Civil society and human rights defenders’ engagement has been central to strengthening UN human rights mechanisms and pressing for their evolution, for instance, by pushing for the recognition of the right to a healthy environment or the creation of mandate holders like the Special Rapporteur on climate change. Submissions, communications, advocacy missions, public briefings, and coalition-building have been part of efforts that have led international bodies to increasingly recognise the links between environmental harm, structural discrimination, corporate abuses, and attacks against defenders.
Before choosing which mechanisms to include in your advocacy work, leverage your experience as an EHRD to identify what works for you! Here are some ways in which interacting with regional and universal human rights systems can help you move forward in your advocacy, and some limitations to take into account:
✔ It offers global visibility and legitimacy for environmental justice and efforts to tackle the climate emergency. ✔ It allows EHRDs to frame local issues as international human rights concerns. ✔ It brings thematic and technical expertise, including on emerging or cross-cutting issues. ✔ It sets and clarifies international norms and standards, shaping how rights are applied and interpreted worldwide. ✔ It engages almost all States, creating political pressure through peer scrutiny. ✔ It documents global patterns and identifies systemic and transnational trends. ✔ It is instrumental when national and system-level institutions are weak, captured, or inaccessible, or when there are no regional systems in place.
☒ Binding outcomes are limited. They largely rely on political pressure, dialogue, and reputational accountability, rather than binding enforcement mechanisms. ☒ State implementation requires continued follow-up and pressure. State capacity for follow-up could be limited, leaving much of the burden on civil society and affected communities to continue putting pressure. Also, some procedures are lengthy and could be bureaucratic, requiring specific technical skills and follow-up. ☒ Power Dynamics continue to be present in some spaces. State interests and geopolitical dynamics influence outcomes and, in some cases, decision-making processes, and sensitive cases may receive limited attention due to political considerations. ☒ The UN mechanisms are often underfunded, impacting their institutional capacity. Lack of financial resources impacts agendas, the ability to respond in real time, and capacity, stretching outreach, monitoring, and follow-up. ☒ Engagement may expose defenders to the risk of reprisals, especially in hostile environments. Some mechanisms have provisions to mitigate this risk, but they may fail in certain contexts due to delayed responses or lead to inadequate actions to counteract it. ☒ Access is unequal. Well-resourced, equipped organisations are often better positioned to engage effectively. On the other hand, smaller organisations lack the resources to carry out time-intensive international advocacy. As a result, it might create excessive dependency on support from experienced CSOs or legal partners. ☒ Geographic and linguistic barriers may also limit grassroots actors' effective participation.
For EHRDs more so than others, UN human rights mechanisms matter because they create additional layers of visibility, accountability, and normative development beyond the national level. However, they are not infallible, and that's why you need to understand their scope, strengths and potential backlashes before actively engaging.
Here are some situations where we advise you to think twice before taking these engagements, as they may not deliver what you are seeking in your advocacy.
⚠ If public engagement may significantly increase exposure to reprisals, and you lack the capacity to mitigate those risks. See here for a tool to assess this. ⚠ When the State has not ratified key treaties or protocols. ⚠ When capacity constraints make sustained engagement impossible, particularly if you need to allocate effort to reach a decision and then follow up on its implementation. ⚠ When you can address the situation using national mechanisms or other means, such as grievance mechanisms, that are more time-effective and have a more tailored impact.
International mechanisms rely on credible information, consistent follow-up, and robust documentation. To engage successfully, you will need to wear different hats and manage multiple activities simultaneously. This work includes regularly presenting information, attending high-level meetings, looking for funds, pressing for a decision from a human rights body, and tracking the implementation at national level. We always recommend that you discuss this with your NGO colleagues, collectives, coalitions or movements you work with. UN engagement requires collective work to make sure it is successful.
We will explore how to choose the right approach for your engagement in the next section.
