You can engage with the Human Rights Council in different ways - including delivering an oral statement, planning a side event, meeting with States, negotiating resolutions, and pushing for government statements. This section focuses on Government statements..
What is a Government statement?
It is a statement made by a State, or a group of States (joint statement), on the human rights situation of another country. Through Government statements, other States can draw attention to a human rights issue in your country. Government statements are also often a necessary step for further action by the UN.
You can push for such statements without travelling to Geneva.
A strong statement
- contains specific and accurate descriptions of national human rights situations/violations (not watered down)
- articulates an appropriate position (e.g., ‘condemns the killing/arrest...’)
- contains clear calls for the State concerned to stop the violations (e.g. concrete action)
- calls for accountability of these violations
- reflects human rights standards and should be 'objective'
For example, if there are extrajudicial killings in your country, a strong statement would condemn it and demand that your State end the violations, investigate, prosecute and provide victims with remedy. A strong joint statement should indicate that there will be further Council action if the situation does not improve (i.e. a resolution).
A weak statement
- is watered down in its language to appease political interests over the human rights reality
- can be a vague statement expressing ‘concern’ about certain situations, rather than calling for concrete action
For example, if there are extrajudicial killings in your country, a weak statement would merely express concern and encourage your State to look into these allegations.
Examples of strong statements:
Joint Statement on the operations of the Human Rights Council
Why this statement is good:
- It is specific
- It contains clear calls for action to strengthen the Human Rights Council
- It addresses the challenges of being a political inter-governmental body
- It sets out objective criteria to determine when the Council takes action on a particular country situation
Statement of Germany on the issue of reprisals in Egypt
Why this statement is good:
- It contains clear calls for action
- It calls accountability by Egypt for committing reprisals against human rights defenders, citing the name of a specific activist
Joint Statement on Venezuela
Why this statement is good:
- The statement was led by countries from the same region as Venezuela, who were perceived to have more authority to speak about the situation – and be less easily dismissed by Venezuela – than countries in the global north.
- The statement reinforced the findings of civil society in the country, which the Venezuelan government had consistently denied, and opened the door for further action at the Council.
Impact of the statement:
- It paved the way for the resolution which mandated OHCHR to report to the council on the situation. Civil society was able to build on the joint statement in 2016, leading to regular national statements at the Council as well as regional (Latin America) joint statements, and finally leading to a resolution in 2018 calling on the OHCHR to report to the Council on the situation in the country.
- Although the impact on the ground was limited in 2016, it is important that States have acknowledged the crisis in the country, and the resolution created great pressure on Venezuela.
- It laid the foundations for the establishment of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in September 2019, through resolution 42/25 of the UN Human Rights Council, to investigate alleged human rights violations committed in the country since 2014.
- On 7 October 2022, the Human Rights Council renewed the vital mandate of the Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on Venezuela and the reporting mandate of OHCHR for another two years, with 19 votes in favour, 5 votes against and 23 abstentions. Extending the mandate of the Mission was vital, and continues to be, to continuing the investigation and documentation of the violations and abuses committed in Venezuela and to putting an end to impunity, as well as playing a preventative role leading up to Presidential elections in 2024.
Defender Story
China – Opening the door for future action
For many years, States didn't want to put on the table a resolution on China. In 2016 there was a first attempt for more accountability with a joint statement by a group of Western States.
The existence of mass detention camps for Uyghurs and Muslim populations in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region was first revealed at the UN level during China's review by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) in August 2018. It was not until June 2019 that a group of countries penned a joint letter to call out grave abuses in Xinjiang, and urge China to implement the CERD's recommendations. Ever since, a joint statement on the human rights situation in Xinjiang - at times referencing Hong Kong too - is read by a Western State at almost every June session of the Human Rights Council, in Geneva. Since October 2019, a similar statement is also read yearly during the Third Committee session of the UN General Assembly, in New York. Every year, the number of signatories increases slowly but steadily, including governments from the Global South, with a current peak at 50 countries.
These joint statements signal that the fate of Uyghurs and other targeted peoples in China is a matter of deep concern at the global level. They also lay out the steps that the Chinese government should take to reverse its current policies, by implementing recommendations from UN Treaty Bodies and the OHCHR. On the basis of these joint statements, a resolution was presented at the 51st session of the Human Rights Council in September 2022, taking note of the OHCHR's Xinjiang report and calling for a debate on the human rights situation in Xinjiang. Yet, the resolution was worryingly defeated by a narrow margin of a few votes.
In an attempt to deflect criticism, the Chinese government has mobilised its allies to deliver joint statements expressing support for the government's policies. Gathering around 20 to 30 signatories more than the joint statements critical of China, these 'counter statements' seek to discredit UN reports and to shape a narrative according to which China's treatment of Uyghurs and other targeted peoples benefits from the endorsement of the Global South.
Example of a weak statement:
Statement of Myanmar on the Commission of Inquiry on Burundi
Why this statement is weak:
- It pushes the narrative that the Human Rights Council should only act with the consent of the State concerned – thus prioritising dialogue over action. This is problematic if the State concerned lacks the political will to improve the human rights situation. Human Rights Council action is necessary, particularly in such cases, to ensure States are held to account for human rights violations and abuses.
Reflection Questions
- A government statement can:
- Put international pressure on your government to do something about a human rights issue
- Raise awareness of an issue
- Be a step towards presenting a resolution
- Garner state support around your issue
- Lobbying for a government statement may expose you to the risk of reprisals by your State, in particular if you are calling for a resolution on your own county. However, you can usually engage in this kind of advocacy quite discreetly. See ISHR Academy: What to do if you face reprisals when engaging with the UN?
- It can put your State on the ‘defensive’, closing down potential dialogue.
Explore our top tips for pushing for Government statements at the Human Rights Council.
