Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Treaty bodies
Human Rights Committee discussees methods of work
24 October 2016
Share
GENEVA (24 October 2016) - The Human Rights Committee discussed its methods of work this morning, focusing on the outcomes of its Annual Report presented by the Committee Chairperson to the Third Committee of the General Assembly in New York, as well as on his intervention at the Plenary Session of the General Assembly aimed at commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights. At the end of the meeting, the Committee adopted the Report on the specification of measures of redress within the scope of individual communications considered by the Human Rights Committee.
Presenting his report to the Third Committee of the General Assembly, Fabian Omar Salvioli, Committee Chairperson, stated that he had updated the Third Committee on the progress made by the Committee on the General Comment on the right to life, as well as other progress made by the Committee, including on country reports and the backlog in this respect. He had also briefed the Third Committee on the state of individual communications, and how the Committee was working on a day-to-day basis with the Secretariat in that regard. Finally, Mr. Salvioli had emphasized the importance of the follow up procedures and asked for more resources, precisely having in mind that the number of individual communications was growing each year. Mr. Salvioli had also reiterated the importance of States parties’ compliance with the Committee’s views, and highlighted the Committee’s concern that some States had mentioned the possibility of reintroducing the death penalty.
Mr. Salvioli regretted that he had not been able to discuss the Report of the Treaty Body Chairpersons as that item had not been on the Agenda of the General Assembly. Finally, Mr. Salvioli briefed the Committee on his intervention at the Plenary Session of the General Assembly organized by the Nordic countries, with a view to commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights.
In the ensuing discussion, Committee Experts commended Mr. Salvioli for presenting the work of the Committee, and inquired what criticisms had been raised towards the Treaty Bodies. As a response to the issue raised by Treaty Bodies on the lack of reporting by States parties, some delegations had proposed that States parties be examined without their presence, or that that they be provided technical cooperation support. One of the criticisms towards the Treaty Bodies was that they were engaging in work that was not specifically within their mandates, which could lead to inappropriate use of time and resources. Finally, they had criticized the San Jose Guidelines on Reprisals, which they claimed placed additional obligations on States parties not contained in the treaties.
The Committee then proceeded to discuss the Report on the specification of measures of redress within the scope of individual communications considered by the Human Rights Committee, drafted by the Committee Chairperson and Rapporteur, Mr. Fabian Omar Salvioli. More specifically, the Committee discussed the concluding Paragraph 107, which stated that: “A close examination of the Committee’s jurisprudence as set forth in its Views on individual communications shows that the Committee has specified a wide variety of measures falling into all the different categories.” The paragraph then outlined the Committee’s policy on redress.
During the discussion, Experts highlighted the importance of the Report, which aimed to set out guidelines for standardizing or harmonizing the criteria used to determine what types of measures of redress were called for. That would render the Committee’s practices more systematic, consistent and effective, as well as enable the Committee to specify the measures to be taken in each case that would best enable States parties to comply with the Committee’s views. Experts agreed that States parties should be given the opportunity to express themselves on reparations and redress, and that the Report was not a straightjacket set in stone, but rather a set of guidelines. They also agreed on the terminology and order of subparagraphs.
The Committee then proceeded to adopt the Report on the specification of measures of redress within the scope of individual communications considered by the Human Rights Committee.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. to examine the sixth periodic report of Morocco (CCPR/C/MAR/6).
Presenting his report to the Third Committee of the General Assembly, Fabian Omar Salvioli, Committee Chairperson, stated that he had updated the Third Committee on the progress made by the Committee on the General Comment on the right to life, as well as other progress made by the Committee, including on country reports and the backlog in this respect. He had also briefed the Third Committee on the state of individual communications, and how the Committee was working on a day-to-day basis with the Secretariat in that regard. Finally, Mr. Salvioli had emphasized the importance of the follow up procedures and asked for more resources, precisely having in mind that the number of individual communications was growing each year. Mr. Salvioli had also reiterated the importance of States parties’ compliance with the Committee’s views, and highlighted the Committee’s concern that some States had mentioned the possibility of reintroducing the death penalty.
Mr. Salvioli regretted that he had not been able to discuss the Report of the Treaty Body Chairpersons as that item had not been on the Agenda of the General Assembly. Finally, Mr. Salvioli briefed the Committee on his intervention at the Plenary Session of the General Assembly organized by the Nordic countries, with a view to commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights.
In the ensuing discussion, Committee Experts commended Mr. Salvioli for presenting the work of the Committee, and inquired what criticisms had been raised towards the Treaty Bodies. As a response to the issue raised by Treaty Bodies on the lack of reporting by States parties, some delegations had proposed that States parties be examined without their presence, or that that they be provided technical cooperation support. One of the criticisms towards the Treaty Bodies was that they were engaging in work that was not specifically within their mandates, which could lead to inappropriate use of time and resources. Finally, they had criticized the San Jose Guidelines on Reprisals, which they claimed placed additional obligations on States parties not contained in the treaties.
The Committee then proceeded to discuss the Report on the specification of measures of redress within the scope of individual communications considered by the Human Rights Committee, drafted by the Committee Chairperson and Rapporteur, Mr. Fabian Omar Salvioli. More specifically, the Committee discussed the concluding Paragraph 107, which stated that: “A close examination of the Committee’s jurisprudence as set forth in its Views on individual communications shows that the Committee has specified a wide variety of measures falling into all the different categories.” The paragraph then outlined the Committee’s policy on redress.
During the discussion, Experts highlighted the importance of the Report, which aimed to set out guidelines for standardizing or harmonizing the criteria used to determine what types of measures of redress were called for. That would render the Committee’s practices more systematic, consistent and effective, as well as enable the Committee to specify the measures to be taken in each case that would best enable States parties to comply with the Committee’s views. Experts agreed that States parties should be given the opportunity to express themselves on reparations and redress, and that the Report was not a straightjacket set in stone, but rather a set of guidelines. They also agreed on the terminology and order of subparagraphs.
The Committee then proceeded to adopt the Report on the specification of measures of redress within the scope of individual communications considered by the Human Rights Committee.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. to examine the sixth periodic report of Morocco (CCPR/C/MAR/6).
____________________
For use of the information media; not an official record