Skip to main content

Statements Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

Statement of the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Ivan Šimonović, at the side event on the Role of National Human Rights Institutions in the UN System, New York, 12 October 2015

Role of national human rights institutions in the UN system

12 October 2015

It is a pleasure and a honour to be here today to discuss the role that national human rights institutions (NHRIs) play in the UN human rights system. Please allow me to thank the Permanent Missions which are co-hosting this important event together with the International Service for Human Rights. I would also like to warmly welcome to New York the distinguished representatives of national human rights institutions that are here with us today.

In my introductory remarks, I would like to focus on two issues: the current participation of national institutions in the work of the UN human rights machinery; and their possible involvement in the work of other UN entities with a mandate to promote and protect human rights.

NHRIs have a long history of cooperation with the UN human rights mechanisms. In view of their independence from the Government and their in-depth knowledge of the human rights situation in their country, NHRIs provide an essential contribution to the work of the UN human rights machinery. NHRIs collaborate with human rights mechanisms in two ways: first, they provide first-hand information on the actual human rights situation on the ground; and second, they play a vital role in following up to the recommendations made by UN bodies.

The relationship between NHRIs and the international human rights system is one of mutual benefit: on the one hand, human rights bodies rely on the independent and authoritative information provided by national institutions to elaborate their conclusions and recommendations; on the other hand, national institutions benefit from the expertise and the tailored and concrete recommendations made by the UN human rights machinery in their efforts to support countries in complying with their human rights obligations.

NHRIs’ participation in the work of UN human rights bodies has evolved over time: nowadays, A-status NHRIs actively participate in the sessions of the Human Rights Council. They have the right to attend all regular and special sessions of the Council, deliver statements and submit written documentation on any agenda item, attend informal consultations on draft resolutions and organise parallel events.

A-status NHRIs actively engage with in the Universal Periodic Review and human rights treaty bodies by providing information on the human rights situation in their countries. In the case of UPR, this information appears in a separate section of the Summary of Stakeholders’ Information prepared by OHCHR so as to mark the unique nature of these institutions. During the examination of State party reports by human rights treaty bodies, NHRIs regularly provide written information, usually in the form of parallel reports, and make formal presentations to the Committee immediately before or during the examination of the State party report.

Last but not least, NHRIs regularly engage with special procedures mandate holders, providing them with unbiased and authoritative information that is essential for carrying out their country visits and engaging with State authorities through the communication procedure.

What lesson can be learned from the well-established cooperation between national institutions and existing UN human rights mechanisms? In which way can this positive experience be used as an example to strengthen and formalise the NHRIs contribution to the work of other UN bodies, mechanisms and processes with a mandate to promote and protect human rights? 

As you may be aware of, the main subject of Secretary-General’s report on NHRIs to the General Assembly is the participation of national institutions in the activities of UN bodies and mechanisms in New York.

The report acknowledges that NHRIs have participated in, and contributed to, a wide range of inter-governmental processes held under the auspices of the GA, including the 2001 World Conference against Racism, the 2009 Durban Review Conference and the 2014 World Conference on Indigenous Peoples.

The contribution made by NHRIs to the elaboration of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was formally recognised by the General Assembly. In this regard, Article 33 of the CRPD on national implementation and monitoring represents the clearest example of the contribution made by NHRIs to the progressive development on international human rights law.

Nevertheless, the report notes that the cooperation of NHRIs with several UN bodies and mechanisms remains “mostly ad hoc and informal”. The Open-ended Working Group on Ageing, for example, does not provide formal participation rights to A-status national human rights institutions, while NHRIs can only participate in the work of the Commission on the Status of Women as part of States’ delegations.

These bodies, the Secretary-General concludes, would benefit from the independent and authoritative contribution of national institutions. He therefore recommends that the participation of A-status NHRIs in the work of New York-based UN bodies and mechanisms be considered, on the basis of the modalities for national institutions’ participation in the Human Rights Council. The Secretary-General also recommends that relevant UN processes and mechanisms develop their own modalities to ensure the effective and independent participation of institutions compliant with the Paris Principles.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Let me conclude. NHRIs are uniquely positioned to support the work of the United Nations in the field of the promotion and protection of human rights. It is our hope that Member States decide to follow the recommendation of the Secretary-General by elaborating clear rules to facilitate the contribution of A-status national institutions in the activities of UN bodies, mechanisms and processes dealing with the promotion and protection of human rights. This would also be an incentive for national institutions to become fully compliant with the Paris Principles.

I thank you for your attention.

VIEW THIS PAGE IN: