THE USE OF THE AGENDA AND RESOLUTIONS
AT THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

While there are occasional changes, the agenda of the Commission generally remains static and resolutions are placed within the following topics: self-determination, racism, the right to development, the question of the violation of human rights in the occupied Arab territories, questions of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world, economic, social and cultural rights (e.g., the right to food, the right to education, etc.), civil and political rights (e.g., freedom from torture, freedom of expression, etc.), human rights of women, minority rights, indigenous issues, and the effective functioning of human rights mechanisms.

There are a number of resolutions that appear annually; others come to the Commission on a biennial basis. For example, annually a resolution condemns the death penalty. Special Procedures must be re-instated at least every three years, but some have provisions in their mandating resolution that state that they must be considered every year. Even where a certain Special Procedure doesn't have this provision, the Special Procedures are required to present their work to the Commission annually.

Analysis

This extensive agenda facilitates the status quo of the Commission; this has both benefits and costs. By annually passing a resolution reaffirming a particular human right, the Commission builds the foundation of custom that is needed for the establishment of international law. However, the already overburdened CHR agenda makes bringing a new resolution a serious task; not only must the new resolution find time in a very crowded field, but the new resolution may displace a resolution addressing an equally important concern. As a former High Commissioner characterized it, "We should also take a harder look at repetitive language: those various paragraphs that recur each year mainly because no one can be mobilized to retire them. This can give the impression, to people observing your proceedings from a distance, that the Commission is, at least on some issues, stuck in an earlier time."

Recently, however, some States have employed the tactic of opposing a resolution by a motion for no-action. A no-action motion does not consider the proposed resolution on its merits, but rather is a decision not to deliberate on the issue at all. This approach threatens the fair and effective functioning of the CHR. Even failed resolutions draw attention to a human rights concern, but no-action motions preemptively counter this interest and forestall debate on the topic. China has successfully made no-action motions on the China country-specific resolution, and this ploy was unfortunately adopted by Nigeria last year. This strategy highlights further the importance of CHR membership. Member States subject to criticism often exchange votes, which could lead to a pattern of quashing all resolutions with reciprocal no-action motions. A movement towards this could effectively nullify all progress made by the CHR in the last fifty years.

Recommendations

Both the Secretary-General and the General Assembly have called for a reform of the Commission on Human Rights.  In 2002 under resolutions 2002/91 and 2002/115, the Commission began a process of reviewing the effectiveness of the CHR's working methods. Some States have sought to manipulate this review in order to diminish the CHR's influence; these States subsequently shortened the CHR meeting times and diminished the amount of speaking time given to both Special Procedures and NGOs. As it stands now, six weeks is far too short to accomplish a fair review of the world's human rights situation, which leads to debates that are more political than constructive. Too many tragic human rights cases go unaddressed by the CHR. Action is needed to ensure that this review process is not used to further destroy the credibility and effectiveness of the CHR. The CHR's working time must be extended. More time should be allocated to the reports of the Special Procedures and the use of no-action motions should be limited to situations where there is no available information.

Click the links below for further information about the Commission on Human Rights.

The Commission on Human Rights

A Brief Overview of the CHR

History of the CHR

Membership in the CHR

Participation by Civil Society

The Use of Special Procedures

Other UN Human Rights Bodies

Conclusion