[UPR Trax] :No10: UPR Recommendations Database available March 18th

On February 19, the UPR Working Group concluded a dense and eventful seventh session which reviewed Qatar, Nicaragua, Italy, El Salvador, Gambia, Bolivia, Fiji, San Marino, Kazakhstan, Angola, Iran, Madagascar, Iraq, Slovenia, Egypt and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Problems with the list of speakers reached a new peak when delegates queued all night for the review of Iran and started Egypt’s list the day before in the corridors.

The Report of the Working Group’s adoptions of the two same States led to animated debates. On Iran, it was for the reasons given to reject recommendations. The delegation said those recommendations were “inconsistent with the Institution-Building text and/or not internationally recognized human rights, or not in conformity with its existing laws, pledges and commitments” which was contested by several States. During the adoption of Egypt’s Report, States tried to delete the mentioning of the original wording of recommendations. A couple of States were opposed, emphasizing the importance that Reports of the Working Group reflect truly the interactive dialogue.

During the session, a new trend turned into a practice. An increasing number of States under Review are considering that the recommendations they accept are “either already implemented or in the process of implementation”. Bolivia and Kazakhstan did so for 90 % of their accepted recommendations and Nicaragua for all of them, thus reducing the number of recommendations on which they commit to take action while keeping the number of accepted recommendations high.

Today starts the 13th session of the Human Rights Council. From 17 to 19 March, Reports of the Working Group from session 6 (last December) will be adopted, followed by a general debate on Friday afternoon.

On UPR-info.org, we are proud to announce you that our database containing all the UPR recommendations will be launched on March 18. This unique feature enables to access and search all UPR recommendations through several categories: State under Review (SuR), State that made the recommendation, their regional groups and organisations, the response provided by the SuR, the session during which the recommendation was made, the thematic issues raised by the recommendation and the type of action. This last category is an exclusive element of our database. Developed by Professor McMahon from the University of Vermont with the support of UPR Info, it looks into the specificity of the action contained in each recommendation. To date, 6,000 recommendations from session 1 to 5 are included in the database. Those from session 6 will be uploaded in Spring.

We will hold a side event on the database during the Human Rights Council on Thursday 18 March at 1 pm, room XXVII, Palais des Nations. Join us to learn more about the database and how to use it.

Finally, the basic version of our website in Arabic is available. We are now offering information on the UPR process in five UN languages.

Quote of the month

Germany does not see any need for a recommendation

Mr. Reinhard Schweppe, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Germany to the United Nations in Geneva, statement for the review of Italy, 9 February 2010.

News on the UPR process

  • More and more accepted recommendations are considered as already implemented - 24 February 2010

A new trend has emerged at the UPR in the framework of responses to recommendations. More and more States under Review are considering some recommendations to be “either already implemented or in the process of implementation”. Read more here…

  • Session 6 Reports of the Working Group adopted from 17 to 19 March - 23 February 2010
  • Egypt rejects recommendations because they are not in its contractual framework and outside IB text - 23 February 2010

In its Report of the Working Group A/HRC/WG.6/7/L.16, Egypt rejects 21 recommendations, among which 14 without comments and 7 because they consider them as "inaccurate and/or factually incorrect". Read more here…

  • Some States against the mentioning of the original wording of recommendations - 22 February 2010

A debate started Friday 19 February on whether including in Working Group Reports footnotes containing the original wording of recommendations. Read more here…

  • Sweden responds to Egypt’s reasons for rejecting their recommendation - 21 February 2010

In its Report of the Working Group A/HRC/WG.6/7/L.16, Egypt rejected seven recommendations they considered “inaccurate and/or factually incorrect”. Read more here…

  • Debate over Iran’s reasons for rejecting recommendations - 17 February 2010

A debate started earlier today during the adoption of Iran’s Report of the Working Group on the reasons given by the delegation for rejecting recommendations. Read more here…

  • Iran’s review: the price to pay to take the floor - 11 February 2010

Iran’s review is overcoming all limits ever witnessed regarding the enrolment on the speaker’s list. Read more here…

News on UPR-info.org

  • List of recommendations per SuR with preliminary responses - Session 6 - 16 February 2010

We have produced a document containing a list of all recommendations made during the interactive dialogue, including the rejected ones, and the preliminary responses given by the State under Review in the Report of the Working Group.