The Human Rights Committee this afternoon held its thirteenth informal meeting with States parties, discussing issues affecting its work such as the United Nations’ current liquidity crisis, the backlog of individual communications, and measures to improve its working methods, including the predictable review cycle and the digital uplift. Speakers also made comments on the conflict in Gaza.
Committee Chairperson Tania María Abdo Rocholl said the Committee had made progress in developing a predictable review calendar, implementing the simplified reporting procedure, grouping similar and repetitive cases submitted to the Committee under the First Optional Protocol, and advancing the use of technology. The Committee’s financial situation remained difficult in the context of the liquidity crisis. However, it was determined to fulfil its mandate. The Committee faced challenges of enormous proportions, but was resilient, and had the opportunity to be part of solutions that it hoped to find with States parties.
The three Vice-Chairs of the Committee described challenges facing the Committee and efforts to overcome them. They discussed the Committee’s efforts to adopt a default simplified reporting procedure, move to an eight-year predictable review cycle, harmonise working methods with other treaty bodies, and promote a digital uplift. They noted that the Committee’s backlog of individual communications was increasing. Currently, 1,338 cases were being monitored by the Committee, while 1,341 cases awaited consideration. The Committee was expediting the consideration of repetitive communications, making decisions on inadmissibility and classifying cases in groups outside of plenaries. There had also been notable work to digitalise the petitions procedure by introducing a digital submission portal for alleged victims and their representatives.
Ibrahim Salama, Chief of the Human Rights Treaties Branch, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the Human Rights Committee had the largest concentration of legal jurisprudence of all treaty bodies. The work of the Committee was sorely needed in the current context of geopolitical tension. The treaty body system continued to work through extrabudgetary resources, but this was not sustainable. This year, a decision would be made in the General Assembly on the revitalisation of the treaty bodies, and States needed to support this decision.
In the discussion, some States expressed their support for the Committee and the treaty bodies, describing them as the backbone of the United Nations human rights system. Some speakers said that the new working procedures allowed for improved engagement with the Committee. The proposed digital uplift would help to improve the Committee’s work, but the Committee needed to be mindful of the gaps in technological availability between States and of the needs of persons with disabilities, one speaker said. Some speakers expressed concern about the limitations on hybrid modalities for dialogues with the Committee. Remote meetings would improve the quality of dialogue with the Committee and other treaty bodies. One speaker called for treaty bodies to adhere to the texts of the treaties on which they were founded and to verify all information they used in assessing States parties. Some speakers spoke on the ongoing conflict in Gaza.
Speaking in the meeting were representatives of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as of Portugal, Paraguay, Morocco, Costa Rica, Egypt, Colombia, Spain, France, State of Palestine, Israel and Angola.
The Human Rights Committee’s one hundred and fortieth session is being held from 4 to 28 March 2024. All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s . Meeting summary releases can be found . The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the .
The Committee will next meet in public at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, 26 March, to discuss the adoption of its annual report.
Opening Statements by Committee Experts
TANIA MARÍA ABDO ROCHOLL, Committee Chairperson, said that at the thirty-fifth annual meeting of the Chairs of treaty bodies in New York in May 2023, the Chairs discussed the need for a mechanism to support the harmonisation of working methods. Concrete proposals were made, respecting the specificities of each Committee, and on addressing requests from States to avoid overlaps. The Committee had made progress in developing a predictable calendar, implementing the simplified reporting procedure, monitoring the use of time during dialogues, designating focal points for other Committees and other human rights protection systems, grouping similar and repetitive cases submitted to the Committee under the First Optional Protocol, and advancing the use of technology. Some of these changes were taken from suggestions made by States in past meetings.
This improvement of working methods was odd in the context of the liquidity crisis, which could affect the Committee’s work. However, the Committee was very aware of its mandate. It was assessing how to fulfil its responsibilities, seeking the least possible impact for the protection of human rights. The Committee was very encouraged by the high number of reports submitted by States parties, some of them after several years of delay. This was clearly an indication of the commitment of States parties to the realisation of their rights enshrined in the Covenant and to ensuring compliance with reporting obligations.
The treaty body system provided an objective and non-political assessment of human rights issues, along with guidance and technical support to States in the implementation of human rights reforms. Dialogues between the Committee and States parties were an important pillar of the entire United Nations human rights system. Ms. Abdo Rocholl expressed thanks to many States for the democratic way they had approached dialogues. Dialogues allowed States to evaluate their own situation with respect to the implementation of the Covenant. Supported by the Committee’s concluding observations, many States had generated very positive results in this regard. On certain occasions, the early detection of situations contrary to the Covenant prevented larger scale violations. The Committee did not always succeed in this regard, but when it did, Ms. Abdo Rocholl felt the potential of the system to promote change.
Amid the financial crisis, the Committee was concerned about the situation of multilingualism. One colleague reflected that, sadly, she had never been able to express herself in her language, even though it was an official language of the United Nations. The Committee always tried to keep its system accessible and in line with geographical balance, but was aware that it would not be able to sustain this position alone for much longer.
The financial situation remained difficult. However, the Committee was determined to fulfil its mandate. The human rights treaty bodies represented a professional and not a political platform for the protection and promotion of human rights, the importance, relevance and necessity of which had never been greater. The Committee faced challenges of enormous proportions, but was resilient, and had the opportunity to be part of solutions that it hoped to find with States parties.
JOSÉ MANUEL SANTOS PAIS, Committee Vice-Chair, said resolution 68/268 of 9 April 2014 encouraged the human rights treaty bodies to continue to enhance their efforts towards achieving greater efficiency, transparency, effectiveness and harmonisation. In 2009, the Committee decided to adopt a simplified reporting procedure for States to use when submitting their periodic reports under the Covenant. The Committee decided in July 2018 to make the simplified reporting procedure a permanent procedure. Most States parties had accepted the new simplified reporting procedure; only eight had opted out. The Committee also decided to move in 2020 to an eight-year predictable review cycle. The Committee had successfully engaged with long overdue States parties through the standard reporting procedure or, as a last resort, through lists of issues in the absence of the report.
The Committee had harmonised the structure of lists of issues prior to reporting and concluding observations. Concluding observations included a recommendation requesting the wide dissemination of the concluding observations, as well as a paragraph requesting that additional information be provided to the Committee within a specified deadline. The Committee had further adopted Guidelines on the follow-up review to States party reports. Recommendations targeted for follow-up were specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time bound.
The Committee spared no time or efforts to bring its work in line with resolution 68/268. It would continue the same efforts in the future, despite the current liquidity crisis. It hoped other stakeholders would also find ways to address current challenges by endorsing a new General Assembly resolution on the funding of the treaty bodies. Workload targets needed to be both inclusive of the current backlog and forward-looking.
KOBAUYAH TCHAMDJA KPATCHA, Committee Vice-Chair, said the Committee received communications submitted by individuals. It could not adopt decisions for all cases registered. In 2023, the Secretariat had to deal with an average of 3,600 correspondences per week, including 2,800 communications received from new authors. The cause of this increase was linked to armed conflicts and the current tendency of individuals to turn to the Committee.
An increasing number of communications included requests for interim protection measures. Such communications needed to be dealt with expeditiously. Approximately 30 per cent of the communications sent to the Committee included a request for interim measures. The Committee noted an increase in requests for interim measures in 2023, with 40 per cent of registered cases granted interim measures by the Committee. Fifty per cent of the Committee’s decisions related to findings of violations of the provisions of the Covenant.
Currently, 1,338 cases were being monitored by the Committee. It was expediting the consideration of repetitive communications, making decisions on inadmissibility and classifying cases in groups outside of plenaries. It currently had 1,341 cases awaiting consideration. The Committee and the Secretariat faced difficulties in registering, processing and adopting communications in a timely manner. The level of implementation of infringement decisions by States needed to be strengthened. The outdated digital system was also in urgent need of improvement.
CHANGROK SOH, Committee Vice-Chair, said the Committee had been advocating for digital transformation of its work processes for several years. A digital uplift could boost the productivity of day-to-day operations and make the work of the Committee more accessible to stakeholders. A digital transformation would enhance the Committee’s analytical capacity and elevate the work of the Committee through an enhanced digital presence.
There had been notable work to digitalise the petitions procedure, where important progress had been made by introducing a digital submission portal for alleged victims and their representatives, and by revamping the database of treaty body decisions. Nevertheless, results and operational improvements remained limited, especially in the critical area of case management. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights needed to step up its capacity significantly to deliver on this agenda with the required speed. In this regard, the Committee was very pleased to learn that the Office had now established a dedicated office to lead the organization-wide digital transformation effort. The Committee reiterated its full support to the Office’s digital transformation agenda. It strongly encouraged States parties to provide sustainable contributions to this agenda.
IBRAHIM SALAMA, Chief of the Human Rights Treaties Branch, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said the Human Rights Committee had the largest concentration of legal jurisprudence of all treaty bodies. The Committee developed standards that States needed to reduce tensions, including its general comments on the right to peaceful assembly, right to life, and right to freedom of expression. The work of the Committee was sorely needed in the current context of geopolitical tension.
There was no amount of improvement of working methods that could allow the Committee to address all individual complaints without increasing resources. The Committee had made significant achievements in strengthening its processes. The treaty body system continued to work through extrabudgetary resources, but this was not sustainable. The future of the Committee was in the hands of States parties. This year, a decision would be made in the General Assembly on the revitalisation of the treaty bodies, and States needed to support this decision.
Statements and Questions by States Parties
In the ensuing dialogue, some States expressed their support for the Committee and the treaty bodies, describing them as the backbone of the United Nations human rights system. Some speakers expressed hope that the current liquidity crisis would have as little impact as possible on the Committee’s work. Some welcomed efforts by the Committee to promote multilingualism in its operations, expressing concern about the impact of the liquidity crisis on multilingualism.
Speakers said, among other things, that the new working procedures allowed for improved engagement with the Committee. The proposed digital uplift would help to improve the Committee’s work, but the Committee needed to be mindful of the gaps in technological availability between States and of the needs of persons with disabilities, one speaker said.
Some speakers called for a predictable review calendar, noting lags between report submission and dialogues, and overlaps of submissions. The periodic reporting cycle needed to consider the reporting burden of States to the United Nations human rights mechanism.
Speakers welcomed efforts by the Committee to harmonise working methods. Different working methods across treaty bodies made cooperation with the system difficult. Some speakers expressed concern about the limitations on hybrid modalities for dialogues with the Committee. Remote meetings would improve the quality of dialogue with the Committee and other treaty bodies.
One speaker called for treaty bodies to adhere to the texts of the treaties on which they were founded and to verify all information they used in assessing States parties. Country-based representatives of the United Nations needed to work more closely with the Committee and the treaty body system. There also needed to be increased cooperation between treaty bodies and regional human rights mechanisms and courts. Frank, regular dialogue with the Committee was crucial to the protection of human rights.
One speaker proposed establishing a “group of friends of the treaty body system” to work together to strengthen the system. The speaker also proposed that the Committee make memorandums of understanding with national human rights institutes to follow up on its recommendations. Another speaker said the Committee needed to be mindful of the specificities of States parties in developing its concluding observations.
Some States discussed domestic efforts to implement the Covenant and the Committee’s recommendations, create databases of those recommendations, and promote and protect the human rights of all, particularly those who had suffered abuse.
Speakers asked about the Committee’s thoughts on the recent working paper of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on strengthening the treaty bodies; measures the Committee could apply to address its backlog of individual communications; and measures aside from assessment of periodic reports that the Committee could implement to promote the implementation of the Covenant.
Responses by Committee Experts
In response to questions and comments by States, Committee Experts said the Committee already had an eight-year review calendar, but it would not publish it before it discussed it with other treaty bodies. The Committee had reviewed the High Commissioner’s working paper and submitted its comments on the paper in August 2023. The Committee hoped that the Office of the High Commissioner would take stock of the Committee’s comments, and that a decision to strengthen the treaty bodies would be made in the General Assembly this year. The liquidity crisis impacted all the treaty bodies. The Committee was not sure whether it would be able to meet again in its next session.
The individual communications backlog had increased dramatically in the past five years. At the beginning of this year, the Committee conveyed to the High Commissioner its extreme concern regarding the situation. The Committee had revised its processes to address its backlog. The petitions unit needed to be seen as a judicial body. It lacked the necessary resources. This issue needed to be addressed.
One Expert said multilingualism was a hallmark of the work of the United Nations. However, there had been a decline in multilingualism in some organizations due to a lack of human resources and the liquidity crisis. The Committee would think of creative solutions to circumvent the crisis.
The Committee had done its best to harmonise working methods and it hoped other treaty bodies would do the same, a Committee Expert said. There had been a large effort by the Committee to provide information on its website on all elements of its work. The Committee engaged with national human rights institutes and non-governmental organizations that prepared shadow reports with the Committee and cooperated on follow-ups to dialogues.
Priorities on the digital transformation needed to be aligned with resources. The High Commissioner was leading the process. The team working on the digital transformation was relying on contributions from States.
A Committee Expert said one way of improving the performance of the Committee was through technical assistance to spread a culture of human rights throughout States parties. The Committee had a responsibility to promote human rights standards in all States. The Committee urged the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to attach importance to technical assistance and capacity building, especially in developing States.
Statements on the Situation in Gaza
State of Palestine said more than 31,000 Palestinians had been killed in Gaza. Many children had become victims of the man-made famine. This was the most egregious crime of modern history. Palestinians lived under a racist colonial regime. The speaker asked why the world questioned the dignity of Palestinians, who had to justify their right to live within their own country. State of Palestine called on the Committee to join other treaty bodies in calling for an immediate ceasefire, to reaffirm peoples’ trust in the United Nations system.
Israel said all human life lost was a tragedy. The loss of human life in Gaza was caused by the actions of Hamas. Palestine had yet to condemn Hamas’ October attacks. Israel was working on launching field hospitals in Gaza. Hamas used civilian structures for terrorist purposes. Israel did not target civilian infrastructure and considered the use of human shields by Hamas as it worked to minimise casualties in its military campaign against Hamas. Both Israelis and Palestinians deserved to live in peace and security.
One Committee Expert said the Committee hoped that the international community and all stakeholders would do what they could to encourage a ceasefire in Gaza. Human lives were all equally precious.
Closing Remarks
TANIA MARÍA ABDO ROCHOLL, Committee Chairperson, said the Committee valued this opportunity to meet with States parties. Sixty representations of States parties had attended the meeting and demonstrated their interest in and knowledge of the Committee’s work. Interactions with States helped the Committee to make progress. The Committee had noted all recommendations made by States and aimed to make progress on them. It was also conscious of the issues raised in the dialogue. In closing, Ms. Abdo Rocholl expressed thanks to all who had participated in the meeting.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media; not an official record.
English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
