author has no objection to his or her name being divulged. The confidentiality of the procedure means that no case under consideration is ever made public.
As the procedure is confidential, you will not receive any feedback about the content of your submission or of any action taken. You will, however, receive an acknowledgement that the submission has been dealt with under the procedure.
| Complaints will not be accepted if they concern a state: | Complaints will be accepted if they concern a state: |
|
|
The special procedures of the UN Commission on Human Rights are set up to monitor either specific subject-areas on a world-wide scale, or particular countries in relation to the full range of human rights. They are most commonly known as special rapporteurs or working groups, but other names include independent experts and special representatives. They are created by resolution in response to situations which are considered to be of sufficient concern to require an in-depth study. The procedures report publicly to the Commission on Human Rights each year, and some also report to the UN General Assembly.
Each procedure has its own slightly different working methods, but they are appointed in the same way, the basic considerations are the same with respect to preparing a communication, and all of the general principles discussed above in relation to writing to UN mechanisms also apply. The one you are most likely to wish to use in the context of torture allegations is the Special Rapporteur on Torture, who will therefore be used as the basic example. It is important to remember, however, that he is only one of a number of special procedures to which allegations of torture may be sent.
All thematic procedures should be approached in a similar way to that described below in relation to the Special Rapporteur on Torture. The important point to remember is that the different thematic mechanisms are not mutually exclusive, and may make either joint or separate interventions in connection with the same allegation.
In general, where your allegation concerns treatment which appears to amount to torture or ill-treatment, you should send it to the Special Rapporteur on Torture, but where the facts reveal other possible human rights abuses as well, you should also try to send it to all other relevant special procedures, or to indicate on your letter to which special procedures you would like it distributed. Action by more than one rapporteur or working group will often carry more weight and is likely to influence a state even more than where only one procedure expresses concern.
An example of an allegation which could be distributed to more than one procedure would be the violent arrest and detention of a female journalist by state officials on account of her journalistic activities, including rape and beating with truncheons at the time of arrest. Depending on the degree of detail available and the particular circumstances, this could potentially motivate action by the Special Rapporteurs on Torture, Violence Against Women and Freedom of Expression, as well as the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
It is also possible that a case on which the Special Rapporteur on Torture decides he cannot take action is one which another special procedure can in fact pursue. It is important not to focus exclusively on one procedure where others may also be competent. For example, where the treatment experienced by a detainee is not considered severe enough for the Special Rapporteur on Torture to intervene, the facts may still reveal a case of arbitrary detention which the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention can follow up. As the Special Rapporteur on Torture must decide each case on its own facts, it is difficult to predict with certainty if he will be able to take action in a particular case - it is therefore better to maximise the chance that the allegation will be followed up by making sure that it reaches any procedure which may be competent to do so, rather than limiting the communication to one mechanism.
As the thematic procedures are dependent on the Commission on Human Rights for their mandates, it is possible for a particular Special Rapporteur or Working Group to be discontinued or a new one created from one year to the next The table on the following page sets out the relevant thematic procedures in existence at the time of writing, along with any particular points of note.
Table 9: Relevant Thematic Procedures of the UN Commission on Human Rights
| Thematic Procedure: | Comments: |
| WG on arbitrary detention | You must explain why you think the detention is arbitrary. The WG interprets this as meaning detention which 1) does not have a legal basis; 2) is a response to the exercise of fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression (e.g. the arrest of a journalist for the exercise of his profession); or 3) is rendered arbitrary because due process guarantees are not observed (e.g. if someone is not brought promptly before a judge). It is not enough to consider that the detention is 'unfair'. The WG will not normally examine a case once the individual has been released, unless it concerns a question of principle. |
| WG on enforced or involuntary disappearances | The WG acts only in clearly identified individual cases. If the person or organisation submitting the information is not a relative but is acting directly or indirectly upon the family's request, he or it is required to maintain contact with the family at all times as any replies received are for the information of the relatives only. You should indicate if you wish your communication to be confidential. |
| SR on extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary executions | The SR can take action in cases where the following result from the actions of state officials or groups co-operating with or tolerated by the Government: 1) the death penalty, where there has been an unfair trial, a breach of right to appeal, or it involves a minor, a mentally retarded or insane person, a pregnant woman or a recent mother; 2) death threats or imminent risk of extra-judicial execution; 3) deaths in custody owing to torture, neglect, use of force, or life-threatening conditions of detention; 4) deaths resulting from unnecessary or disproportionate use of force; 5) deaths in violation of ILAC; 6) expulsion to a country where there is a risk to life; 7) genocide; 8) a breach of the obligation to investigate, bring perpetrators to justice and provide adequate compensation. You should indicate if the information is confidential. |
| SR on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression | The SR's areas of interest include: persons exercising/promoting the exercise of the right, including professionals in the field of information; political opposition parties and trade union activists; the media (print and broadcast), including any threats to their independence; publishers and performers in other media; human rights defenders; obstacles to women's right to be heard; obstacles to access to information. You should indicate if you wish your communication to be confidential. |
| SR on the independence of judges and lawyers | Information can be received about judges, lawyers and court officials. The SR is essentially concerned with safeguards and the proper functioning of the justice system. |
| SR on the question of torture | See below. |
| SR on violence against women | The SR examines cases of violence against women on account of their gender - your communication must indicate why you believe that the woman involved was targeted because of her gender. A special feature of this mandate is that it looks at violence not only by state officials, but also where it is condoned by the state in the community and within the family. With respect to general information, you should note that the SR is particularly interested in examples of good practice which can be used as a basis for recommendations in other states. Communications are confidential. |
| Other relevant thematic procedures
are:
SR on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography; SRSG on children in armed conflict; SRSG on internally displaced persons; SR on the human rights of migrants; SR on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance; SR on the question of religious intolerance. |
|
KEY: SR = Special Rapporteur; SRSG = Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General; WG = Working Group
Table 10: Basic Facts: UN Special Rapporteur on Torture
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The UN Special Rapporteur On Torture | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By a resolution of the UN Commission on Human Rights |
| When did it become operational? | 1985 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | 1 |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | Independent expert | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To monitor and report to the Commission on Human Rights on the practice of torture world-wide |
| Functions |
|
|
The job of the Special Rapporteur is to present to the Commission on Human Rights as accurate a picture as possible of the practice of torture throughout the world. In order to do this, he relies on information received from a variety of sources, including NGOs, individuals and governments themselves. On the basis of this information he:
Dialogue:
The Special Rapporteur's dialogue with a Government can begin in one of two ways. If he believes that allegations he has received are credible, he will either transmit an urgent appeal or raise the allegation in a standard communication.
The urgent appeal procedure is designed to respond urgently to information reporting that an individual may be at risk of torture and is used to prevent possible incidents of torture. It will therefore be used only where information is very recent. It is a non-accusatory procedure, which means that it merely asks the Government to take steps to make sure that the person is not tortured, without adopting any position on whether or not the fear of torture might be justified.
Standard communications are transmitted to governments on a periodic basis and contain both allegations concerning individual cases (individual allegations) and those concerning general trends, patterns and special factors contributing to the practice of torture in a country (general allegations).
These communications are transmitted to the Government against which the allegations have been made, in order to give that Government an opportunity to comment on them. Depending on the response received from the Government, the Special Rapporteur may inquire further or make recommendations. All communications sent and received throughout the year are referred to in an annual report, along with further recommendations and general comments as appropriate, including recommendations about measures which should be taken in order to eradicate torture.
Fact-finding:
The Special Rapporteur on Torture also carries out fact-finding visits to obtain first-hand information. He does not have a right to visit any country of his choice, but must first obtain an invitation from the Government to carry out a visit. During the visit, the Special Rapporteur meets with Government officials, NGO representatives and alleged victims, as well as visiting places of detention such as prisons and police stations. His objective is to get a good sense of what the actual situation on the ground is like. Following the visit, he produces a report in which he presents the conclusions he has reached about the scope of the problem, or lack of it, in that country, and makes recommendations about any measures which could be taken to improve the situation.
The power of the Special Rapporteur lies with the Commission on Human Rights, and the public nature of the procedure. His conclusions are not legally binding and he has no powers of enforcement. Nonetheless, not many states are immune to public condemnation, and the publicity of his findings creates pressure for states to co-operate by introducing reforms or otherwise implementing his recommendations.
If you are seeking action in relation to a general situation, he can be used to:
If you are seeking action in relation to an individual case, he can be used to:
He cannot:
=> where torture has not yet occurred, the relevant date, time and location will generally be those of the taking into custody
=> you must show that there is a risk that torture may occur. This means that you need to emphasise the factors which show that this risk exists: e.g. the incommunicado or unacknowledged nature of the person's detention; the fact that this same person was tortured when arrested on a previous occasion; knowledge that persons arrested by this particular branch of the police are usually tortured, or that members of a particular group to which this person belongs are often tortured when arrested.
=> Widespread use of a particular method of torture e.g. electric shocks
=> A law permitting the extended use of fetters on prisoners
=> A law permitting incommunicado detention for a long period
=> Consistent reports that persons prosecuted for torture are never convicted
=> Consistent reports that a specific police station or branch of the security forces practices torture
=> Consistent reports that members of a particular ethnic group are more likely to be tortured than others
=> Consistent reports that prisoners with life-threatening illnesses are refused medical treatment
In order for the Special Rapporteur to take action in an individual case, it is necessary to transmit the name of the alleged victim or victims to the Government concerned. The name of the alleged victim will also become known to the public once it is recorded in the annual report of the Special Rapporteur. If you specify that you do not wish the name or names to be made known to the Government, it will not be possible to investigate the case itself, but it may provide a basis for general allegations in combination with other information. The name of the source of the allegation is never revealed, either in the communication to the Government, or in the annual report.
You will not receive any acknowledgement of receipt of your submission. If your allegations are transmitted to the Government, any reply received from the Government will normally be sent to you in order to give you an opportunity to comment on its content. All cases which are transmitted to governments are summarised in the Special Rapporteur's annual report to the Commission on Human Rights, so this will also tell you if any action was taken on the basis of your allegations.
In addition to thematic rapporteurs and working groups, the Commission on Human Rights also appoints country-specific rapporteurs (or independent experts or special representatives) whose task is to report on the full range of human rights, including torture and inhuman treatment, in the specific country for which they are responsible. In general, such rapporteurs will be appointed in relation to countries which have particularly serious human rights situations, including those caused by war or internal conflict. The singling out of a country for such scrutiny is inevitably a politically sensitive matter, however, and there must be sufficient agreement among states at the Commission on Human Rights for a country-specific rapporteur to be created.
Like the thematic rapporteurs, the objective of country-specific rapporteurs is to paint an accurate picture of a situation, but instead of it being a world-wide portrait of a specific phenomenon, it should be a far more comprehensive report on the human rights situation in a single country. Allegations of torture and inhuman treatment are of major relevance to such a rapporteur, who needs to be able to report on the phenomenon in the context of his or her country report. Where a special rapporteur exists for the country about which you wish to submit an allegation of torture, therefore, he or she should be included on the list of procedures to which the allegation should be circulated. So, for example, if the arrest and detention of the female journalist mentioned previously took place in a country for which there is a special rapporteur, e.g. Myanmar or Equatorial Guinea or Iran, he or she should also receive the information.
At the time of writing, country-specific mandates existed in relation to:
Table 11: Country Rapporteurs of the UN Commission on Human Rights (1999)
| Afghanistan (SR) Burundi (SR) Cambodia (SRSG) Cyprus (SG) Democratic Republic of Congo (SR) East Timor (SG) |
Equatorial Guinea (SRCHR) Former Yugoslavia: Kosovo (SG) Haiti (IE) Iran, Islamic Republic of (SRCHR) Iraq (SR) Myanmar (SR) |
Occupied Arab Territories (SG,
SR, & Special Committee) Rwanda (SRCHR) Somalia (IE) Sudan (SR) |
KEY: SR = Special Rapporteur; SRSG = Special Representative of the Secretary General; SRCHR = Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights; IE = Independent Expert
The United Nations treaty bodies were created to supervise the implementation by States Parties of their obligations under a number of UN human rights treaties. The principal committees to which allegations of torture may be made are the following:
The most relevant for the purpose of torture-related material are the CAT, which focuses solely on the subject of torture, and the HRC, which is a well-established body dealing with a range of human rights including torture. However, the other committees are very important where torture allegations concern certain identifiable categories of persons, namely children, women and racial groups.
The working methods of each of these bodies are very similar. All have the power to examine and comment on state reports, and most are also able to receive individual complaints, or else are in the process of developing such a procedure.
Table 12: Basic Facts: Committee Against Torture
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The Committee Against Torture | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By the 1984 UN Convention Against Torture |
| When did it become operational? | 1988 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | 10 |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | Independent experts | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To ensure that states respect their obligations under this treaty to prevent and punish torture. |
| Functions |
|
|
The Committee is responsible for monitoring the extent to which states respect their obligations to implement the Convention Against Torture, i.e. to prevent, prohibit and punish torture. The main way in which it does this is through:
In addition, the Committee can:
The inquiry procedure is a confidential procedure to investigate allegations of a systematic practice of torture in a State Party to the Convention. An inquiry can be initiated when 'reliable information' is received which 'appears to contain well-founded indications that torture is being systematically practised'. The bulk of this information will originate from NGOs, and it is possible to expressly request an inquiry if you think you have enough information to establish a systematic practice, although you should not expect to be told if your request has been acted upon. If a State Party agrees, the inquiry can involve a fact-finding visit to the country. In such cases, the Committee will make contact with local NGOs, on the understanding that they will maintain the highest respect for the confidential nature of the visit.
Ultimately, the Committee will reach a conclusion as to whether or not a systematic practice of torture exists. This conclusion, along with any appropriate recommendations, will be transmitted to the State Party. The proceedings remain confidential, but once they have been concluded, the Committee may, following consultation with the State Party, decide to include a summary account of their results in its annual report.
See Part III, Chapter 2.3, for suggestions about what can be achieved in the context of the state reporting procedure.
The strength of the inquiry procedure, in spite of its confidential nature, is the very negative implications of such an inquiry being initiated against a country. It will only happen in cases where the situation is considered extremely serious, and for a state to be identified as tolerating a systematic practice of torture is a very weighty penalty. Although the proceedings remain confidential throughout the inquiry, the possibility exists nonetheless to make a summary of the findings public, and this includes an affirmative finding that a systematic practice exists. This sanction has so far been used in two cases. Even in cases where findings are not made public by the Committee, or are not made public until long after the inquiry has taken place, the procedure can be useful. The mere fact that the Committee has the possibility of making its findings public may create pressure for a State to take steps to amend legislation or prevent certain practices, in order to discourage the Committee from following this course of action.
See Part III, Chapter 2.3.3, for general guidelines on what a communication in the context of the state reporting procedure should contain.
The Convention Against Torture creates very specific obligations, many of which States Parties are required to implement through legislative and other measures. A State Party will generally set out in a very comprehensive manner the formal legal situation in relation to each of these obligations. Your principal objective should be to describe what actually happens in practice, giving as many examples as possible. Never simply state that something is ineffective without explaining why.
E.g.:
Where the state has taken legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures
to prevent acts of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, do they actually
prevent such acts in practice? Give examples of where they have worked/not worked.
If torture is a criminal offence under the law, are any officials actually prosecuted or convicted under this law and what kind of penalties do they receive? Give examples of any prosecutions and decisions not to prosecute, as well as any convictions and penalties.
Does the state investigate allegations of torture and ill-treatment, and if it does, what is the result of such investigations? E.g. Do public prosecutors take them seriously? Do they ever result in the perpetrator being prosecuted? What kind of methods are used to investigate?
Do victims of torture ever receive compensation or any other kind of redress? If compensation is granted, give examples of the amounts awarded.
Can an individual be convicted on the basis of a statement made as a result of torture? i.e. if a judge knows that a confession or other incriminating statement has been made under torture, can he still convict the person?
If you wish to request a confidential inquiry, your objective is two-fold: to demonstrate the existence of a systematic practice of torture in the country, and to explain the context, particularly the legal context.
Systematic practice: The Committee has formulated some general criteria which it considers to indicate that a systematic practice is taking place. It considers that torture is practised systematically when:
In addition, it considers that:
NGOs should provide information about a large number of incidents of torture, and be well-organised in their presentation of these incidents in order to use them to best demonstrate the systematic nature of the practice. This means that it is not enough to be reporting on a few isolated incidents - there must be a geographical concentration of incidents, or a multiplication of allegations linked to a specific law, for example.
Context: In order for the Committee to gain a sense of whether or not a systematic practice may exist in a country, it helps for them to familiarise themselves with the context, particularly the legal context. This is particularly important in helping the Committee to identify possible causes of a systematic practice, especially inadequate legislation. NGOs should provide information about any anti-terrorist laws which may be applicable in the country, and draw the Committee's attention to any laws which appear to be causing problems, for example any laws permitting the extension of incommunicado detention, or protecting officials from prosecution for torture.
Table 13: Basic Facts: Human Rights Committee
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The Human Rights Committee | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights |
| When did it become operational? | 1976 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | 18 |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | Independent experts | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To supervise the implementation by States of their obligations under this treaty |
| Functions |
|
|
The Committee is responsible for making sure that States Parties respect their obligations to respect and to ensure to all individuals the rights contained in the ICCPR, including the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 7) and the right of all persons deprived of their liberty to be treated with humanity and dignity (Article 10). It does this in two ways:
See Part III, Chapter 2.3, for a description of how the state reporting procedure works, suggestions as to what can be achieved in the context of the state reporting procedure, and what a communication should contain.
Table 14: Basic Facts: Committee on the Rights of the Child
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The Committee on the Rights of the Child | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child |
| When did it become operational? | 1991 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | 10 |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | Independent experts | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To supervise the implementation by States Parties of their obligations under the CRC |
| Functions |
Discussions are currently ongoing regarding the possibility of adopting a protocol to the CRC which would allow individual complaints. |
|
Table 15: Basic Facts : Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By the 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women |
| When did it become operational? | 1981 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | 23 |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | Independent experts | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To supervise the implementation by States Parties of their obligations under the CEDAW |
| Functions |
In early 1999, agreement was finally reached to establish an individual complaint procedure, but it had not yet become operational at the time of writing. |
|
Table 16: Basic Facts: Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
| BASIC FACTS ABOUT: The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination | ||
| Origin: | How was it created? | By the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination |
| When did it become operational? | 1969 | |
| Composition: | How many persons is it composed of? | 18 |
| Are these persons independent experts or state representatives? | Independent experts | |
| Purpose: | General objective | To supervise the implementation by States Parties of their obligations under the CERD |
| Functions |
|
|
Of these three committees, all currently function principally through the state reporting procedure. The CERD is the only one which presently has an operational individual complaint procedure (see Part III, Chapter 4.3.3), but it is probable that both the CRC and the CEDAW will do so also within a fairly short period of time.
You should refer to Part III, Chapter 2.3, for a description of how the state reporting procedure works, suggestions as to what can be achieved through such a procedure and guidelines on how to prepare a submission in the context of this procedure.
Table 17: Basic Chronology of Individual Complaint Procedure: CAT
| BASIC CHRONOLOGY OF: Individual Complaint Procedure - CAT | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
See Part III, Chapter 4.2.2.1, for 'Basic Facts: The Committee Against Torture'.
See Part III, Chapter 3.2, regarding the kind of complaints which can be examined by individual complaint procedures in general.
The Convention Against Torture creates obligations on States Parties not only not to torture, but also to take preventive and remedial steps against torture. This means that you can bring a complaint against a State Party not only because of the incident of torture itself, but also in connection with any of the State Party's other obligations under the Convention. The principal obligations include (see Articles 2 - 16 of UNCAT for complete list):
A communication will be declared inadmissible if:
Table 18: Practicalities of Using Individual Complaint Procedure: CAT
| PRACTICALITIES OF USING THE INDIVIDUAL COMPLAINT PROCEDURE: UN Convention Against Torture | |
| Who can bring a case under this procedure? | Any individual who claims to be a victim of a violation of the Convention, his or her relatives, a designated representative, or others where the victim is unable to make the submission in person and the author of the communication can justify taking action on the victim's behalf. |
| Is there a time limit for bringing an application? | No, but the alleged violation must have occurred after the State Party's declaration accepting the procedure has come into force. |
| Can you bring a case under this procedure if you have already brought one under another procedure concerning the same set of facts? | No |
| Do you need legal representation? | No |
| Is financial assistance available? | No |
| Are amicus briefs accepted? | Not provided for but not excluded |
| Who will know about the communication? | The author of the communication and his or her representative, the Committee and its Secretariat, and the State Party. The identity of the author is only made public if the Committee finds that a violation has occurred, and may remain confidential at the request of the author even in such cases. |
| How long does the procedure take? | Normally about one year, though can be longer. |
| What measures, if any, can the mechanism take to assist it in reaching a decision? e.g. fact-finding hearings; on-site visits; written pleadings; oral hearings; other. | Written pleadings; oral hearings. |
| Are provisional or urgent measures available? | Yes |
See Part III, Chapter 4.2.2.2, for 'Basic Facts: The Human Rights Committee'.
The basic chronology for the individual complaint procedure of the Human Rights Committee is the same as that for the CAT. See Part III, Chapter 4.3.1.
See Part III, Chapter 3.2, for the kind of complaints which can be examined.
A communication will be declared inadmissible if:
Table 19: Practicalities of Using Individual Complaint Procedure: Optional Protocol to the ICCPR
| PRACTICALITIES OF USING THE INDIVIDUAL COMPLAINT PROCEDURE: Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights | |
| Who can bring a case under this procedure? | Individuals claiming to be victims of a violation of the ICCPR. Communications are accepted from close family, or from an authorised representative (There must be a letter of authorisation from the victim or his or her family). An explanation should be given where victims do not take action themselves. |
| Is there a time limit for bringing an application? | No, but where there is no justification for a long delay, this may lead the Committee to declare the case inadmissible. |
| Can you bring a case under this procedure if you have already brought one under another procedure concerning the same set of facts? | Yes, but only if the State Party concerned has not made a reservation in this respect. |
| Do you need legal representation? | No |
| Is financial assistance available? | No |
| Are amicus briefs accepted? | No |
| Who will know about the communication? | The State Party will always be informed of the identity of the complainant, in order for it to reply to the allegations, but the Committee will not make the applicant's name public if asked not to do so. The complainant and the State Party concerned are entitled to publish information concerning the procedure, unless there is a request from the complainant or State Party for confidentiality. |
| What measures, if any, can the mechanism take to assist it in reaching a decision? | The whole procedure is based on written pleadings from the parties - there is no possibility of other measures. |
| How long does the procedure take? | Normally between two and five years, although this may be reduced to one year in urgent cases. |
| Are provisional or urgent measures available? | Yes, but it is quite rare for the Committee to exercise this option |
See Part III, Chapter 4.2.2.3, for 'Basic Facts: The Committee on the Rights of the Child', 'Basic Facts: The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women', and 'Basic Facts: The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination'.
Only the CERD Committee currently examines individual complaints, but this function has recently been approved for the CEDAW Committee and is also under discussion in relation to the CRC.
The basic chronology for the individual complaint procedure of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is the same as that for the CAT. See Part III, Chapter 4.3.1.
See Part III, Chapter 3.2, for the kind of complaints which can be examined.
A communication will be declared inadmissible if:
Table 20: Practicalities of Using Individual Complaint Procedure: CERD
| PRACTICALITIES OF USING THE INDIVIDUAL COMPLAINT PROCEDURE: UN Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination | |
| Who can bring a case under this procedure? | An individual claiming to be a victim of a violation of the rights in the CERD. The communication should generally be submitted by the victim him or herself or by a family member or designated representative, but may exceptionally be accepted from a third party on behalf of the alleged victim where the latter cannot act in person and the third party can justify taking action. |
| Is there a time limit for bringing an application? | Within six months of the exhaustion of domestic remedies except in verifiable exceptional circumstances |
| Can you bring a case under this procedure if you have already brought one under another procedure concerning the same set of facts? | Yes |
| Do you need legal representation? | No |
| Is financial assistance available? | No |
| Are amicus briefs accepted? | Not provided for but not excluded |
| Who will know about the communication? | The identity of the individual is not revealed without his or her express consent. |
| How long does the procedure take? | Usually 1-3 years |
| What measures, if any, can the mechanism take to assist it in reaching a decision? e.g. fact-finding hearings; on-site visits; written pleadings; oral hearings; other. | Written pleadings; oral hearings; request for relevant documentation from UN bodies and specialised agencies. |
| Are provisional or urgent measures available? | Yes |
|
|
On this page... | top of page | |
|
4.1
Introduction to the United Nations system
- 4.2 Reporting mechanisms within the United Nations
system - 4.3 Complaint procedures within the United
Nations system |
|
|
  |
