The 22nd regular session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva marks the beginning of the United States’ second consecutive three-year term as a member of the intergovernmental body created in 2006 to replace the Commission on Human Rights. In an effort to review the effect that US membership on the Council has had to date, the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights has reviewed of the “country-specific” resolutions adopted by the Council, the country-specific special sessions held by the Council, and the number of country-specific and thematic special procedures created by the Council since its establishment. This is one of a number of areas to which the US has devoted substantial attention during its first term on the Council.
The findings of this review are that in the three years that the US has served on the Council, the body’s criticism of countries by name on human rights grounds has substantially increased. The Council’s criticism of an increasing number of violator States has not only strengthened its legitimacy; it has decreased to a certain degree the Council’s highly disproportionate focus on the conduct of a single UN Member State, Israel.
While there remain many aspects of the Council’s performance that States should continue to work to improve, and while the Council still devotes a disproportionate degree of its country-specific action to Israel, JBI’s review finds that US engagement has had beneficial effects on the Council’s performance. JBI concludes that the United States should continue its efforts in its second term of membership, by pressing Council members to convene special sessions on emerging human rights crises and by proposing and encouraging the tabling of resolutions that identify the perpetrators of serious human rights violations worldwide by name. It should also devote further efforts to ensure the Council’s credibility and professionalism, including with respect to Israel.
JBI’s detailed documentation and analysis of trends over time, as well as background information, can be found in the full analysis below.
Background
In the first few years following the creation of the Human Rights Council, the US refused to seek election to the body on the grounds that it suffered from structural flaws that would ensure that its performance did not improve upon that of the discredited Commission on Human Rights, its predecessor institution at the UN. The cited flaws included the eligibility of all UN member States, no matter how poor their human rights record or questionable their commitment to universality of human rights, to run for Council membership and, if elected, to have a say in the establishment or maintenance of special procedures.
Indeed, in the Council’s initial years of operation, from 2006 to the end of 2008, its performance was decidedly problematic. Certain Council members, including Algeria, Cuba, China, and India explicitly called for the elimination of all country-specific mandates. Yet these same entities simultaneously continued to support multiple annual country-specific resolutions and mandates on Israel.[1] Iran, Pakistan, Syria and China considered them too politicized and divisive. The Palestinian representative called them “the product of arm twisting for political reasons that had nothing to do with human rights.” North Korea and India questioned their impact, which Cuba and South Africa saw them as remnants of the past and argued for a new approach.
In its early years, the Council did not adopt a significant number of country-specific resolutions on human rights and discontinued several country-specific mandates, such as those of the Special Rapporteurs on Belarus, Cuba, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The few country-specific actions the Council did take focused to an extraordinarily disproportionate extent on Israel. During those two years, the Council adopted a total of 33 resolutions that identified countries as deserving of attention to their human rights records. Of these, 17 (or about 52 percent) addressed Israel.[2]
In March 2009, the US changed course and announced its intention to seek a seat on the Council. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice justified the decision on the grounds that “we believe that working from within, we can make the Council a more effective forum to promote and protect human rights.” The US was elected to membership on the Council in May of that year, and began its term on the Council in November 2009 at the Council’s 12th session.
The Human Rights Council’s Performance Prior to and During US Membership
From September 2009 – September 2012, the first three-year term in which the US served on the Council, while the body’s performance still left much to be desired, it addressed human rights conditions in countries other than Israel far more often than before.
Since 2009, the US has championed a number of specific initiatives at the Council and played an important behind-the-scenes role in supporting many others that have placed much-needed attention on key human rights situations that should have received international scrutiny, but had not. The US was among those leading calls for the Council to hold special sessions on the government crackdowns in Libya and Syria and to establish country-specific special rapporteurs on Iran and Belarus. It pressed successfully for creation of a thematic rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly and association as well as a working group on laws that discriminate against women. The US also provided critical support for the successful effort for the Council to adopt its first-ever resolution condemning violence and discrimination against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation, and calling on the High Commissioner to report to the Council on these abuses. Each of these individual accomplishments is important; and cumulatively they have led to substantial changes in the Council’s performance.
Increase in number of country-specific resolutions and countries identified as having human rights records of concern
First, the number of specific human rights situations addressed by the Council has increased. Not only did the Council adopt an ever-increasing total number of country-specific resolutions each year from 2009-2012, it also focused on a greater number of countries with particularly poor human rights records. As a result, the relative degree to which it focused on Israel diminished, although the actual number of resolutions on Israel remained numerous and higher than the number devoted to other individual States. From 2009-2011, the Council adopted a total of 64 country-specific resolutions, 22 of which (or about 34 percent) criticized Israel.[3] This pattern continued in 2012, during which the Council adopted 30 country-specific resolutions, 5 of which (or about 17 percent) focused on Israel.
Country-Specific Resolutions Adopted by the UN Human Rights Council, 2006-2012[4]
|
Year |
Country-Specific Resolutions |
# on Israel |
|
2006[5] |
7 |
7 |
|
2007[6] |
11 |
4 |
|
2008[7] |
15 |
6 |
|
2009[8] |
17 |
7 |
|
2010[9] |
18 |
8 |
|
2011[10] |
29 |
7 |
|
2012[11] |
30 |
5 |
|
Total |
127 |
44 |
While not all of these country-specific resolutions actually criticized the governments in question for committing human rights abuses, even tepidly-worded “technical assistance” resolutions – on States such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kyrgyzstan, and Guinea – improved upon the Council’s past silence in the face of a vast number of situations of serious human rights abuse.
The Council routinely adopts more country-specific resolutions annually on Israel than on any other country. However, in 2012, both Syria and Israel were the subject of five country-specific resolutions. The only year in which this happened previously was 2007, in which Israel and Sudan were both the subject of four country-specific resolutions.
Increase in number of special sessions convened and States addressed in such sessions
The Council’s practice with regard to convening special sessions to address human rights emergencies (which requires the consent of one-third of Council members) also changed during 2009-2012. From 2006-2008, the Council convened seven country-specific special sessions, four of which (or 57 percent) were on Israel. From 2009-2012, the Council convened nine country-specific special sessions, two of which (or 22 percent) were on Israel, and none of which were held in 2010, 2011, or 2012.
Special Sessions Convened by the Human Rights Council on the Situation of Human Rights in Specific Countries, 2006-2012
|
Year |
Country-Specific Special Sessions |
# on Israel |
|
2006[12] |
4 |
3 |
|
2007[13] |
1 |
0 |
|
2008[14] |
2 |
1 |
|
2009[15] |
3* |
2 |
|
2010[16] |
1 |
0 |
|
2011[17] |
4 |
0 |
|
2012[18] |
1 |
0 |
|
Total |
16 |
6 |
* Includes the May 2009 special session on Sri Lanka in which the Council failed to condemn the government for its indiscriminate use of force in its conflict against the LTTE. Does not include the May 2008 special session on “the negative impact of the worsening of the world food crisis,” the February 2009 special session on “the impact of the global economic and financial crises on the universal realization and effective enjoyment of human rights,” or the January 2010 special session on “the support of the HRC to the recovery process in Haiti after the earthquake of January 12, 2010: a human rights approach.”
Increase in number of special procedures mandated by the Council, including on countries of concern
Similarly, the total number of special procedures mandated by the Council rose from a low point of 38 in 2008 to 48 in 2012, reflecting increases in the number of both country-specific and thematic mandate holders.
Between 2009 and 2012, the Council maintained several important existing country-specific mandates, including those on Burma, Cambodia, Haiti, North Korea, Somalia, and Sudan; and created new mandates on Belarus, Cote d’Ivoire, Eritrea, Iran, and Syria.
The Council also maintained important existing thematic mandates, such as the special rapporteurs on torture, freedom of opinion and expression, and freedom of religion and belief, and created new mandates on issues such as peaceful assembly and association and discrimination against women in law and practice.
Special Procedures Mandated by the Human Rights Council, 2006-2012
|
Year |
Country-Specific Mandates |
Thematic Mandates |
Total |
|
2006[19] |
13[20]^ |
28[21]^ |
41 |
|
2007[22] |
12[23] |
28[24] |
40 |
|
2008[25] |
8 |
30[26] |
38 |
|
2009[27] |
8[28] |
31[29] |
39 |
|
2010[30] |
8[31] |
31[32] |
39 |
|
2011[33] |
11[34]* |
35[35] |
47* |
|
2012 |
12[36]* |
36[37] |
48* |
^ All were established by the Commission on Human Rights and automatically transferred to the Council.
* Includes the Special Rapporteur on Syria, a mandate which was created in 2011 but will not become active until the conclusion of the COI on Syria, which as of year-end 2012 had been extended to 2013.[38]
Conclusion
Certainly, despite these positive changes, the Human Rights Council’s performance remains flawed in many significant ways at the conclusion of the first term of US membership. The Council continues to focus its attention disproportionately on the human rights situation in Israel and to refrain from criticizing many States that bear responsibility for the commission of serious violations of human rights around the world. However, the US has made an impact on the Council and demonstrated that with sufficient political will, the human rights body’s performance can be improved. During its second term on the Council, the US government should devote even greater attention and effort to improving the body’s performance and legitimacy by continuing the positive trends identified above.
[1] See Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Human Rights Council takes up situation of human rights in Belarus and Cuba,” (12 June 2007), http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=7267&LangID=E. At this meeting, Council members Algeria, China, Cuba, and India and observers Angola, Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela, along with the Palestinian representative, called for the categorical elimination of all country-specific special procedures, and many other States called for limiting their mandates.
[2] 2006 – 7, all on Israel; 2007 – 11, 4 on Israel; 2008 – 15, 6 on Israel.
[3] 2009- 16, 7 on Israel; 2010- 18, 8 on Israel; 2011- 24, 7 on Israel.
[4] Some commentators have calculated the number of country-specific resolutions adopted by the Human Rights Council according to a different methodology than that applied here. For example, some add to these figures additional Council resolutions that they consider to have a negative impact on Israel even if they do not expressly discuss the human rights situation there, and do not count resolutions that discuss the human rights situation in other countries but do not use explicitly condemnatory language when doing so.
[5] Res. 3/3, Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Lebanon); Res. 3/1, Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: follow-up to Human Rights Council resolution S-1/1); Res. 2/3, Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan); Res. 2/4, Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan); Res. S-3/1, Human rights violations emanating from Israeli military incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including the recent one in northern Gaza and the assault on Beit Hanoun ); Res. S-2/1, The grave situation of human rights in Lebanon caused by Israeli military operations); Res. S-1/1, Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory).
[6] Res. OM/1/2, Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: follow-up to Human Rights Council resolutions S-1/1 and S-3/1; Res. 6/19, Religious and cultural rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; Res. 6/18, Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: follow-up to Human Rights Council resolutions S-1/1 and S-3/1; Res. 4/2, Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory: follow-up to Human Rights Council resolutions S-1/1 and S-3/1; Res. 6/35, Human Rights Council Group of Experts on the situation of human rights in Darfur; Res. 6/34, Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Sudan; Res. OM/1/3, Follow-up to resolution 4/8 of 30 March 2007 adopted by the Human Rights Council at its fourth session entitled “Follow-up to decision S-4/101 of 13 December 2006, adopted by the Council at its fourth special session entitled ‘Situation of human rights in Darfur’”); Res. 4/8, Follow-up to decision S-4/101 of 13 December 2006 adopted by the Human Rights Council at its fourth special session entitled “Situation of human rights in Darfur”); Res. 6/33, Follow-up to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar; Res/S-5/1, Situation of human rights in Myanmar; Res. 6/5, Advisory services and technical assistance for Burundi.
[7] Res. 9/18, Follow-up to resolution S-3/1: human rights violations emanating from Israeli military incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and the shelling of Beit Hanoun; Res 7/30, Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan); Res 7/18, Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan; Res 7/17, Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination; Res 7/1, Human rights violations emanating from Israeli military attacks and incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly the recent ones in the occupied Gaza Strip; Res S-6/1, Human rights violations emanating from Israeli military attacks and incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip; A/HRC/RES/8/14 (2008), Situation of human rights in Myanmar; Res 7/32, Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar; Res 7/31, Situation of human rights in Myanmar; Res. 9/17, Situation of human rights in the Sudan; Res 7/16, Situation of human rights in the Sudan; Res. 9/15, Advisory services and technical assistance for Cambodia; Res 7/15, Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; Res. S-8/1, Situation of human rights in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo; Res 7/35, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights.
[8] Res. S-12/1, The human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; Res 10/21, Follow-up to Council resolution S-9/1 on the grave violations of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly due to the recent Israeli military attacks against the occupied Gaza Strip; Res 10/20, Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination; Res 10/19, Human rights violations emanating from the Israeli military attacks and operations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; Res 10/18, Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan; Res 10/17, Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan; Res. S-9/1, The Grave Violations of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory including the recent aggression in the occupied Gaza Strip; Res. 12/20, Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners in Myanmar; Res 10/27, Situation of human rights in Myanmar; Res. 12/26, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights; Res 10/32, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights; Res. 12/25, Advisory services and technical assistance for Cambodia; Res 10/16, Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; Res 10/33, Situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the strengthening of technical cooperation and consultative services; Res. 12/14, Situation of human rights in Honduras since the coup d’état on 28 June 2009); Res. 11/10, Situation of human rights in the Sudan; S-11/1: Assistance to Sri Lanka in the promotion and protection of human rights.
[9] Res 15/1, Follow-up to the report of the independent international fact-finding mission on the incident of the humanitarian flotilla; Res 15/6, Follow-up to the report of the Committee of independent experts in international humanitarian and human rights law established pursuant to Council resolution 13/9; Res 14/1, The grave attacks by Israeli forces against the humanitarian boat convoy; Res 13/5, Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan; Res 13/8, The grave human rights violations by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; Res 13/7, Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan; Res 13/6, Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination; Res 13/9, Follow-up to the report of the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict; Res 14/15, Addressing attacks on school children in Afghanistan; Res 15/20, Advisory services and technical assistance for Cambodia; Res S-14/1, Situation of human rights in Côte d’Ivoire in relation to the conclusion of the 2010 presidential election; Res 13/14, Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; Res 13/22, Situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the strengthening of technical cooperation and consultative services; Res 13/21, Strengthening of technical cooperation and consultative services in the Republic of Guinea; Res 14/14, Technical assistance and cooperation on human rights for Kyrgyzstan; Res 13/25, Situation of human rights in Myanmar; Res 15/28, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights; Res 15/27, Situation of human rights in the Sudan.
[10] A/HRC/RES/17/10, Follow-up to the report of the independent international fact-finding mission on the incident of the humanitarian flotilla; A/HRC/RES/16/30, Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination; A/HRC/RES/16/31, Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan; A/HRC/RES/16/29, Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; A/HRC/RES/16/20, Follow-up to the report of the independent international fact-finding mission on the incident of the humanitarian flotilla; A/HRC/RES/16/32, Follow-up to the report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict; A/HRC/RES/16/17, Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan; A/HRC/RES/S-18/1, The human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic; A/HRC/RES/S-17/1, Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic; A/HRC/RES/S-16/1, The current human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic in the context of recent events; A/HRC/RES/17/21, Assistance to Côte d’Ivoire in the field of human rights; A/HRC/RES/16/25, Situation of human rights in Côte d’Ivoire; A/HRC/RES/17/17, Situation of human rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya; A/HRC/RES/S-15/1, Situation of human rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya; A/HRC/RES/17/24, Situation of human rights in Belarus; A/HRC/RES/18/25, Advisory services and technical assistance for Cambodia; A/HRC/RES/16/8, Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; A/HRC/RES/16/35, The human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the strengthening of technical cooperation and advisory services; A/HRC/RES/16/9, Situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran; A/HRC/RES/17/20, Technical assistance and cooperation on human rights for Kyrgyzstan; A/HRC/RES/16/24, Situation of human rights in Myanmar; A/HRC/RES/17/25, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights; A/HRC/RES/18/16, Technical assistance for the Sudan in the field of human rights; A/HRC/RES/18/19, Technical assistance and capacity-building for Yemen in the field of human rights; Res 18/17: Technical assistance and capacity-building to South Sudan in the field of human rights;Res 18/24: Advisory Services and technical assistance for Burundi; Res 16/34: Advisory services and technical assistance for Burundi; Res16/36: Strengthening of technical cooperation and consultative services in Guinea; Res 6/19: Cooperation between Tunisia and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
[11] A/HRC/RES/19/14, Human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan; A/HRC/RES/19/15, Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination; A/HRC/RES/19/16, Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; A/HRC/RES/19/17, Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan; A/HRC/RES/19/18, Follow-up to the report of the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict; A/HRC/RES/20/22, Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic; A/HRC/RES/21/26, Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic; A/HRC/RES/S-19/1, The deteriorating situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, and the recent killings in El-Houleh; A/HRC/RES/19/1, The escalating grave human rights violations and deteriorating humanitarian situation in the Syrian Arab Republic; A/HRC/RES/19/22, Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic; A/HRC/RES/20/21, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights; A/HRC/RES/21/31, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights; A/HRC/RES/19/28, Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights; A/HRC/RES/20/20, Situation of human rights in Eritrea; A/HRC/RES/21/1, Situation of human rights in Eritrea; A/HRC/RES/20/17, Human rights situation in Mali; A/HRC/RES/21/25, Situation of human rights in the Republic of Mali; A/HRC/RES/21/22, Technical assistance and capacity-building for Yemen in the field of
human Rights; A/HRC/RES/19/29, Technical assistance and capacity-building for Yemen in the field of
human rights; A/HRC/RES/20/13, Situation of human rights in Belarus; A/HRC/RES/20/19, Technical assistance to Côte d’Ivoire in the field of human rights; A/HRC/RES/19/13, The situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; A/HRC/RES/19/27, The human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the strengthening of technical cooperation and advisory services; A/HRC/RES/19/30, Strengthening of technical cooperation and consultative services in Guinea; A/HRC/RES/19/12, Situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran; A/HRC/RES/19/21, Situation of human rights in Myanmar; A/HRC/RES/19/2, Promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka; A/HRC/RES/21/27, Technical assistance for the Sudan in the field of human rights; 19/39: Assistance to Libya in the field of human rights; 21/28: Technical assistance and capacity building for South Sudan in the field of Human Rights.
[12] S-1, Human Rights Situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 5 July 2006; S-2, The gave situation of human rights in Lebanon caused by Israeli military operations, 11 August 2006; S-3, Occupied Palestinian Territories, Beit Hanoun, 15 November 2006; S-4, Situation of human rights in Darfur, 12 December 2006.
[13] S-5, Situation of human rights in Myanmar, 2 October 2007.
[14] S-6, Human rights violations emanating from Israeli military attacks and incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, 23 January 2008; S-8, situation of human rights in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 28 November 2008 (does not include S-7, the negative impact of the worsening of the world food crisis, 22 May 2008).
[15] S-9, The grave violations of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory including the recent aggression in the occupied Gaza Strip, 9 January 2009; S-11, human rights situation in Sri Lanka, 26 may 2009; S-12, human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, 15 October 2009 (does not include S-10, the impact of the global economic and financial crises on the universal realization and effective enjoyment of human rights, 20 February 2009).
[16] S-14, situation of human rights in Cote d’Ivoire in relation to the conclusion of the 2010 presidential election, 23 December 2010 (does not include S-13, the support of the HRC to the recovery process in Haiti after the earthquake of January 12, 2010: a human rights approach, 27 January 2010).
[17] S-15, situation of human rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 29 April 2011; S-16, situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, 29 April 2011; S-17, the situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, 22 August 2011; S-18, the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, 2 December 2011.
[18] S-19, the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, 1 June 2012.
[19] OHCHR Annual Report (2006) http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/AboutUs/annualreport2006.pdf.
[20] Belarus, Burundi, Cambodia, Cuba, DPRK, DRC, Haiti, Liberia, Myanmar, OPT, Somalia, Sudan, Uzbekistan.
[21] Same as 2007.
[22] OHCHR Annual Report (2007) http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Press/OHCHR_Report_07_Full.pdf.
[23] Belarus, Burundi, Cambodia, Cuba, DPRK, DRC, Haiti, Liberia, Myanmar, OPT, Somalia, Sudan.
[24] Same as 2008 except no slavery, no water.
[25] OHCHR, Annual Report (2008) http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Press/OHCHR_Report_2008.pdf.
[26] Same as 2009 and 2010 except no cultural rights.
[27] OHCHR Annual Report (2009) .http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/I_OHCHR_Rep_2009_complete_final.pdf.
[28] Burundi, Cambodia, DPRK, Haiti, Myanmar, OPT, Somalia, Sudan.
[29] Same as 2010.
[30] OHCHR Annual Report (2010) http://www2.ohchr.org/english/ohchrreport2010/web_version/media/pdf/24_Human_Rights_Council_SP.pdf.
[31] Same as 2009.
[32] Same as 2011 except no democratic and equitable international order; peaceful assembly and association; truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence; or discrimination against women.
[33] OHCHR Annual Report (2011) http://www2.ohchr.org/english/ohchrreport2011/web_version/ohchr_report2011_web/allegati/30_Human_Rights_Council_and_Special_Procedures.pdf.
[34] Burundi, Cambodia, Cote D’Ivoire, DPRK, Haiti, Iran, Myanmar, OPT, Somalia, Sudan, Syria.
[35] Adequate housing; people of African descent; arbitrary detention; sale of children; cultural rights; democratic and equitable international order; education; enforced or involuntary disappearances; extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; extreme poverty; food; foreign debt; freedom of peaceful assembly and association; freedom of opinion and expression; freedom of religion or belief; health; human rights defenders; independence of judges and lawyers; indigenous peoples; internally displaced persons; international solidarity; mercenaries; migrants; minority issues; truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence; racism; slavery; terrorism; torture; hazardous substances and waste; trafficking in persons; transnational corporations; violence against women; water; discrimination against women.
[36] Added Belarus and Eritrea, discontinued Burundi
[37] Added Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.
[38] UN Human Rights Council, Resolution 21/26, “Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic,” UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/21/26 (17 October 2012).
Comments