Saturday, July 23, 2016

Voting results 2016

Five of six elections to be held in 2016 have now taken place, filling expiring roles on the UN human rights treaty bodies. These elections covered 47 candidates from 38 countries. The Committees affected were CEDAW, CESCR, CCPR (HRCttee), CRC and CRPD. The 6th election to be held later this year, for 12 of the 25 members of the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture, will be in October. Elected members will begin service in 2017.

Some results are surprising.  Some indicate some backsliding on prior successes.  Lets take a look at the results so far.


This year a group of NGOs have combined efforts to present information on the candidate profiles of persons running in four of the six elections discussed here (CEDAW, CRC, CRPD and HRCttee).  Candidates were asked to fill in questionnaires on their experience -- some of whom complied -- and you can see those answers at that website.

The Office of High Commissioner of Human Rights has also recently published a 25 page brochure on Human Rights Treaty Bodies and Election of Treaty Body Members (A Guide for UN Delegates Based in New York) at

and a Handbook for Treaty Body Members at

both of which provide useful information on the elections process.

Brief summary of each election


Elections of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESC) were held in New York by the Economic, Social and Cultural Council, on April 5, 2016.  

There were four new members and five re-elected members.  There will now be 5 women and 13 men on the Committee, a better balance than the previous 3 women and 15 men.

Newly elected:

  • Ms. Laura Maria Craciunean (Romania)
  • Ms. Sandra Liebenberg (South Africa)
  • Ms. Lydia Carmelita Ravenberg (Suriname)
  • Mr. Michael Windfuhr (Germany)
  • Mr. Mohamed Ezzeldin Abdel-Moneim (Egypt)
  • Mr. Chen Shiquiu (China)
  • Mr. Waleed Sadi (Jordan)
  • Mr. Zdzislaw Kedzia (Poland)
  • Mr. Mikel Mancisidor (Spain)


Elections of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) were held in New York on June 14th to 16th.  

There were seven new members and two re-elected members.  Since five women's terms had expired and all were replaced by men, the gender mix is now only one woman and 17 men (formerly, it was 6 women and 12 men).

Newly elected:

  • Mr. Ahmad Alsaif (Saudi Arabia)
  • Mr. Imed Eddine Chaker (Tunisia)
  • Mr. Jun Ishikawa (Japan)
  • Mr. Samuel Njuguna Kabue (Kenya)
  • Mr. Robert George Martin (New Zealand)  
  • Mr. Valery Nikitich Rukhledev (Russian Federation)


  • Mr. Monthian Buntan (Thailand)
  • Mr. Laszlo Gabor Lovaszy (Hungary)
  • Mr. Martin Babu Mwesigwa (Uganda)                                                                                           


Elections of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) were held in New York on June 21st.  Historically the composition of this Committee has been almost all women. Currently there is one man and 22 women. It would seem that this type of gender mix is also unhealthy -- it tends to diminish or marginalise the importance of the Committee, and deprive the Committee of a healthy mix of different views and perspectives. 

The elections produced six new members and five re-elected members.  The gender mix continues the same, with 22 women and 1 man.

Newly elected:

  • Mr. Gunnar Bergby (Norway)
  • Ms. Marion Bethel (Bahamas)
  • Ms. Rosario G. Manalo (Philippines)
  • Ms. Bandana Rana (Nepal)
  • Ms. Wenyan Song (China)
  • Ms. Aicha Vall Verges (Mauritania)


  • Ms. Nicole Ameline (France)
  • Ms. Hilary Gbedemah (Ghana)
  • Ms. Nahla Haidar (Lebanon)
  • Ms. Dalia Leinarte (Lithuania)
  • Ms. Theodora Nwankwo (Nigeria)


Elections of the Human Rights Committee under the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) were held in New York on June 23rd.  

There were three new members and six re-elected members.  There will now be 8 women and 10 men on the Committee, a better balance than the previous 5 women and 13 men. 

Newly elected: 
  • Ms. Marcia Kran (Canada)
  • Ms. Ilze Brands Kehris (Latvia)
  • Mr. Christof Heyns (South Africa)
  • Ms. Anja Seibert-Fohr (Germany)
  • Mr. Yuval Shany (Israel)
  • Mr. Koita Bamariam (Mauritania)
  • Ms. Tania Maria Abdo Rocholl (Paraguay)
  • Mr. Ahmed Amin Fathalla (Egypt)
  • Mr. Jose Manuel Santos Pais (Portugal)


Elections for the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) were held in New York on June 30, 2016.  Five new members and four existing members were elected.  There was a net gain of one more woman member so the gender ratio becomes 10 women and 8 men (previously it was 9 women and 9 men). 

Newly elected:
  • Mr. Cephas Lumina (Zambia)
  • Ms. Mikiko Otani (Japan)
  • Mr. Luis Ernesto Pedernera Reyna (Uruguay)
  • Ms. Ann Marie Skelton (South Africa)
  • Ms. Velina Todorova (Bulgaria)
  • Ms. Amal Salman Aldoseri (Bahrain)
  • Ms. Olga A. Khazova (Russian Federation)
  • Mr. Benyam Dawit Mezmur (Ethiopia)
  • Ms. Renate Winter (Austria)

Gender balance

As noted in the above summaries, gender balance has remained essentially the same after these five elections, although one treaty body (CRPD) has worsened considerably, one (CEDAW) has stayed the same (unbalanced), and three have improved their gender balance slightly. Here is a table showing the data: 

Treaty body
last election
1 of 18
under balanced
June 2016
2 of 10
under balanced
June 2015
5 of 18
under balanced
April 2016
5 of 14
under balanced
June 2015
7 of 18
under balanced
June 2015
4 of 10
under balanced
Oct 2015
8 of 18

June 2016
13 of 25

Oct 2014
10 of 18

June 2016
22 of 23
June 2016
77 of 172

*The total ratio remained the same but CRPD got worse, CEDAW stayed the same and the others got slightly better. Since CEDAW has an overbalance of women (96%), it brings the overall average up (to 45%). When you remove CEDAW from the count the system-wide average becomes 37%.  

Reporting compliance

Another interesting analysis is to look at the reporting compliance of states who nominate experts from their country to serve on one or more of these Committees.  Of the 38 countries who nominated one or more candidates who won a seat in these particular elections: 

  • 30 or 79% were overdue in submitting one or more reports under the treaty instruments (in other words, only 8 countries were up to date on all reports owed under the treaty body system when these candidates were nominated for election)
  • eight (8) countries (21%) were overdue in submitting their current report to the particular treaty body whose election was at issue -- and this included countries that were 10 years, 12 years, 13 years and 21 years overdue in submitting their current report!

Should countries who are this late in submitting their own reports to these Committees be permitted to nominate candidates in the elections process? Do states who vote on these candidates know about these reporting compliance figures when they vote? Would more transparency in these figures help to ensure better reporting compliance? 

Some discussion of these issues would seem appropriate as part of the treaty body strengthening process, in light of the generally held view that the elections process should be strengthened and improved, and that reporting compliance also needs to be improved. 


With five of six elections now complete in 2016, analysis of the results can begin. In determining what type of treaty body system we want, the election of members matters. The goals should include good gender balance and highly qualified candidates.  It is submitted that evaluating the reporting compliance record of states who nominate candidates is also fair game.  

Friday, June 3, 2016

Treaty body chairs meeting -- final day (June 3)

This post concludes my daily commentary on the agenda items of the Treaty Body Chairs meeting taking place in New York this week. Today I will comment on the final day’s agenda (June 3).

Friday Agenda (June 3)

The Committee is scheduled to discuss the following topics:
  • Any other business including next year’s agenda (item 11(c))
  • Adoption of the final report of this session (item 12)
I don't have any comments on the final topic (adoption  of report), but will split my comments on the first item into two parts -- (1) any other business and (2) next year's agenda

(1) Any other business (item 11(c))

Other than next year's agenda, which I will comment on in the next section, here is the open space on the Committee's agenda to consider new ideas. What else can be done to improve the effectiveness of the treaty body system? 

Some of the topics I would like to see more focus on include the following: 

  • disability access -- are the meetings and information of the treaty body system as accessible as possible to persons with disabilities? This is not just a topic for the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. All Committees should be attentive to this issue and all meetings should be adequately equipped to make reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities to participate. Is there a fire evacuation plan in place for all public meetings of the treaty body system that includes how to evacuate a large number of disabled persons if they were in attendance?
  • new technologies -- how can the treaty body system make better use of new technologies? Is the system preparing adequately for potential cyber attacks or cyber surveillance of confidential information in the system? Should the High Commissioner consider creating a post for a CTO -- chief technology officer, who could advise the High Commissioner and treaty bodies on strengthening and improving technology systems?
  • size of committees -- do the current treaty bodies have the right number of members? I'm thinking in particular about the Committee Against Torture with just 10 members, yet a workload heavier than most other Committees. 
  • CMW -- how can the entire system work to improve the ratification numbers for the Convention on Migrant Workers which is in danger of being left behind as the system grows
  • implementation -- how can implementation be strengthened across the board?
  • current events -- how can the treaty bodies be as relevant as possible to current events that involve human rights? What role should treaty bodies play when major events like the Arab Spring, earthquakes or other humanitarian disasters, or migration flows occur?
  • civil society -- are there new ways to engage civil society more effectively?
  • improve reporting compliance -- how to develop better state compliance to reporting and follow up obligations? 
  • master calendar idea -- should a UPR style master calendar be adopted, with evaluations going forward on non-reporting states in the absence of a report

(2) Next year's agenda (item 11(c))

Here is a compilation of suggestions I have made in my other posts for agenda items next year, plus a few more:
  • Implementation should be a standing item on each year’s meeting agenda
  • Improve the jurisprudence database, including how to harmonize it with other such databases of other regional institutions
  • How to improve NGO participation in the annual treaty body chairs meeting and in the treaty body system as a whole
  • Broaden the scope of reporting compliance by adding to next year’s report information on state reports, inquiries, follow up procedures, interim measures, and OPCAT responses.  Compare the current year to past years on each of these classifications
  • Ideally a system like the treaty body system should be effectively managed and good management requires good data. Some more thought should be given to what types of data would be most useful for the treaty body chairs, each individual treaty body and the OHCHR office, to better manage their parts of the system
  • Perhaps take a broader look at complaint mechanisms on next year’s agenda, to explore effectiveness, backlog, staff resources, workload planning, data compilation, and other management related issues; complaints for these purposes should also include inquiries, early warnings, urgent actions, reprisals, etc. All of the different types of complaint mechanisms should be measured, published, explained, and be part of annual summaries


There are many valuable topics to discuss and only a limited amount of time available, but I hope the treaty body chairs are able to reflect on these suggestions and others made during the meeting, in order to continually improve the effectiveness of the treaty system.