Theme: International intergovernmental organizations and the International

Protection of Human Rights:

The example of the UN bodies, charter- based bodies and treaty-based bodies
as mechanisms of monitoring the implementation of international instruments
of human rights by States’ parties.

The aftermath of the Second World War and the decline of all the
European empires as well as colonies, created a new era in the human history.
As a proof, the world witnessed a proliferation of organizations for international
cooperation and diplomacy in the hope of maintaining peace and stability. In
fact, according to Virally, international organizations are “associations of states
established by agreements among its members, possessing a set of bodies
whose task is to achieve the states’ objectives of security and peace through
cooperation”. In this framework, States were eager to cooperate together in
order to achieve the common interests under one umbrella. Therefore, they
created the Intergovernmental Organizations IGOs which are "organizations
composed primarily of sovereign states, or of other intergovernmental
organizations. IGOs are established by treaty or other agreement that acts as a
charter creating the group." Alongside the Non-Governmental Organizations
NGOs which are non-profit organizations that operate independently of any
government, typically they address humanitarian, social or political issues. The
regional and universal organizations are of the same purpose which is mainly
fulfilling the will of states to obtain peace and harmony. In fact, a regional
organization is a subcategory of international organizations that links the
related states geographically and ideologically, while the universal organization
is a non-profit international organization, whether governmental or non-
governmental.

I- Charter-based bodies:
Charter bodies include the former Commission on Human Rights, the Human
Rights Council -which replaced the commission on Human Rights since 2006,
and Special Procedures. Moreover, the Charter based bodies are established by
resolutions of the UN's principal organs. In fact, these bodies derive their
establishment from provisions contained in the U.N.C. they hold broad human
rights mandates and they address an unlimited audiences. The current Charter-
based bodies are Human Rights Council and its subsidiaries including Universal
Periodic Review working group and the Advisory Committee.

A- Human Rights Council

The Human Rights Council that was established in 2006 and which has replaced
the Commission on Human Rights after its failure, is an intergovernmental body
within the U.N. responsible for strengthening the promotion and protection of
human around the globe. Actually, the main purpose of the Human Rights
Council is addressing situation of human rights violations and making
recommendations on them. This intergovernmental body, which meets in
Geneva 10 weeks a year, is composed of 47 elected United Nations Member
States who serve for an initial period of 3 years, and cannot be elected for more
than two consecutive terms. It is worth mentioning that the most important
body of the HRC Universal Periodic Review (UPR).

1- The Universal Periodic Review

In fact, The UPR was established when the Human Rights Council was created
on 15 March 2006 by the UN General Assembly. It is a unique process which
involves a periodic review of the human rights records of all 193 UN Member
States. The UPR is a significant innovation of the Human Rights Council which is
based on equal treatment for all countries when their human rights situations
are assessed. It provides an opportunity for all States to declare what actions
they have taken to improve the human rights situations in their countries and to
overcome challenges to the enjoyment of human rights. The ultimate goal of
UPR is the improvement of the human rights situation in every country with
significant consequences for people around the globe. It is worth noting that
Reviews take place through an interactive discussion between the State under
review and other UN Member States. This takes place during a meeting of the
UPR Working Group. During this discussion any UN Member State can pose
questions, comments and/or make recommendations to the States under
review. Indeed, the documents on which the reviews are based are mainly the
information provided by the State under review, which can take the form of a
“national report”; the information contained in the reports of independent
human rights experts and groups, known as the Special Procedures, human
rights treaty bodies, and other UN entities. Furthermore, NGOs can submit
information which can be added to the “other stakeholders” report which is
considered during the review. Finally, The UPR will assess the extent to which
States respect their human rights obligations set out mainly in the UN Charter;
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, human rights instruments to which
the State is party (human rights treaties ratified by the State concerned);
voluntary pledges and commitments made by the State giving the example of
national human rights policies; and applicable international humanitarian law.
In a nutshell, The UPR ensures that all countries are accountable for progress or
failure in implementing these recommendations.

2-Advisory Committee
This committee is composed of 18 experts and works to provide its expertise
and advice on thematic human rights issues based mainly on studies and
researches. The Committee shall not adopt resolutions or decisions but may
propose to the Council suggestions for further enhancing its procedural
efficiency. The Advisory Committee is urged to establish interaction with States,
national human rights institutions and N.G.O.s and other civil society entities in
accordance with the modalities of the Council.

3-The complaint procedure

This procedure was adopted by the Human Rights Council, addresses
communications submitted by individuals, groups, or non-governmental
organizations that claim to be victims of human rights violations or that have
direct, reliable knowledge of such violations.
In fact, two distinct groups have been established to examine communications
and bring complaints to the attention of the Council. The former is the Working
Group on Communications (W.G.C.) and the latter is the Working Group on
Situations (W.G.S.). Both are characterized by their confidential work nature
 II- Treaty-based Bodies
A-Features of the Treaty-based bodies
The treaty bodies are committees of independent experts who monitor states
parties’ implementation of each of the nine core human rights treaties and their
optional protocols. Treaty- based bodies derive their existence from provisions
contained on a specific legal instrument. They hold more narrow mandates
which are codified in specific legal instruments. These bodies address a limited
audience (women, children, minorities…) and base their decision making on
consensus. Treaty- based bodies monitor the implementation of the treaty
provisions that is why we call them monitoring bodies. Moreover, the treaty
bodies were created to monitor and encourage States to uphold and implement
their international obligations under the above-mentioned international human
rights treaties. They are composed of independent experts who should be of
recognised competence in the field of human rights, and they meet to consider
States parties' periodic reports as well as individual's complaints and
communications. There are currently ten human rights treaty bodies, which are
committees of independent experts. Nine of these treaty bodies monitor
implementation of the core international human rights treaties while the tenth
treaty body, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, established under the
Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, monitors places of
detention in States parties to the Optional Protocol. The treaty- based bodies
consist of independent experts who are apolitical.
There are ten human rights treaty bodies that monitor implementation of the
core international human rights treaties:
 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
 Human Rights Committee (CCPR)
 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)
 Committee against Torture (CAT)
 Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
 Committee on Migrant Workers (CMW)
 Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT)
  Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)
 Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED)

More details on the official website of the Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights:
https://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/Pages/HumanRightsBodies.aspx

1.1 The Human Rights Committee

The Human Rights Committee is the body of independent experts that monitors
implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by its
State parties.
All State parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how
the rights are being implemented. States must report initially one year after
acceding to the Covenant and then whenever the Committee requests (usually
every four years).

1.2 The committee on ESCR

The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) is the body of
independent experts that monitors implementation of the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by its State parties. The
Committee was established to carry out the monitoring functions assigned to
the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
All State parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how
the rights are being implemented. States must report initially within two years
of accepting the Covenant and thereafter every five years. The Committee
examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the
State party in the form of “concluding observations”.

B-Functions of the treaty-based bodies

Four different types of monitoring procedures have been established by or
under the treaties:
1. Reporting procedures: all seven core treaties, require States parties to report
regularly on the steps they have taken to implement their obligations under the
treaty and to identify difficulties in implementation
2. Individual communications procedures: five of the seven treaty bodies have a
mandate to receive and consider communications from individuals alleging
violations of their rights under the convention by States which have accepted
the individual communication procedure
3. Inquiry procedure: two treaty bodies may also initiate inquiries on their own
initiative if they have received reliable information about serious or systematic
violations of their conventions in a State party
4. Inter-State communications procedures: a number of the treaties provide for
one State party to lodge=submit a complaint with the relevant committee that
another State party which has accepted the procedure alleging=claiming that
the latter has not carried out its obligations under the treaty.

To conclude, even though the Charter-based bodies through its human

rights council succeeded in reviewing all of the scheduled states with no delay
and increasing the number of states signing up to major human rights treaties.
Nevertheless, the council is not doing enough to protect individuals from grave
human rights violations as well as it lacks the enforcement powers to ensure
compliance with the resolutions. As for the treaty-based bodies they also
witnessed some achievements as they are recording a great number of states
ratification on treaties and enhancing a constructive dialogue between states
and committees alongside increasing the interest in national reporting and
implementing mechanisms. However, these bodies are challenged by the
insufficient compliance by states parties with their reporting obligations as well
as the growing backlog of state reports, individual communications and urgent
actions.

As for reporting procedures, some States which responded positively to some

recommendations of these bodies and expressed their willingness to take the
appropriate measures in a certain field of human rights as recommended by one
of the bodies in the national report.
Example: The United Nations Committee against torture (the Committee)
examined the third periodic report of Tunisia in 2016 in which it considered
illegal the use of forced anal examinations or “Forensic examinations” as an
attempt to find “proof” against people accused of homosexual conduct because
it violates the principle of prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment.
The committee against Torture considered the third periodic report of Tunisia
(CAT/c/TUN/3) and its additional updated report (CAT/c/TUN/3/add.1) at its
1398th and 1401st meetings (CAT/c/Sr.1398 and 1401), held on 19 and 21 April
2016. At its 1420th and 1421st meetings, held on 6 May 2016, the committee
adopted concluding observations.

NB: Concluding observations come right after the State has submitted its national report. The
Committee then examines the report. There are two types of observations: positive and negative.
The former deals with the achievements of the State in the field. The latter deals with the challenges
or the non-conformity of the national legislation with the international treaty being monitored. At
last, they give recommendations to the State.
For example, as a response to the observations of human rights bodies, in September 2017, Tunisia
accepted a number of UN recommendations on improving the state of human rights in the country,
including the ban of forced forensic tests but no official ban has since been adopted.