No matter how overshadowed by inter-governmental politics, the UN Human Rights Council's "Universal Periodic Review" (UPR) is under-appreciated. When it comes to China -- in February 2009 -- this becomes regrettable.
In the US, there is a general suspicion of things that the UN is trying to do. This may not be without good reasons. But UPR is not your yet another piece of useless UN resolution, another wasteful opportunity where diplomats make deals and the violators of human rights pat each other on the back! I understand how we taxpayers in the US have come to see the UN as a circus of political dealings, where repressive governments banging together – defeating efforts to examine or criticize those among them.
The UPR no doubt has its flaw and can potentially be abused by members states that fear for exposure of their human rights records. As far as China is concerned, though, under-appreciation accompanied by lack of activism in participating in this process will let go by an opportunity to shame China hence pressuring it to improve human rights:
1. Since 1989, each year, at the annual session of the former Human Rights Commission, efforts were defeated to try to put the review of China’s human rights records on the agenda! The new Human Rights Council (which replaced the Commission) made such hard work to jump that hurdle suddenly unnecessary. Human rights NGOs no longer need to sweat over lobbying governments claiming to care about human rights to sponsor a motion and get other governments to sign on in order to put the motion to examine China on the agenda!
2. China lost one major weapon against any international attempt to scrutinize its human rights: that it is "interference in China's internal affairs" and "selectively tarnishing China." All 192 members states of the UN are to be reviewed within 4 years, including China. This is no small measure for those of us who went through years of difficult lobbying, followed only by disappointment. China lost the very opportunity to manipulate the Commission procedures to block efforts to examine its performance: UPR is automatic - every 4 years - and comprehensive - all areas of human rights are examined whether or not China has signed or ratified any covenants or conventions governing specific areas of human rights.
3. Prior to UPR review, NGOs are given several opportunities to get involved to make the review work though their impact is limited. They can directly provide the UPR Working Group with their own reports of a country’s human rights performance. They need not to be “accredited” by the incredibly difficult process set by the UN for submitting such non-governmental reports.
UPR is not without its flaws and limitations, which can affect the objectivity and accuracy of the outcome of the review. The Geneva-based group International Service for Human Rights did a rather useful assessment of UPR in a report of the new Human Rights Council (2005- ) first-year performance.
One limitation is that the final conclusion of the Review is a running record of things said during the "interactive dialogue" and only states are involved in this dialogue. UPR is thus largely a peer review by member states (as contrasted to independent experts review conducted by treaty bodies). This can be manipulated by states under review. They can lobby their friends countries to occupy the 3-hour dialogue with praises!
Still, the upcoming Feb. 09 UPR on China is the first opportunity ever to put China's human rights performance in the past 4 years under the magnifying glasses at the UN. The review is supposed to be systematic and comprehensive. Concerned goverments and international or domestic civil society actors must not be blinded by cynicism and should fully explore the opportunities for making UPR bite!
Xiaorong Li
November 2008
