UN Human Rights Committee meets (111th session)

The U.N. Human Rights Committee concluded its 111th session July 25th.  I'm experimenting with a format to offer a quick summary of context and relevant developments for these treaty body sessions. Please feel free to let me know what you think of this report.

In the case of the Human Rights Committee, the Centre for Civil and Political Rights follows developments closely and also produces a report on each session. They are well worth following if you are interested in this treaty body.  I'm going to take a slightly different approach than they do, but I would definitely recommend the CCPR's site too.

Background

The Human Rights Committee monitors compliance under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It meets three times a year, in March, July and October and has 18 members, half of whom are elected/re-elected every even numbered year.  The last election was held June 24^th, at which 6 new members were elected, 3 members were re-elected, and one replacement was selected to fill a current vacancy.  

The Committee is the second oldest in the UN human rights treaty system and receives the most numbers of individual complaints each year, claiming human rights violations of state parties.  The treaty has been ratified by 168 countries, the most recent being the State of Palestine (ratified April 2, 2014). The individual complaint mechanism in the First Optional Protocol to the treaty has been accepted/ratified by 115 countries. 

Context

The Committee met shortly after the General Assembly had concluded its treaty body strengthening resolution, aiming to increase resources and streamline processes to help the treaty bodies reduce backlogs, and improve state reporting and responsiveness to treaty obligations and treaty body requests.  These developments were discussed in private session by the Committee and will no doubt have an impact on its proceedings in the future. 

Other political events happening during or shortly before this session included civil conflict in Ukraine, Iraq, Syria and the Gaza Strip; the kidnapping of over 200 girls by Boko Horam in Nigeria; continuing outbreaks of Ebola in central Africa; and the downing of Malaysian Airlines MH17 in rebel-held region of the Ukraine. 

Key developments

The Committee reviewed six country reports during this session, decided 33 individual cases, and continued discussion and drafting of its new general comment on article 9 of the ICCPR (on the liberty and security of person).   In addition it appointed its first rapporteur on reprisals, tasked to follow up on any reports from individuals who are threatened or persecuted after giving testimony to the Committee about human rights violations in a country before the Committee. 

State reports

Many of the reports submitted by governments were either late, over the page limit, or failed to respond to the prior concluding observations (COs) of the Committee. The current page limits are 40 pages for periodic reports, 60 pages for initial reports, and 80 pages for common core reports. Here is my analysis of the six country reports reviewed at this session: 

Country	On time?	Within page limits?	Response to last COs?
Chile	Yes, submitted only 2 mos. late	Yes, both the periodic report & the common core report comply	Yes, a table showing where each CO has been addressed can be found on p.3
Georgia	No, 8 mos. late	Yes, both the periodic report & the common core report comply	Yes, direct responses to the prior COs are listed on pp.5-13
Ireland	Yes	No, the periodic rept is 110 pages over the limit; the common core report is okay	Yes, apparently covered in the article by article section, but no index or table to confirm completeness
Japan	No, 6 mos. late	No, the periodic report is 17 pages over the limit; the common core report complies with the page limits	No, there is no obvious response to the prior COs in the rpt. I couldn’t find anything in the TOC or in a skim through the report.
Malawi	No, submitted 17 years late	Yes	Not applicable. This is an initial report.
Sudan	No, submitted 2 yrs late	No, the periodic report is 18 pages over the limit; the common core report is okay. Annex of 45 pp is posted; other annexes are also noted to be on file.	Yes, responses to the prior COs are listed in pp. 5-14

Each report was reviewed by the Committee and discussed with the government delegation. Heavy interest in attending the Ireland and Japan hearings required moving the hearing to the larger Palais des Nations meeting rooms.  

The Committee issued Concluding Observations on each report, from 7 to 9 pages in length, containing positive aspects and areas of concern. Counting sub-items, there were between 20 and 63 recommendations for each report.  In each case several items were identified for followup by the government in one year. The next full report is due in 3 to 5 years, depending on the country. 

Here is a brief analysis of each concluding report. 

Chile

• 7 pages, 25 recommendations*
• concluding observations are in Spanish only so far
• next full report is due 31 July 2019 (5 years)
• follow up within one year on:
• amending the Terrorism Act to limit the definition of terrorism & not use it indiscriminately against the Mapuche people (para 7)
• decriminalize abortion in cases of rape, incest, etc. Provide abortion-related health services to women & girls. (para 17)
• establish national preventive mechanism against torture urgently, investigate & prosecute cases of torture (para 19)
• link to full report of the Committee

*the number of recommendations listed in these summaries is a subjective assessment, based on the total number of paragraphs in each Committee report that contain recommendations and the individual sub-items in each such paragraph that seem to have separate ideas, requests or programs that require implementation

Georgia

• 8 pages, 36 recommendations
• next full report is due 31 July 2019 (5 years)
• follow up within one year on:
• reform of the administrative detention system (para 13)
• reform of the jury trial system (para 14)
• link to full report of the Committee

Ireland

• 8 pages, 24 recommendations
• next full report is due 31 July 2019 (5 years)
• follow up within one year on:
• thorough investigation of all allegations of abuse at the Magdalene Laundries, children's institutions and mother and baby homes; prosecute and punish perpetrators (para 10)
• thorough investigation of the harmful and injurious practice of symphysiotomy in childbirth operations, conducted on 1,500 women and girls without their informed consent, between 1944 and 1987; prosecute the perpetrators; provide effective remedies to the victims (para 11)
• improve conditions at places of detention, bringing them up to compliance with the Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners (para 15) 
• link to full report of the Committee

Japan

• 9 pages, 43 recommendations
• next full report is due 31 July 2018 (4 years)
• follow up within one year on:
• giving due consideration to abolishing the death penalty or, at minimum, limiting it to only the most serious crimes; immediately strengthen legal safeguards against wrongful sentencing (para 13)
• impartially investigate the allegations of human rights violations suffered by the comfort women of World War II, include an accurate historical account in school curricula, expression of apology, condemn attempts to defame victims or deny the events (para 15)
• abolish or reform the Technical Intern Training Programme, investigate allegations of sexual abuse and labor related deaths and conditions, increase the number of onsite inspections (para 16)
• Abolish the substitute detention system (Daiyo Kangoku), or ensure full compliance with all guarantees of articles 9 and 14 of the Covenant (para 18)
• link to full report of the Committee

Malawi

• 9 pages, 63 recommendations
• next full report is due 31 July 2018 (4 years)
• follow up within on year on: 
• efforts to prosecute extrajudicial killings more effectively (para 12)
• establishment of an independent police complaints mechanism to follow up more effectively on claims of torture (para 13)
• amend the Penal Code to criminalise sexual abuse of children, and improve efforts to bring perpetrators to justice (para 24)
• adopt legislation to end forced and child marriages (para 25)
• link to full report of the Committee

Sudan

• 7 pages, 38 recommendations
• next full report is due 31 July 2017 (3 years)
• follow up within one year on:
• removing provisions discriminatory to women from domestic laws (para 10)
• abolish the death penalty or limit it to only the most serious crimes (para 14)
• adopt laws that define and criminalise torture; ensure effective investigation of all claims of torture (para 15)
• amend the National Security Act to permit detention of persons for only 48 hours before being brought before a judge, not 4-1/2 months; abolish all secret places of detention (para 18)
• link to full report of the Committee

Other countries discussed

In addition to the six countries reviewed above, the Committee as usual also discussed upcoming reviews. They prepared lists of issues for upcoming reviews. These lists will soon be posted on the Committee website and will figure in the presentation and review of reports at future sessions.

The countries for which these lists of issues were prepared were:

• Cambodia
• Cote d'Ivoire
• Cyprus
• France
• Russia
• Mexico (LOIPR)
• Poland (LOIPR)

The last two countries, Mexico and Poland, have elected the so-called simplified reporting procedure in which the Committee is asked to submit a list of issues or questions beforehand and the state report will then be structured as a response to those questions rather than a full item-by-item summary of developments under each article of the treaty. This procedure is called the "List of Issues Prior to Reporting" (LOIPR) and will probably become more popular as time goes on. 

Individual complaints

As noted earlier the Committee has announced that it has decided 33 new cases this session, but those decisions have not yet been released publicly.  It usually takes one to two months before all of the decisions of a session are published.  Once these decisions are available I will summarise them in a separate post on this blog. 

The background press release for the session indicates that there are now over 380 cases pending, representing about a 4 year backlog at current pace.  This backlog problem has been a concern for some time now. The Committee has requested additional time and resources to reduce the backlog, but only received a positive response last fall before the UN General Assembly, A/RES/68/240.  The program budgetary implications for this resolution indicated that 360 cases were pending at that time, 160 of which were ready for review and decision by the Committee but were simply waiting for staff support and working group time to consider them. 

The draft version of the resolution from the General Assembly had approved one additional week and corresponding staff support, for both 2014 and 2015, to support the Committee's efforts to reduce this backlog. However, the final version of the resolution granted only an additional week in 2014, and left open as to whether additional time would also be granted in 2015.  We now know that the final GA resolution on treaty body strengthening in April this year also granted additional meeting time. So the Committee will meet for an additional week in the upcoming October session, and additional time will also be added to each of their sessions in 2015 for the same purpose -- to reduce the backlog of individual communications. 

Allocation of meeting time

It is also noteworthy to see how the Committee is allocating its time between its various tasks.  With the heavy workload of individual communications, those are taking approximately 40% of the total Committee meeting time.  

An approximate allocation of time looks like the following, based on the announced program of work for the session:

• country reports, including task force time -- 46 hours (38%)
• individual communications, including regular and precessional time -- 21 hours + 27 hours = total of 48 hours (39%)
• draft general comment -- 12 hours (10%)
• open, close, methods of work & various administrative matters -- 8 hours (7%)
• NGO briefings -- including official time on the agenda and informal lunchtime briefings -- 8 hours (7%)

All considered, this seems like a reasonable balance of schedule but if the backlog in individual communications is going to be significantly reduced in the near future, the Committee will obviously need to spend more time on individual communications as time goes on. 

Elections

The latest election was held June 24, 2014, NY, when 9 of the Committee members were up for re-election or replacement. A special election was also held at the same time to fill the vacancy left by the resignation of Mr. Matadeen of Mauritius, who resigned Jan 9, 2014.  The election results represent major turnover from the existing committee membership and a small move toward greater gender balance (one more female than the prior committee composition).

·      Newly elected

o   Ms. Ivana JELIC, Montenegro

o   Mr. D.B. SEETULSINGH, Mauritius (filling vacant position)

o   Mr. Olivier de FROUVILLE, France

o   Ms. Sarah H. CLEVELAND, USA

o   Ms. Photini PAZARTSIS, Greece

o   Mr. Duncan Muhumuza LAKI, Uganda

o   Mr. Mauro POLITI, Italy

·      Reelected

o   Ms. Margo WATERVAL, Suriname

o   Mr. Yadh BEN ACHOUR, Tunisia

o   Mr. Yuji IWASAWA, Japan

·      

·      Gender/geographic balance –

o   the topic of geographic balance is addressed annually in a GA report on treaty body composition.  In its 2013 report the GA report indicates that the Human Rights Committee is underrepresented geographically by the Asian Group and overrepresented by WEOG. 

From table 3 of A/68/323 -- Human Rights Committee – these statistics are from the last election held Sep 6 2012

Region	Membership	Ratifications	Notes
Africa	5 (27.8%)	51 (30.5%)
Asia	1 (5.6%)	35 (20.9%)	underrepresented
Eastern Europe	2 (11.1%)	23 (13.8%)
GRULAC	3 (16.7%)	29 (17.4%)
WEOG	7 (38.9%)	29 (17.4%)	overrepresented
TOTAL	18	167

o   On gender balance the new committee, including newly elected members from June of this year, will have 5 women and 13 men on it – which is below the average and only 5^th best in the system (excluding CEDAW which is overbalanced with women).

Committee	No. of women members
CCPR	5 of 18 (28%)
CESC	4 of 18 (22%)
CERD	4 of 18 (22%)
CEDAW	22 of 23 (96%)
CAT	3 of 10 (30%)
SPT	10 of 25 (40%)
CRC	11 of 18 (61%)
CRPD	7 of 18 (39%)
CMW	3 of 14 (21%)
CED	1 of 10 (10%)
TOTAL	66 of 172 (38%)*

            *only 30% if you remove CEDAW 

Next session

The Committee's 112^th session will be Oct 7-31, 2014. This session will last an extra week in order to reduce the backlog on individual communications. 

·      Country reports to be reviewed at the 112th session:

o   Burundi

o   Haiti

o   Israel

o   Malta

o   Montenegro

o   Sri Lanka

·      LOIs to be issued:

o   Canada

o   Spain

o   Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

o   UK (including crown dependencies and overseas territory)

o   Uzbekistan

o   Venezuela

·      LOIPR to be issued:

o   Switzerland

For NGOs who would like to submit information that will be considered by the Committee at its 112th session, the deadline is September 12 for country reports to be reviewed, and was July 25th for preparation of lists of issues (although late submissions after this date may be accepted if sent as soon as possible). 

Quarterly newsletter on the UN human rights treaties

The Human Rights Treaty Division of the UN Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights has issued its latest quarterly newsletter on the treaty system, covering the period April to June 2014.  For anyone following developments of the human rights treaty system, the newsletter contains much useful information and can be downloaded from the official UN website.

The time period covered by this newsletter has been particularly important, including the final stages of the UN General Assembly's approval of its resolution on treaty body strengthening (Res 68/268 of Apr 9 2014), and the elections/re-elections of four of the core human rights committees (50% of each committee is elected/re-elected every 2 years).  

Newsletter contents

25 pages in length, the newsletter covers: 

• the UN General Assembly resolution on treaty body strengthening and its implications for the current treaty body system
• the 26th annual meeting of treaty body chairpersons, June 21-25
• elections of new members for 4 different committees (the Human Rights Committee, the Committee on the Rights of the Child, the Committee on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Committee on Rights of Persons with Disabilities)
• a new urgent action procedure adopted by the Committee on Enforced Disappearance
• a special event on workplace exploitation held by the Committee on the Rights of Migrant Workers
• Key jurisprudence -- summaries of 8 individual case decisions issued between January and April 2014 from 4 different committees, and 3 cases where followup information has been received recently
• A.M.M. v. Switzerland (CERD 50/2012) (Febraury 2014)
• R.P.B. v. the Philippines (CEDAW 34/2011) (February 2014)
• Elisabeth de Blok et al. v. the Netherlands (CEDAW 36/2012) (February 2014)
• Follow up to Pimentel v. Brazil (CEDAW 17/2008)
• Paksas v. Lithuania (CCPR 2155/2012) (March 2014)
• Ory v. France (CCPR 1960/2010) (March 2014)
• Horvath v. Australia (CCPR 1885/2009) (March 2014)
• Follow up to X v. Sweden (CCPR 1833/2008)
• Follow up to Aboushanif v. Norway (CCPR 1542/2007)
• X v. Argentina (CRPD 8/2012) (February 2014)
• Groeninger v. Germany (CRPD 2/2010)  (February 2014)
• a report on the new web based database on timely reporting and late/non-reporting of states
• reports on capacity building workshops held in Tunisia, St. Maarten, the Bahamas and Turkey
• programs supporting victims of torture in  Cambodia and Mali
• Ireland's innovative approach to gathering stakeholder input for its treaty body reports, including online methods
• Nigeria's new torture prevention initiatives under the OPCAT (Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture)
• Latest ratifications of treaties (19 new ratifications and accessions during the quarter)
• Latest state reports received under various treaties (25 reports from 20 countries, under 5 treaties, including initial, periodic, and common core reports)
• an updated directory of contact names and email addresses for each committee
• a listing of other useful tools and links

Committee on Enforced Disappearances

I also found the photo on p. 8 of the newsletter helpful, identifying the members of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances, the newest treaty body added to the system. 

From left to right in the 2nd row:

• Mr. Enoch Mulembe (former member) (Zambia)
• Mr. Rainer Huhle (Germany)
• Mr. Alvaro Garce' Garcia y Santos (Uruguay)
• Mr. Mamadou Badio Camara (Senegal
• Mr. Mohammed Al-Obaidi (Iraq)
• Ms. Suela Janina (Albania)

First row, left to right: 

• Mr. Luciano Hazan (Argentina)
• Mr. Juan Jose Lopez Ortega (Spain)
• Mr. Emmanuel Decaux (France
• Mr. Kimio Yakushiji (Japan)

Conclusion 

This is number 23 in the quarterly newsletter series, which began in 2010 and has been issued somewhat intermittently since then.  The newsletter is a useful information source for those of us following human rights treaty developments, especially if the content continues to cover new developments and the regular quarterly publication schedule can be resumed. 

Decisions of the Committee on Women's Discrimination (CEDAW)

Decisions from CEDAW's latest session (58th), just concluded last week, are not yet available. The following three decisions were issued after its February session (57th) and are now available for review.  In the first two cases violations were found to exist and the government must respond by this September.  The third case was ruled to be inadmissible, with no further action to be taken.

The full text of these cases can be found at the official UN website under the 57th session.

PHILIPPINES

Rape of a deaf and mute 17 year old woman in the Philippines; inadequate sign language and support services; acquittal of the perpetrator due to poor investigation/prosecution efforts, and prejudicial misconceptions and gender stereotypes of the trial judge

R.P.B. v. the Philippines, CEDAW/C/57/D/34/2011 (March 12, 2014), decided February 21, 2014. Represented by counsel (Evalyn G. Ursua and Maria Karla L. Espinosa).  Articles 1 and 2(c), (d), and (f) of the Convention. The complainant comes from a poor family near Manila and is both deaf and mute.  She was raped by a neighbor when 17 years old.  She filed a complaint with the local police, and was interviewed with the help of her sister who provided sign language interpretation. 

She was interviewed by a male police officer, which is a violation of applicable laws.  An affidavit was prepared which she and her sister were asked to sign, but it was prepared in Filipino, even though her sign language fluency was in English. She was not provided a translation. She also underwent a medical exam which concluded there was clear evidence of trauma and sexual assault. 

The perpetrator was arrested but the hearings against him were delayed for several months due to the unavailability of the prosecution’s witnesses. No sign language interpretation was made available on other scheduled dates.

The trial finally went forward on the testimony of the complainant and her mother only, plus written stipulations from the medico-legal officer and police officer who had taken the initial complaint and medical exam. The defendant was acquitted.  The trial court challenged the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and found that she failed to prove that the sexual intercourse was not consensual.  The judge described in detail why he felt that the victim was not credible because she hadn’t resisted the assault with sufficient force.  Despite some evidence of injury and resistance of her arms during the rape, the judge concluded this was not enough to negate the implication of consent.

The Committee concludes the victim’s rights have been violated.  She was not given adequate sign language interpreter services, since she only understood written and sign language English and most of the hearings and investigations were only in Filipino.  The Committee also notes the mistaken and prejudicial reliance on gender stereotypes by the trial court about the use of force and intimidations and the myth that women must forcefully and physically resist the sexual assault to be blameless in its occurrence. 

The Committee recommends that the government provide reparations to the victim in this case, including monetary compensation and free of charge psychological counseling and therapy, and in general, that the government review its legislation on rape, guarantee free and adequate interpreters, including in sign language, in all legal proceedings, ensure rape proceedings are conducted in an impartial and fair manner, free from prejudices or stereotypical notions regarding the victim’s gender, age or disability, and provide regular, adequate training on the Convention, the Optional Protocol, and the Committee’s general recommendations on these topics, in particular nos. 18 and 19 on stereotypes and gender bias to legal professionals. 

The government is to submit a written response within 6 months (Sep 2014) on the actions it has taken to implement these recommendations. The government is also requested to publish this decision, translate it into Filipino and recognized regional languages, as appropriate, and widely disseminate it.  VIOLATION. 

NETHERLANDS

Public insurance maternity leave program enacted, then retracted in lieu of private insurance at much higher premiums, and leaving a gap of 2 years during which private insurers required a qualifying period and would not cover new pregnancies.  Held to be a violation of article 11(2)(b) of the Convention.

De Blok et al v. the Netherlands, CEDAW/C/57/D/36/2012 (24 March 2014), decided 17 February 2014. Represented by counsel (Marlies S.A. Vegter of Bosch Advocaten). Removal of a previously existing public scheme providing benefits to self-employed women during maternity leave, without provision of an adequate alternative.  Violation of CEDAW article 11(2)(b).  The case involves six Dutch nationals, women who were pregnant, self-employed, and without adequate maternity leave benefits after the date that the public law was rescinded and before private insurers were willing to cover such pregnancies (2 year qualifying period).

A Dutch law came into effect in January 1988, the Incapacity Insurance (Self-employed Persons) Act. It established mandatory insurance for self employed workers and their spouses against risk of loss of income owing to their inability to work.  Those insured paid premiums for coverage. A maternity leave allowance of 16 weeks was included.  The law was rescinded in August 2004, requiring self employed workers to take out private insurance after that date if they wanted to be covered against loss of income.  However, most private insurers only covered maternity leave benefits for pregnancies at least 2 years after taking out the insurance.  The premiums for such private insurance were also substantially higher. Others have challenged the fairness of these circumstances in the Dutch courts and lost, the courts concluding it was not a discriminatory act against women.  A declaratory action was also sought by one of the complainants in 2005, which led to a court ruling rejecting their claim in 2007 and an appeal that also rejected their claim in 2009.

The Committee rejects the government’s arguments that the maternity benefits provisions in article 11(2)(b) of CEDAW do not apply to self-employed persons and are “instructive” and a “best efforts obligation” only, not mandatory.  In the present case, having initially introduced a compulsory public maternity leave scheme applicable to all, the government abolished the system without introducing any transitory measures and decided that self employed persons would no longer be covered by the public insurance scheme, but must take out private insurance instead.  5 of the 6 claimants did not purchase private insurance because they could not afford it; in one case the premiums for the private insurance were equal to her entire income.  Concludes that the abolishing of the benefits without putting in place an adequate alternative maternity leave scheme was a violation of article 11 of the Convention.

A new act was adopted in June 2008, re-establishing a public maternity benefit scheme for self-employed women, but this Act did not address the lack of benefits for women who gave birth between August 2004 and the adoption of this new program in June 2008.

The government is ordered to provide reparation to the six complainants, including appropriate monetary compensation, for the loss of maternity benefits.  In addition, the government is ordered to address the gap in benefits available as noted above, between August 2004 and June 2008 when the new law reinstated a maternity benefits program.

The government has 6 months to respond (Sep 2014) on how it has implemented this decision.  It is also requested to publish and disseminate this decision to all relevant sectors of society. VIOLATION.

NETHERLANDS

Woman who is raped and abused in a domestic relationship in Mongolia, then seeks asylum in the Netherlands. Loses her asylum claim and files this claim with the Committee, rejected as failing to substantiate a valid claim under CEDAW

N. v. the Netherlands, CEDAW/C/57/D/39/2012 (March 12, 2014), decided 17 February 2014.  Represented by counsel (Ilse van Kuilenburg).  A woman from Mongolia sought asylum in the Netherlands. Her application was rejected and deportation proceedings were begun. 

She had worked for an influential businessman in Mongolia, who she claimed had raped her, beat her up, confiscated her passport and identity papers and kept her imprisoned in his house.  She said multiple attempts to file complaints with the local police led to bribery by her perpetrator and no charges being filed against him.  She escaped and sought refuge with a friend, but was forcibly removed by men who returned her to her abuser 2 months later.  She escaped a second time and this time went to live in a more remote location, but again was discovered and forcibly removed and returned to her abuser. By this time she was pregnant. He forced her to take some pills to try to induce a miscarriage, but they were not successful. She eventually contacted a smuggler and fled to the Netherlands, to seek asylum. 

The Dutch immigration service found her statements of abuse credible, but did not believe that the Government of Mongolia was unwilling or unable to protect her. Her request for asylum was denied.  She appealed the decision to the Dutch courts and lost. 

The Committee concludes that her complaint is not admissible before them because she failed to raise the issue of sex-based discrimination in the handling of her asylum request in the Dutch courts. CEDAW does not cover asylum claims as a general matter, but only where there has been sex-based discrimination in their handling. In addition she has not provided any explanation for why she thinks articles 3 and 6 of CEDAW have been violated, which deal with the advancement of the human rights of women and exploitation of prostitution and trafficking of women. On her claim of fear of gender based violence if she were to return to Mongolia, she offers no explanation for why her perpetrator would continue to be a threat to her five years after the events occurred.  Nor has she explained how, in the past, the Mongolian authorities have failed to protect her in her personal circumstances or shown that there is a real risk that these authorities would be unable to provide her with appropriate protection upon return.  Her failure to follow up on the various police complaints she had filed was also noteworthy to the Committee.

Therefore her complaint is ruled INADMISSIBLE.

Latest ratifications of UN human rights treaties, including the State of Palestine

There have been 38 new ratifications* of human rights treaties and various treaty protocols so far in 2014.  This is slightly above the pace of 2013 when there were a total of 46 ratifications for the entire year, but it is consistent with prior years before that (e.g., 59 total ratifications in 2012).

Palestine

Probably the most significant news so far is the first ratifications from the State of Palestine. They have now ratified seven of the core human rights treaties plus two important protocols, as of April 2014, namely

• International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racism (CERD)
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR)
• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
• Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
• Optional Protocol to the CRC on child soldiers (OPAC)
• Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT)
• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)
• Optional Protocol to the CRPD (accepts individual complaints)

However, except for the complaint mechanism for disabled persons (CRPD), the State of Palestine has not yet elected to join any of the other individual complaint mechanisms available under these treaties.

The first reports to be submitted by the Palestinian Authority will be due 

• May 2015 for CERD, CEDAW, CRC and CAT
• July 2015 for CCPR
• April 2016 for CESCR  
• May 2016 for CRPD and OPAC

Other ratifications and withdrawn reservations

Here is a list of the other ratifications so far in 2014, grouped by treaty:

Optional Protocol to CESCR (accepts the individual complaint mechanism):

• Belgium (ratified May 20)
• Cape Verde (ratified June 23)
• Finland (ratified Jan 31)
• Gabon (ratified April 1)

Optional Protocol to CAT (accepts national preventive system against torture, including international visits of places of detention): 

• Greece (ratified February 11)
• Lithuania (ratified January 20)
• Mozambique (ratified July 1)

Optional Protocol to the CRC (accepts the individual complaint mechanism) (OPIC):

• Belgium (May 30)
• Costa Rica (January 14)

Optional Protocol to the CRC on the sale/pornography of children (OPSC):

• Ethiopia (March 25)

Optional Protocol to the CRC on child soldiers (OPAC): 

• Burundi (May 22)
• Estonia (February 12)
• Ethiopia (May 14)
• St. Lucia (January 15)

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD):

• Andorra (March 11)
• Angola (May 19)
• Cote d'Ivoire (January 10)
• Georgia (March 13)
• Japan (January 20)
• Switzerland (April 15

Optional Protocol to the CRPD (accepts individual complaints to the CRPD treaty): 

• Andorra (March 11)
• Angola (May 19)
• Burundi (May 22)
• Gabon (June 26)

Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (CED): 

• Portugal has ratified both the treaty and the complaint mechanism under article 31 (Jan 27)

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): 

While there are no new ratifications to CEDAW (other than the State of Palestine mentioned above), it is noteworthy that both the governments of Iraq (on February 18) and Tunisia (on April 17) have notified the UN treaty authorities that they have withdrawn certain of their prior reservations to CEDAW. 

Next steps

Each new ratification means the country concerned must file its first report on its human rights track record within one or two years, depending on the treaty. 

In addition, in those cases where acceptance of an individual complaint mechanism has been ratified, complaints may be submitted by human rights victims to the relevant treaty body for events occurring after the complaint mechanism went into effect for such country. In addition, each complaint procedure requires that the individual exhaust available remedies in the country before submitting a complaint to the international treaty body.  For more information, please consult the UN human rights treaty site on complaint procedures. 

The next major event in the annual calendar is the UN treaty event held in late September each year during the General Assembly session.  Countries are encouraged to ratify instruments that they have not yet joined.  Usually this event results in a spike of ratifications, often equal to 50% of the entire year's activity. 

*please note that I have used the term "ratify" in this article when sometimes the technical term would be more properly "accede".  In both cases the treaty is ratified but in the case of an "accession" the country involved has simply ratified the instrument without going through the interim, optional step of signing it (which implies an intention to seek formal ratification).  Thus whether ratified or acceded to, the legal effect is the same -- the country concerned becomes legally bound by the terms of the treaty. 

Vatican human rights -- the Committee speaks

The Committee on the Rights of the Child released its concluding observations on Wednesday for each of the countries whose reports were reviewed during their current session.  This included the report of the Holy See.  The press coverage was extensive and as you probably know the Committee's report was hard hitting, with many strong criticisms and specific, concrete recommendations.

I will discuss other aspects of the Committee's session later, but in this post I would like to address the overall impact and impressions of the Holy See report and conclusions.

First, lets look at the Holy See's report itself.  It was filed 14 years late. The Vatican had last appeared before the Committee in 1995.  They were supposed to submit updated reports every five years. This report was submitted in September 2011 but it had been due since 1997.  As a consequence, most of the revelations about priest and church hierarchy abuse had surfaced since the last report had been filed.

Second, the length of the report, 41 pages, is actually below the page limits recommended by the Committee (60 pages) even though it was a combined report, covering 16 years of activities.  Most state reports are much longer, often exceeding the 60 page limit. The Vatican has also elected not to file what is called as a common core document, which could cover some of the more generic information about its government, legislation and demographics which is common to all treaties.  Common core documents are submitted by most governments, and have a recommended page limit of 80 pages.  Since the Vatican didn't file a core document much of the material in their report was actually generic in nature and could have been moved to the core report, had they elected to submit one.  So the actual detailed information in the 41 page report that they submitted was far less specific than in most state reports.

The third criterion I usually look at in assessing the completeness of a report is whether or not it addresses the concluding recommendations of the Committee from the last report.  In this case, that would mean, did it cover the recommendations from the 1995 report of the Committee? Here I thought the Vatican did a fairly good job of responding to each recommendation of the 1995 report. Although the quality of the responses was not great, at least they made the effort to respond in some form to each of the recommendations.  Many states don't even do that much in their reports. However, even on this point the Committee was quite critical of the delegation for failing to effectively respond to their prior recommendations.

In terms of the Committee's concluding recommendations, they covered 16 pages and 67 paragraphs, with 32 of those being specific paragraphs with recommendations.  Taking into account subparagraphs and subpoints I counted at least 76 separate recommendations.

The full text of the Committee's report can be downloaded here.

Among the notable observations and recommendations, were the following (paragraph references are in parentheses):

• Most of the prior recommendations of the Committee have not been addressed by the state party in the present report (9)

• The Committee welcomes the statement of the delegation that the Holy See may possibly withdraw the reservations they have previously filed to the Convention; and recommends that they do so in order that it is clear that the Convention has precedence over internal laws and regulations (11, 12)

• Recommends that the Holy See establish a mechanism at a high level with the mandate and capacity to coordinate the implementation of children’s rights across all pontifical councils, episcopal conferences of bishops as well as individuals institutions of a religious nature that function under the authority of the Holy See. (16)

• Notes the Special Office established in August 2013 to oversee the implementation of international agreements, including to receive children’s complaints on sexual abuse, but the Committee believes more must be done. An independent mechanism should be established to receive and investigate children’s complaints in a child-sensitive manner, and ensure that this mechanism is made accessible to all children in schools, services and institutions provided by the Catholic Church. Given the special nature of the Holy See, guidelines on the relationship and collaboration between this mechanism and national law enforcement authorities, should also be established and widely disseminated. (19, 20)

• Remove gender stereotypes from Catholic school textbooks. (28)

• The number of children born of Catholic priests should be assessed, find out who they are and take all necessary measures to ensure the rights of these children to know and be cared for by their fathers, as appropriate. Churches should no longer impose confidentiality agreements on mothers who receive financial plans to support their children. (34)

• Concern about the continued practice of anonymous abandonment of babies organized by Catholic organizations in several countries through the use of the so-called “baby boxes.” The Holy See should study the root causes of anonymous abandonment, strengthen and promote alternatives, provide family planning and counseling to prevent unplanned pregnancies. (35, 36)

• Failure to adequately investigate and remedy the plight of the women and girls who were forced to work in slavery-like conditions in the Magdalene laundries of Ireland run by four congregations of Catholic Sisters until 1996. Also addressed by the Committee against Torture in their recommendations to the Republic of Ireland. The Committee calls on the Holy See to conduct an internal investigation into this event as well as in all countries where this system was in place, to ensure those responsible are sanctioned and reported to the national judicial authorities for prosecution purposes; ensure that compensation is paid to the victims; provide support to the victims; assess the circumstances and reasons that led to such practices and take all necessary measures to ensure that no women and children can be arbitrarily confined for whatever reason in Catholic institutions in the future. (37, 38)

• Corporal punishment, including ritual beatings of children, has been and remains widespread in some Catholic institutions and reached endemic levels in certain countries. The Committee calls on the Holy See to amend both Canon Law and Vatican City State laws to explicitly prohibit all corporal punishment of children, and establish mechanisms to effectively enforce this ban in all Catholic schools and institutions. (39, 40)

• Deepest concern over child abuse committed by members of the Catholic churches, involving the sexual abuse of tens of thousands of children worldwide. Well known sexual abusers have been transferred from parish to parish. The Holy See has claimed to investigate but has declined to provide the Committee with data on cases or the outcome of the internal procedures. Abuse has been dealt with in confidential proceedings, allowing the vast majority of abusers to escape judicial prosecution. Reporting to national law enforcement authorities has never been made compulsory by the church. Code of silence imposed on all members of the clergy under penalty of excommunication. The Committee calls on the Holy See (43,44):

• To ensure that the new Commission created in December 2013 will investigate independently all cases of child sexual abuse as well as the conduct of the Catholic hierarchy in dealing with them

•  Immediately remove all known and suspected child sexual abusers, & refer the matter to relevant law enforcement authorities

• Ensure a transparent sharing of archives

• Amend Canon Law in order to consider any child sexual abuse to be a crime; repeal all obligations of silence on victims and on all those that become aware of such crimes

• Establish clear rules, mechanisms and procedures for mandatory reporting of all suspected cases of child sexual abuse

• Ensure that all priests, religious personnel and individuals working under the authority of the Holy See are made aware of their reporting obligations

• Develop programs and policies for the prevention of such crimes

• Develop educational preventive programs to increase children’s awareness of sexual abuse and to teach them the necessary skills with which to protect themselves

• Consider ratifying the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (43, 44) 

• Concern that the Holy See objected to draft text at the 2013 session of the Commission on the Status of Women that would have prevented governments from using religion, custom or tradition as an excuse for not protecting women and girls from violence. (45). Calls on the Holy See to prioritize the elimination of all forms of violence against children. (46)

• The Holy See should promote the creation of helplines in all countries, raise awareness of their existence and encourage children to use them. (47)

• Adopt a policy for the de-institutionalization of children placed in Catholic Church-run institutions and for the reunification with their families, where possible. (53)

• Establish comprehensive procedures for the early identification of child victims of sexual and other forms of abuse.  Ensure accessible, confidential, child-friendly and effective reporting channels for children who are victims or witnesses of sexual abuse, and that they are protected from retaliation. (61)

What are the next steps?

      The Committee has requested that the Holy See file its next report no later than September 1, 2017, in 3 3/4 years. This is a relatively short time period as these deadlines go and it means that the government will need to get busy in responding to and implementing the 76 recommendations made. 

      There will also be pressure put on the Vatican to demonstrate early progress toward implementing these recommendations, especially the ones that are reasonably simple to implement and/or that the delegation indicated at the hearing it was already considering actions on. 

      The next treaty body hearing for the Holy See is this May, before the Committee Against Torture (CAT).  The dates of review have been tentatively set for May 12 and 13. The sessions will also be webcast. Many of the same questions and criticisms will no doubt be raised as were made in the Committee on the Rights of the Child, but clever advocates will try to push the agenda forward by pointing to the conclusions of this Committee and the assurances made by the delegation here as well as statements of the Pope and the Church in public media, to produce tangible evidence of concrete actions that the Holy See is taking. If you would like to follow the developments before CAT you can check the Committee website and also track the latest news on Twitter with hashtag #HolySeeConfess.  

      The NGOs CRIN, CCR and SNAP are also likely to cover the CAT proceedings very closely, as they did with the CRC hearing. 

      The Holy See is also overdue on two other reports for treaties that it has ratified: the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (CED) (one year overdue) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) (14 years overdue).  One would hope they would submit those reports soon and that those treaty bodies would also have an opportunity to question the delegation on its human rights obligations in the not too distant future. 

Opening day of Committee on Racial Discrimination

Monday was the opening day of the 84th session of CERD -- the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.  In an historic event, they elected Mr. Jose Francisco Cali Tzay from Guatemala as their chairperson for the next two years, the first representative of an indigenous organisation to hold such a title.  His election included a nice welcoming speech from Chief Wilton

Mr. Cali Tzay is in the centre

Little Child, chair of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and messages of support from representatives of each of the regional groups on the Committee.

Mr. Cali Tzay is a member of the Mayan Caqchikel of Guatemala.  A ceremonial blanket from the International Indian Council was also presented to Mr. Cali Tzay during the opening day session as an expression of honour in the tradition of the Cree Indian Tribe.

The Committee will meet for three weeks and will be reviewing the reports of eight countries -- Belgium, Honduras, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Montenegro, Poland, Switzerland and Uzbekistan.

The review of country reports will be webcast live.  The Committee is also expected to review and issue some decisions on individual cases and meet with governments in a state parties meeting, to discuss changes in working procedures.

More information about the CERD session can be found at the Committee's website.