Q. What is the UN Human Rights Council?

A. The Human Rights Council is the main UN body for promoting and protecting human rights. It is composed of 47 countries, apportioned among the five regional groups of UN members. The council meets in Geneva to advance human rights standards, address human rights violations in specific countries, appoint experts to monitor specific countries and the observance of particular rights, and recommend new treaties.

Q. How does the council differ from the former UN Commission on Human Rights?

A. The Human Rights Council was created in 2006 to replace the Commission on Human Rights, which was criticized for including many violator states among its membership and being overly politicized and selective in reviewing human rights issues. The commission met only once a year in a six-week session. The council meets at least three times a year, and with the support of one-third of its members can call special sessions to consider urgent situations. It must regularly scrutinize the human rights records of all UN member states under a new “universal periodic review” procedure. Unlike the commission, there are standards that are supposed to govern the selection of members.

Q. What are the membership standards for council members?

A. Human Rights Council members are expected to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights,” and to “fully cooperate with the Council.” In electing states to the council, UN members are to consider “the contribution countries will make to the promotion and protection of human rights.”

Q. How are the members of the council elected?

A. Each May, the UN General Assembly elects one-third of the council members for three-year terms. To win election, candidates must win both an absolute majority of the 192 UN members (97 votes), and be one of the highest vote winners for the open seats allocated to their region. The candidates running this year are listed on the UN website.

Q. Why are human rights organizations calling for competitive elections?

A. We believe the requirement that states take into account candidates’ human rights records underscores the spirit of the resolution creating the council: that UN member states be given a real choice in elections to select members with the strongest commitment to the promotion and protection of human rights and to cooperation with the council. We therefore urge states with a commitment to human rights to present their candidacies individually and to support and encourage competition, ensuring there are more states seeking election to the council than seats allocated to the regional group. This process will allow the international community a meaningful choice of candidates most committed to human rights.

Competitive elections are essential to achieving improved membership at the Human Rights Council. They encourage states to make stronger pledges to improve human rights and commit themselves to more ambitious initiatives. Ultimately, competitive elections create a stronger, more effective council.

The usefulness of competitive elections has already been demonstrated:

• In 2006, Iran and Venezuela both failed in their bids to become council members when forced to compete on their human rights records with other states in their region.
• In 2007, the candidacy of Belarus was unsuccessful after Bosnia and Herzegovina entered the race in Eastern Europe, providing a choice to the General Assembly and forcing Belarus to compete on its human rights record.
• In 2008, in a competitive election among Asian states, Sri Lanka was defeated following a campaign by NGOs led by Sri Lankan human rights defenders that focused on its poor human rights record and failure to cooperate with Human Rights Council experts.
• In 2009, Azerbaijan failed to gain membership to the Human Rights Council once its human rights record came under scrutiny during a spirited competitive election.
• This year Iran, running in a contested election of seats from the Asia Regional Group, was forced to withdraw its candidacy in the face of mounting opposition from states and NGOs because of its poor human rights record. Iran might well have been elected had it been on a closed slate of Asian states.

Q. What should a member of the General Assembly do when a candidate does not meet membership criteria and the election in the region is not competitive (as in all regions this year)?

A. The requirement of an absolute majority of the full UN membership (97 votes) to win election to the council was designed to avoid the election of abusive states. As they “take into account the contribution countries will make to the promotion and protection of human rights,” UN member states should decline to support countries with poor human rights records, and should only vote for countries likely to use their council membership to actively promote human rights.

Q. How can states use the election process to promote human rights?

A. Candidate states are expected to issue pledges and commitments as to the contribution they will make to promoting and protecting human rights. All UN members should closely scrutinize these pledges and the human rights records of candidate states, and grant their votes only to those candidates that uphold human rights and will contribute to protecting those rights. UN members should insist on commitments for improvements from states that fall short of the membership standards before deciding whether or not to vote for those candidates.