We use various third-party cookies to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. Please use the options below to manage your cookie settings. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Please be aware, if you deny cookies, certain features of our website may not work.
This will apply to all services
Google Analytics
YouTube
CCPR Centre>
28 June 2022
At their 34th Annual Meeting, Chairpersons of United Nations (UN) treaty bodies (TBs) agreed on a predictable review schedule of eight years.
‘We have been pushing for such predictable schedules – along with others – since the beginning of our involvement in the 2020 review. This has been a key recommendation emanating from our Academic Platform on Treaty Body Review 2020 and of our follow-up work related to this review’ underlines Felix Kirchmeier, Executive Director of the Geneva Human Rights Platform.
Accordingly, states will have to present a report on their obligations under the treaty in question every eight years and the committees will review a state’s performance even in the absence of a report. The schedules will notably take into consideration the calendar of the Universal Periodic Review to avoid overlap.
‘Such predictable review schedules will allow addressing the existing backlog of reports pending review and will increase state parties’ compliance with their reporting obligations. While this might sound technical, it constitutes a major breakthrough’ explains Felix Kirchmeier.
‘In this respect, we developed a series of recommendations and proposals on how this can work in practice, as well as on how to do the follow-up at the national level’ he adds.
Domenico Zipoli>
Follow-up reviews focussing on a limited number of issues will take place in between these eight-year cycle full reviews.
‘One model for such follow-up review is the in-country focused reviews that we have been testing in Sierra Leone and Grenada. Both pilots have highlighted the benefits of such in-country follow-up mechanisms for implementation at the national level’ says Felix Kirchmeier.
‘We look forward to continuing accompanying UN TBs in this endeavour by providing concrete proposals based on our research and consultations with the various stakeholders’ he adds.
News
The Indigenous Navigator
Via its DHRTTDs Directory, the Geneva Human Rights Platform provides a comprehensive list and description of such key tools and databases. But how to navigate them? Which tool should be used for what, and by whom? This interview helps us understand better the specificities of the current highlight of the directory: The Indigenous Navigator
News
CCPR Centre
Via its DHRTTDs Directory, the Geneva Human Rights Platform provides a comprehensive list and description of such key tools and databases. But how to navigate them? Which tool should be used for what, and by whom? This interview helps us understand better the specificities of the current highlight of the directory: ICCPR Follow-up World Maps
Event
Adobe
This Human Rights Conversation will highlight the significance of academic freedom, explore its legal foundations, and examine the concrete threats it faces.
Event
This event presents the a public discussion of the Maastricht Principles’ legal commentary, exploring their impact on intergenerational justice and policymaking.
Training
This training course will delve into the means and mechanisms through which national actors can best coordinate their human rights monitoring and implementation efforts, enabling them to strategically navigate the UN human rights system and use the various mechanisms available in their day-to-day work.
Training
Adobe
This training course will examine how the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights have been utilized to advance the concept of business respect for human rights throughout the UN system, the impact of the Guiding Principles on other international organizations, as well as the impact of standards and guidance developed by these different bodies.
Project
Olivier Chamard/Geneva Academy
Project
The Geneva Human Rights Platform contributes to this review process by providing expert input via different avenues, by facilitating dialogue on the review among various stakeholders, as well as by accompanying the development of a follow-up resolution to 68/268 in New York and in Geneva.
Publication
Geneva Academy
Publication
Geneva Academy
