Typically when a UN human
rights treaty body reviews a state party’s report, they issue concluding
observations and recommendations to be followed up by the country in question
at the time of the next periodic report – usually 5 or more years later. In recent years some of the treaty bodies
have adopted the practice of identifying 2 or 3 recommendations to be followed
up more quickly – in 12 or 24 months.
This practice provides NGOs a unique opportunity that is often going underutilized
at the moment.
Example: racial discrimination and the Dominican Republic
For example, here are
three recommendations for the Dominican Republic that the CERD Committee
specified in February 2013 for follow up in 12 months (CERD/C/DOM/CO/13-14):
- Paragraph 11 – adopt a specific law on racial discrimination that corrects article 39 of the Constitution and articles 336 and 337 of the Criminal Code; to make sure that there is an express prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of race, colour or national origin
- Paragraph 19 – remove administrative obstacles to issuing identity documents to Dominicans of Haitian origin
- Paragraph 21 – ensure that deportation laws do not discriminate, including ending the mass deportation of Haitians in violation of due process guarantees
Answers are due from the
government on these three items by February 2014. When the government submits a response, it
will be posted at the Committee’s website for the February 2013 session (82nd
session), under the section on the Dominican Republic, subheading “Follow up
State party’s report”. http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/SessionDetails1.aspx?SessionID=776&Lang=en
Committee procedure
If the government fails
to respond, the matter will be taken up next by the rapporteur appointed by the
Committee to follow up such matters. He or she will contact the government in
question, attempt to obtain an explanation for the missed deadline and a
submission of the requested material, and then will report back on his or her
results to the full Committee at a later session. States are encouraged to consult with local
NGOs when planning and implementing recommendations. Each of the treaty bodies
will also accept submissions from NGOs providing information about the
government’s implementation or failure to implement each recommendation. If the government has failed to respond by
the time of the 12 month deadline, the NGO submission may be the only
information the follow up rapporteur has on the subject.
Five of the nine treaty
bodies that regularly review country reports have now adopted this “quick
follow up” practice.
CERD
|
12 month follow up
|
Human Rights Committee
|
12 month follow up
|
CAT
|
12 month follow up
|
CEDAW
|
24 month follow up
|
CED
|
12 month follow up,
first cases this April
|
CRC
|
no quick follow up
procedure yet adopted
|
CRPD
|
no quick follow up
procedure yet adopted
|
CMW
|
no quick follow up
procedure yet adopted
|
CESC
|
no quick follow up
procedure yet adopted
|
SPT
|
does not apply;
different sequence of reports applies
|
For example, here are the
34 countries that have a deadline during 2014 under this quick follow up procedure:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
How can NGOs utilize this
procedure?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This procedure offers
NGOs a unique opportunity to influence change in their country. The 12 or 24 month deadline and the
concrete, specific nature of most of these quick follow up recommendations, can
make lobbying and advocacy more focussed and more effective. The fixed deadline provides a
useful backstop to get action. By their nature, these recommendations are
easier to implement in a shorter time period. It also gives an NGO a good
reason for introducing themselves to key government officials to urge
implementation efforts. The quick
turnaround time expected, gives the whole exercise a more practical,
achievable character than is often present with more general or long term
recommendations.
Here is one suggested
approach for how an NGO might pursue one or more of these quick follow up
recommendations:
Review text; preliminary analysis
 1. Review the
full text of the quick follow up recommendations and note the deadline. Make
a preliminary assessment of what steps the government should take to
implement each recommendation. Research some good practice implementation
models if appropriate. Model legislation or a model plan of action might be
obtained or prepared, depending on the nature of the specific recommendation.In the example above regarding the Dominican Republic, an assessment might include finding someone to draft a simple bill that incorporates the express language on racial discrimination that is referred to in the treaty, researching the steps necessary to adopt a constitutional amendment, monitoring whether Dominicans of Haitian origin are finally getting identity documents, and monitoring whether the mass deportation of Haitians has stopped. Be prepared to document and report on your monitoring efforts as the 12 month deadline approaches.
Identify appropriate government contact points
2. Assess
which government agency or officials are your best contact points. For
example, you can check the Committee website for the session when the country
report was reviewed. There is usually a document entitled “List of
Delegation” which identifies the government officials who attended the
hearing when the country report was presented. Check for any local officials who were
present and who usually reside in the home country. Alternatively, contact the Ministry of
Justice, or Human Rights Department, or other local ministry or agency known
to be responsible for human rights matters. If legislation is required, the relevant
Parliamentary Committee head might also be contacted.
Initial contact with the government
3. Make
initial contact with the government as soon as possible, indicating an
interest in providing input on the implementation of these recommendations,
requesting a chance to meet with the appropriate persons who will be
responsible for implementation, and requesting a copy of any information
submitted to the treaty body.
Prepare for, attend meeting; or repeat requests
if no response
4. If the
government official offers to meet with you, prepare for the meeting. If
there is no contact, be sure to renew your request a few more times so that
you can summarize your efforts to the treaty body before the 12 month
deadline.
Prepare submission to treaty body (12 or 24 month
deadline)
5. Prepare
your submission to the treaty body, evaluating the government’s efforts to
implement the subject recommendations and whether they were willing to
consult with your NGO and provide copies of submissions. Make sure to file the submission by the 12 or
24 month deadline that has been set for the government.
Consider a press release
6. Decide
whether to issue a public press release that tells the story of the 12 month
follow up process and the government’s failure to implement the treaty body’s
recommendations.
Now turn to the other recommendations in the
treaty body’s conclusions
7. Depending
upon whether or not these efforts have been successful, perhaps go on to the
other recommendations in the treaty body’s concluding observations. Responses
for these recommendations are due by the time of the next periodic report, in
about five years. Perhaps you can initiate an implementation dialogue with
the government on these remaining recommendations in a similar manner as the
“quick follow up” recommendations.
Document your steps
8. Be sure to
document your steps along the way, especially if the government is failing to
respond to your requests. This will help the treaty body’s follow up
rapporteur to make more concrete suggestions when discussing these matters
with your government.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment