“Human rights are built for moments like these,” stated new Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Ilze Brands Kehris, emphasizing the crucial role of the council during times of oppression and the need for principles to translate into action. The UN Human Rights Council, established on June 19, 2006, replaced the UN Human Rights Commission. Then-Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged its 47 member states to avoid “political point-scoring or gratuitous or politically motivated attacks.” Currently, during its 62nd session in Geneva, the Council is working more intensely than ever, striving for accountability in numerous new emergencies and unresolved crises.
However, has it met expectations? And has it adapted to a world where, as UN Secretary-General António Guterres highlighted at a special event marking the Council’s two decades, “human rights are under attack and are being violated with impunity”?
‘Not an Easy Undertaking’
“Building the Council was not an easy undertaking,” recalled its first president, Luis Alfonso de Alba Góngora. “Member states had very different views on what needed to be changed and what needed to be preserved from the old Commission. The international context was also not good; there were countries that opposed the establishment of the Human Rights Council and did not support the building of the new institution. There were conflicts in Gaza, as there are today, in Lebanon… It was not easy.”
Every Voice Matters
One of the Council’s foundational objectives, like other UN bodies, was to involve a wide spectrum of participants in its discussions—from government officials to civil society activists, independent investigators, and NGO representatives. High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk explained that this level of engagement ensures “Indigenous Peoples are represented,” alongside those whose voices are often harder to hear. “I have participated in many interactive panels involving children and young people, as well as survivors and victims. This is a model of participation that the UN should emulate and even go further.” Observers of the Council often hear the president, appointed on a rotating basis from regional blocs for a one-year term, gently reminding delegates to show respect for each other. This reminder underscores the pivotal role of the forum in voicing concerns, a role that many human rights activists today face with deadly reprisakes.
Special Rapporteurs
Another key feature of the Council is its human rights rapporteurs, tasked with monitoring situations and reporting to raise awareness and promote action. Farida Shaheed, the special rapporteur on the right to education, noted the presence of around 50 Special Rapporteurs, describing them as the “front line for the unheard.” “When those who are silent speak, we speak too, and sometimes what we say is not palatable. We bring issues to the table that are not always discussed.”
Assessed Approach
As a subsidiary organ of the UN General Assembly, the Council holds a higher status than its predecessor. It convenes for three regular sessions annually, and each session typically considers two dozen or more resolutions on everything from the promotion of human rights in specific countries of concern, such as South Sudan, to freedom of religion or belief, and the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. Many of these texts, detailing what actions the Council expects, are adopted without a vote at the end of the session. Some are revised before approval, while others might be withdrawn from the final list. Sometimes this happens after hushed informal negotiations near the coffee machines, emanating from the more plush, carpeted settings of the iconic Room XX in Geneva. When consensus cannot be reached on an issue, such as with Ukraine, a vote is held, and the resolution is adopted or rejected. As the Council continues to face accusations of bias against Israel, which has been on its agenda for 20 years, proponents of the forum point to the human rights peer review that each UN member state undergoes once every four and a half years.
A view of journalists following the opening of the 28th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva.
Funding Crisis
Despite human rights being one of the three pillars of the UN, alongside peace and security and development, the current UN-wide funding crisis poses an existential challenge to the Council’s work. Delegates’ speaking time has been reduced, and interpretation services have had to be cut. Independent experts, reiterating the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ concerns about the dire financial situation, have also frequently highlighted that a lack of funding forces them to rationalize their workloads.
Exciting Days
Beyond the challenges confronting the Council, Rolando Gomez, a senior communications officer, recalls the excitement of the inaugural session in 2006. “As part of the small media team supporting the launch, there was a real sense of witnessing the beginning of a renewed commitment by the international community to strengthen the UN’s human rights work and to place these issues more prominently on the global agenda.”
“Despite its share of challenges and debates, it has become an indispensable forum for dialogue, accountability, and action on human rights issues worldwide,” he stated. “What has impressed me the most has been its unique ability to provide a platform for voices that are often not heard elsewhere – victims, human rights defenders, independent experts, and civil society representatives whose testimonies sharply outline the realities of human rights.”
Bob Last, a seasoned political advisor from the UK Mission who was there from the Council’s inception, added, “There was a mixture of excitement and hope on day one. It was exciting because we were starting something big, and we had the chance to build a new institution, which is something very few of us working at the UN rarely get. And it was hopeful because there was a chance to improve on the failures of the Human Rights Commission. There were, and still are, disagreements about the failures of the Commission. But on day one, Kofi Annan was very clear about what he saw as the failures of the Commission, why he wanted to change it, and his hopes for the Council.”
