UNITED NATIONS

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

(UNHRC)

Subsidiary Bodies and Complaint Procedure

Submitted to:
Atty. Daniel Padilla

Submitted by:
Airah Faye D. Tabotabo
On 18 June 2007, one year after its first meeting, the Human Rights Council

adopted its "Institution-building package" (resolution 5/1) which details

procedures, mechanisms and structures that form the basis of its work. Among

those mechanisms the following subsidiary bodies directly report to the Human

Rights Council:

A. Universal Periodic Review Working Group

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a unique process which involves a

review of the human rights records of all UN Member States. The UPR is a

State-driven process, under the auspices of the Human Rights Council, which

provides the opportunity for each State to declare what actions they have taken

to improve the human rights situations in their countries and to fulfil their

human rights obligations.

As one of the main features of the Council, the UPR is designed to ensure equal

treatment for every country when their human rights situations are assessed.

The ultimate aim of this mechanism is to improve the human rights situation in

all countries and address human rights violations wherever they occur.

Currently, no other universal mechanism of this kind exists.

B. Advisory Committee

Human Rights Council Advisory Committee has been established to function as

a think-tank for the Council and work at its direction. It has a number of

mandates and functions as provided in the institution package. The Advisory

 Committee provides expertise to the Council in the manner and form requested

by it. It mainly focuses on studies and research-based advice. It may also

propose within the scope of the work set out by the Council, for the latter’s

consideration and approval, suggestions for further research proposals. In its

work, the Committee should be implementation-oriented and the scope of its

advice should be limited to thematic issues pertaining to the mandate of the

Council, namely promotion and protection of all human rights. However, it shall

not adopt resolutions or decisions.

C. Complaint Procedure

The complaint procedure 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. This

subsidiary body will be further explained in the later part of this report.

The Council also established the following subsidiary expert mechanism to

provide the Council with thematic expertise and forums providing a platform for

dialogue and cooperation. These bodies focus mainly on studies, research-based

advice or best-practices. They meet and report annually to the Council:

 Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous People

The Expert Mechanism provides the Human Rights Council with expertise

and advice on the rights of indigenous peoples as set out in the United
 Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and assists Member

States, upon request, in achieving the ends of the Declaration through the

promotion, protection and fulfilment of the rights of indigenous peoples.

 Forum on Minority Issues

This forum has been established to provide a platform for promoting dialogue

and cooperation on issues pertaining to national or ethnic, religious and

linguistic minorities, as well as thematic contributions and expertise to the

work of the Special Rapporteur on minority issues. The Forum shall identify

and analyze best practices, challenges, opportunities and initiatives for the

further implementation of the Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging

to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities.

 Social Forum

The idea of a Social Forum had been discussed since 1997 in response to

concerns about the impact of globalization on the enjoyment of economic,

social and cultural rights. The forum was meant to serve as a new space in

the United Nations system for the exchange of diverse views and concerns

across regions, professions and cultural backgrounds with a view to formulate

new ideas and proposals for action to address global human rights challenges.

 Forum on Business and Human Rights

 The UN Human Rights Council established the Forum in 2011 to serve as a

global platform for stakeholders to “discuss trends and challenges in the

implementation of the Guiding Principles and promote dialogue and

cooperation on issues linked to business and human rights, including

challenges faced in particular sectors, operational environments or in relation

to specific rights or groups, as well as identifying good practices.”

 Forum on Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

The purpose of the Forum is “to provide a platform for promoting dialogue

and cooperation on issues pertaining to the relationship between these areas”

and to “identify and analyze best practices, challenges and opportunities for

States in their efforts to secure respect for human rights, democracy and the

rule of law”

The Council further established the following open-ended intergovernmental

working groups to elaborate and/or negotiate and finalize new draft legal

instruments or to make recommendations on the effective implementation of

existing instruments:

 Working Group on the Right to Development

 Intergovernmental Working Group on the Durban Declaration and

Programme of Action

 Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the Convention on the

Rights of the Child

  Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of Complementary Standards

 Open-ended intergovernmental working group on the draft United

Nations declaration on human rights education and training

 Open-ended intergovernmental working group on regulatory

framework of activities of private military and security companies

 Open-ended intergovernmental working group on a draft United

Nations declaration on the right to peace

 Open-ended intergovernmental working group on a United Nations

declaration on the rights of peasants and other people working in

rural areas

 Open-ended intergovernmental working group on transnational

corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human

rights

The Council also establishes the Special Procedures mandates and appoints the

respective mandate holders, which report annually to the Council from a thematic

or country-specific perspective. The special procedures of the Human Rights Council

are independent human rights experts with mandates to report and advise on

human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective. The system of Special

Procedures is a central element of the United Nations human rights machinery and

covers all human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political, and social.
Human Rights Council Complaint Procedure

The complaint procedure 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.

Like the former 1503 procedure, it is confidential, with a view to enhance

cooperation with the State concerned. The new complaint procedure has been

improved, where necessary, to ensure that the procedure be impartial, objective,

efficient, victims-oriented and conducted in a timely manner.

Pursuant to paragraph 94 of resolution 5/1, the Chairperson of the Working Group on

Communications, together with the Secretariat, undertake an initial screening of

communications based on the admissibility criteria set in paragraphs 85 to 88 of resolution

5/1. Manifestly ill-founded and anonymous communications are screened out.

Communications not rejected in the initial screening are transmitted to the State concerned

to obtain its views on the allegations of violations. Both the author of a communication and

the State concerned are informed of the proceedings at each stage.

There are two (2) distinct working groups - the Working Group on

Communications and the Working Group on Situations. They are responsible,

respectively, for examining written communications and bringing consistent

patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental

freedoms to the attention of the Council.

A. Working Group on Communications

The Chairperson of the Working Group on Communications is requested,

together with the secretariat, to undertake an initial screening of

communications received, based on the admissibility criteria, before

transmitting them to the States concerned. Manifestly ill-founded or anonymous

communications shall be screened out by the Chairperson and shall therefore not

be transmitted to the State concerned. In a perspective of accountability and

transparency, the Chairperson of the Working Group on Communications shall

provide all its members with a list of all communications rejected after initial

screening. This list should indicate the grounds of all decisions resulting in the

rejection of a communication. All other communications, which have not been

screened out, shall be transmitted to the State concerned, so as to obtain the

views of the latter on the allegations of violations.

The members of the Working Group on Communications shall decide on the

admissibility of a communication and assess the merits of the allegations of

violations, including whether the communication alone or in combination with

other communications appear to reveal a consistent pattern of gross and reliably

attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Working

Group on Communications shall provide the Working Group on Situations with

a file containing all admissible communications as well as recommendations

thereon. When the Working Group on Communications requires further

consideration or additional information, it may keep a case under review until

its next session and request such information from the State concerned. The

Working Group on Communications may decide to dismiss a case. All decisions

of the Working Group on Communications shall be based on a rigorous

application of the admissibility criteria and duly justified.

B. Working Group on Situations

The Working Group on Situations is requested, on the basis of the information

and recommendations provided by the Working Group on Communications, to

present the Council with a report on consistent patterns of gross and reliably

attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms and to make

recommendations to the Council on the course of action to take, normally in the

form of a draft resolution or decision with respect to the situations referred to it.

When the Working Group on Situations requires further consideration or

additional information, its members may keep a case under review until its next

session. The Working Group on Situations may also decide to dismiss a case.

All decisions of the Working Group on Situations shall be duly justified and

indicate why the consideration of a situation has been discontinued or action

recommended thereon. Decisions to discontinue should be taken by consensus; if

that is not possible, by simple majority of the votes.

Admissibility Criteria

A communication related to a violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms

is admissible, provided that:

 It is not manifestly politically motivated and its object is consistent with the

Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

and other applicable instruments in the field of human rights law;

 It gives a factual description of the alleged violations, including the rights

which are alleged to be violated;

 Its language is not abusive. However, such a communication may be

considered if it meets the other criteria for admissibility after deletion of the

abusive language;

 It is submitted by a person or a group of persons claiming to be the victims of

violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, or by any person or

group of persons, including non-governmental organizations, acting in good

faith in accordance with the principles of human rights, not resorting to

politically motivated stands contrary to the provisions of the Charter of the

United Nations and claiming to have direct and reliable knowledge of the

violations concerned. Nonetheless, reliably attested communications shall

not be inadmissible solely because the knowledge of the individual authors

is second-hand, provided that they are accompanied by clear evidence;

 It is not exclusively based on reports disseminated by mass media;

  It does not refer to a case that appears to reveal a consistent pattern of gross

and reliably attested violations of human rights already being dealt with by

a special procedure, a treaty body or other United Nations or similar

regional complaints procedure in the field of human rights;

 Domestic remedies have been exhausted, unless it appears that such remedies

would be ineffective or unreasonably prolonged.

National human rights institutions, established and operating under the Principles

Relating to the Status of National Institutions (the Paris Principles), in particular

in regard to quasi-judicial competence, may serve as effective means of addressing

individual human rights violations.