7.3 Universal Periodic Review: Process and Impact

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a key tool for improving human rights globally. It assesses all UN member states' compliance with human rights obligations, promoting equal treatment and addressing past criticisms of selectivity in human rights monitoring.

The UPR process involves preparation, review, and follow-up stages. It encourages dialogue between states and civil society, leading to concrete improvements like treaty ratifications and legal reforms. However, its effectiveness can be limited by political factors and implementation challenges.

Universal Periodic Review: Purpose and Functioning

Mechanism Overview and Objectives

Top images from around the web for Mechanism Overview and Objectives

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Mechanism Overview and Objectives

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Basic facts about the Universal Periodic Review | Human Rights Online Philippines View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Universal Periodic Review (UPR) improves human rights situations in all 193 UN Member States
• Established in 2006 to address criticisms of selectivity and bias in previous Commission on Human Rights
• Assesses state compliance with human rights obligations from UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other ratified instruments
• Operates on a 4.5-year cycle for regular monitoring and follow-up on commitments and recommendations
• Promotes equal treatment, universality, interdependence, and indivisibility of all human rights
• Reviews information from multiple sources (state under review, UN bodies, NGOs, national human rights institutions)
• Produces recommendations for states to accept or note, creating framework for future improvements

Key Features and Principles

• Based on peer review among UN Member States
• Ensures regular and comprehensive assessment of all countries' human rights records
• Encourages diplomatic dialogue and constructive criticism between states
• Allows for stakeholder participation, including civil society organizations
• Aims to identify human rights challenges and share best practices among countries
• Complements other UN human rights mechanisms (treaty bodies, special procedures)
• Emphasizes follow-up and implementation of accepted recommendations

Examples of UPR Impact

• Ratification of human rights treaties (Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities)
• Establishment of national human rights institutions (National Human Rights Commission in Myanmar)
• Legislative reforms (abolition of death penalty in Benin)
• Improved cooperation with UN special procedures (increased number of country visits)
• Enhanced dialogue between government and civil society on human rights issues (creation of national UPR follow-up mechanisms)

Stages of the UPR Process

Preparation and Information Gathering

• States compile national reports on their human rights situation
• UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) prepares compilation of UN information
• OHCHR summarizes stakeholders' submissions (NGOs, national human rights institutions)
• Civil society organizations conduct national consultations and submit alternative reports
• UN Member States prepare questions and recommendations for the state under review

Review and Interactive Dialogue

• State under review presents national report in Geneva
• Interactive dialogue involves questions and comments from other UN Member States
• Working Group on the UPR (all 47 Human Rights Council members) conducts review
• Three rapporteurs (troika) facilitate the review process
• State under review responds to questions and provides clarifications
• Session typically lasts 3.5 hours for each country review

Adoption and Follow-up

• Working Group prepares outcome document with recommendations
• Human Rights Council formally adopts UPR outcome during plenary session
• State under review responds to recommendations (accept or note)
• Other stakeholders (NGOs, national human rights institutions) make comments
• State implements accepted recommendations and reports on progress in subsequent cycles
• Civil society monitors implementation and advocates for follow-up actions
• Mid-term reports often submitted voluntarily by states to update on progress

UPR Effectiveness in Improving Human Rights

Positive Impacts and Achievements

• Generates concrete improvements in human rights practices and policies at national level
• Raises awareness of human rights issues globally and within reviewed countries
• Promotes dialogue between states, civil society, and other stakeholders
• Leads to ratification of human rights treaties (Convention against Torture)
• Establishes national human rights institutions (Oman's National Human Rights Commission)
• Initiates legislative reforms (criminalization of domestic violence in Saudi Arabia)
• Enhances cooperation with other UN human rights mechanisms (increased reporting to treaty bodies)

Limitations and Criticisms

• Implementation rates of accepted recommendations vary significantly across countries and regions
• Relies heavily on state cooperation, lacking strong enforcement mechanisms
• Peer review nature can lead to politicization and reciprocal praise
• Potential undermining of credibility and effectiveness due to diplomatic considerations
• Limited time for in-depth discussion of complex human rights issues during review
• Challenges in measuring long-term impact on human rights situations on the ground
• Risk of recommendations being too general or not addressing root causes of human rights violations

Factors Influencing UPR Effectiveness

• Political will of the state under review to implement recommendations
• Capacity and resources of states to fulfill human rights obligations
• Strength of civil society and national human rights institutions in follow-up advocacy
• Quality and specificity of recommendations made during the review process
• Coordination with other human rights mechanisms and development initiatives
• International pressure and support for implementation of UPR recommendations
• Media coverage and public awareness of the UPR process and outcomes

Civil Society Engagement in the UPR

Roles and Contributions of Civil Society

• Provides alternative information through stakeholder reports
• Monitors state compliance with human rights obligations and UPR recommendations
• Advocates for human rights improvements before, during, and after the review
• Organizes pre-sessions with diplomats to influence recommendations
• Conducts national-level advocacy around UPR recommendations
• Builds coalitions and networks to strengthen collective advocacy efforts
• Enhances dialogue with national governments on human rights commitments
• Raises public awareness about the UPR process and human rights issues

Challenges for Civil Society Participation

• Limited space for NGO participation during formal UPR sessions (two-minute oral statements)
• Risks of reprisals and intimidation in some countries for UPR involvement
• Technical nature of UPR process creates barriers for smaller, grassroots organizations
• Resource constraints limit effective participation (travel costs, research capacity)
• Difficulty in translating UPR recommendations into concrete advocacy strategies
• Varying levels of government openness to civil society input across countries
• Challenges in maintaining sustained engagement throughout the 4.5-year UPR cycle

Strategies for Effective Civil Society Engagement

• Form broad coalitions to submit joint stakeholder reports
• Engage with national human rights institutions to amplify civil society voices
• Utilize social media and digital platforms to raise awareness and mobilize support
• Develop simplified guides and training materials on UPR engagement for grassroots organizations
• Collaborate with international NGOs for capacity building and resource sharing
• Engage diplomatic missions in capital cities and Geneva to influence state recommendations
• Conduct strategic media outreach to increase public pressure for implementation
• Develop long-term advocacy plans aligned with UPR cycles and recommendations