UPR Info - Promoting and strengthening the Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
We are currently collecting NGOs, States and NHRI data from session 7, and publishing session 6. You may consult the Mid-term Implementation Assessments with regard to sessions 2, 3, 4 and 5 at the Follow-up Programme webpage:
The follow-up of UPR recommendations is the most critical and important phase of the whole UPR process as it is the one leading to the concrete realization of the UPR goal, that is the "improvement of the human rights situation on the ground". The success of this phase will also determine the efficiency and credibility of the mechanism and demonstrate States’ engagement in the promotion and strengthening of human rights.
Entering the second UPR cycle, assessments on the stage of implementation of recommendations in States under Review must be advanced. They should look into the approaches and methods planned for such implementation, including the creation of specific bodies and National Plans of Action and the participation of the civil society. As highlighted in the 2010 High Commissioner’s Annual Report, developing roadmaps and practical mechanisms to ensure a reliable follow up is indeed a significant challenge for the future. In this framework, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) calls upon States under review, United Nations entities, and all other relevant stakeholders to join in a common effort in order to identify specific steps to accelerate national implementation of recommendations. The OHCHR has also established a mechanism to support follow-up process of the UPR on the basis of the funding provided by the Voluntary Fund for Financial and Technical Assistance.
The role of UPR Info
UPR Info is actively engaged in the follow-up on UPR recommendations as it believes that is a key part of the whole process. We have started to provide information on the implementation of recommendations and voluntary pledges. This information is collected under item 6 of the Human Rights Council as well as directly from Governments and the civil society. You will find them under each State under Review’s individual page.
In this regard, we are welcoming any information from States, National institutions and NGOs about the follow-up. If you wish to upload documents on UPR-info.org, please contact us at the following address: followup (at) upr-info.org.
Many States have already engaged in the follow-up. As example of best practices, certain States, such as Bahrain, have developed National Plans of Action which include UPR recommendations. Bahrain has also set up a steering committee to monitor the implementation which includes members of the government and NGOs. Another best practice is to provide an update under item 6 of the agenda of the Human Rights Council. Countries such as Bahrain, Colombia, the Czech Republic, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom have already provided information. Finally, some States are also producing at mid-term reports on the state of implementation, such as Colombia and Mauritius.
List of suggested Best practices:
Produce a document gathering all the responses to all recommendations with clear identification of accepted ones. Ex: Norway.
Develop a Plan of Action which includes all the accepted UPR recommendations. Ex: Bahrain.
Set up an inter-ministerial working group to coordinate the government’s actions. Ex: Poland.
Set up a steering committee composed of members of the Government, of the National Human Rights Institution and of NGOs to monitor the implementation. Ex: Bahrain.
Issue mid-term reports on the state of implementation. Ex: Argentina; Azerbaijan; Bahrain - 1, 2 A, E; Benin; Bolivia; Chile; Colombia - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; Ecuador; Finland; France - E, F; Japan; Macedonia; Mauritius; the Netherlands; Poland; Portugal; Romania; Spain; Switzerland; Ukraine and the United Kingdom.
Report regularly at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. Ex: Republic of Korea, Romania, United Arab Emirates.
Involve the civil society in the process through regular meetings and consultations. Ex: Switzerland.
. Bangladesh - UPR-HR Forum (2011)
. Bangladesh - Odhikar (2011)
. India - Working Group on Human Rights in India and the UN (2011)
. Iran - Bahá’í International Community (2011)
. Kenya - Kenya Stakeholders Coalition for the UPR (KSC-UPR) (2011)