The Human Rights Council this morning held separate general debates on human rights bodies and mechanisms and on the Universal Periodic Review. In the general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms, speakers stressed the importance of the Special Procedures system - an indispensable piece of the United Nations human rights architecture that called out human rights violations in every part of the world. Questioning the very legitimacy of the system was a smokescreen for human rights abusers to continue doing so with impunity. Supporting the integrity and independence of the mandate holders, as well as ensuring their finances, was the responsibility of States. Mandate holders must be equipped fully with all the necessary resources needed to carry out their work. Acts of intimidation or reprisals against those seeking to cooperate with mandate holders must be condemned in the strongest terms by all States, investigated, and brought to the attention of the Council. Speaking were Tunisia, Ireland, Belgium, Costa Rica and United States. The following civil society organizations also took the floor: Réseau Unité pour le Développement de Mauritanie; European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Federation; Amnesty International; International Action for Peace and Sustainable Development; Minority Rights Group; International Commission of Jurists; Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII; China Society for Human Rights Studies; Community Human Rights and Advocacy Centre; Partners For Transparency; Africa Culture Internationale; African Commission of Health and Human Rights Promoters; Organization for Poverty Alleviation and Development; World Muslim Congress; International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations; Maat for Peace, Development and Human Rights Association; ABC Tamil Oli; Tamil Uzhagam; Elizka Relief Foundation; iuventum e.V.; Association pour l"Intégration et le Développement Durable au Burundi; Mother of Hope Cameroon Common Initiative Group; Universal Rights Group; Association des étudiants tamouls de France; Association Thendral; Association Bharathi Centre Culturel Franco-Tamoul; Association Culturelle des Tamouls en France; Le Pont; Society for Development and Community Empowerment; Jeunesse Etudiante Tamoule; The International Organisation for LDCs; Prahar; Centre for Africa Development and Progress; Centre for Organisation Research and Education; Centre for Gender Justice and Women empowerment; Organisation Mondiale des associations pour l"éducation prénatale; and Jubilee Campaign. Cuba, China and Ethiopia spoke in right of reply. In the general debate on the Universal Periodic Review, speakers said all United Nations Member States must follow-up in an effective manner on the recommendations received through the Universal Periodic Review. They condemned all kinds of reprisals against individuals, non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders cooperating with the United Nations human rights mechanisms. Some speakers said that the Universal Periodic Review process should consider all human rights in equal measure. Lack of progress in implementing recommendations was often due to lack of capacity, not lack of willingness to advance human rights. Speaking on the Universal Periodic Review were Portugal on behalf of the European Union, Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Cameroon on behalf of the Group of African States, Azerbaijan on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, Libya on behalf of the Arab Group, Belgium on behalf of a group of members of la Francophonie, Venezuela, Indonesia, Togo, India, Bahrain, China, Sudan, Malawi, Cuba, Iraq, Malaysia, Maldives, Iran, Algeria, United Nations Population Fund, Ethiopia, Georgia, Serbia, Tunisia and Republic of Moldova. The following civil society organizations also took the floor: UPR Info; International Catholic Center of Geneva; China NGO Network for International Exchanges; International Council Supporting Fair Trial and Human Rights; Organization for Defending Victims of Violence; Colombian Commission of Jurists; Iran Autism Association; Asociacion HazteOir.org; China Foundation for Human Rights Development; International Institute for Rights and Development Geneva; Partners For Transparency; Amnesty International; Africa Culture International; International Catholic Child Bureau; International Human Rights Association of American Minorities; Charitable Institute for Protecting Social Victims; Jameh Ehyagaran Teb Sonnati Va Salamat Iranian; Association des étudiants tamouls de France; and Centre for Africa Development and Progress. Nazahat Shameen Khan, President of the Human Rights Council, announced at the start of the meeting that the Bureau had recommended the use of the “e-Recorded votes” module on the e-delegate platform online to take action on draft proposals during the forty-sixth session due to the current circumstances. The President outlined the proposed extraordinary modalities for electronic voting, which the Council then accepted. The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s forty-sixth regular session can be found here. The Council will next meet at 3 p.m. this afternoon to open agenda item 7 on the human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories, with the presentation of the reports submitted by the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner for Human Rights under the agenda item, followed by a general debate. General Debate on Human Rights Bodies and Mechanisms The general debate on human rights bodies and mechanisms started in a previous meeting and a summary can be found here. Speakers stressed the importance of the Special Procedures system - an indispensable piece of the United Nations human rights architecture that called out human rights violations in every part of the world. Questioning the very legitimacy of the system was a smokescreen for human rights abusers to continue doing so with impunity. Speakers noted the importance for States to send out a standing invitation to all mandate holders and Special Procedures - all countries were urged to do so. Supporting the integrity and independence of the mandate holders, as well as ensuring their finances, was the responsibility of States. Mandate holders must be equipped fully with all the necessary resources needed to carry out their work. Acts of intimidation or reprisals against those seeking to cooperate with mandate holders must be condemned in the strongest terms by all States, investigated, and brought to the attention of the Council. The working methods of the Consultative Group were welcomed by speakers, who hoped they would lead to increased trust with the mandate holders and better cooperation on the part of the States. Speakers highlighted the efficiency with which mandate holders were able to adapt to the COVID-19 crisis. Speakers welcomed the recommendations made by the Forum on Minority Issues, specifically the recognition of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex people as one the populations that were particularly vulnerable to hate speech on social media platforms. In many States, such hate speech was indirectly legitimised by State officials who used exactly the same means to dehumanise communities; when people in power used hate speech against any community, it fostered a sense of impunity that could translate into real-world harm. As a result, transgender communities in particular were under attack across the world. Speakers regretted the actions and statements made by some States during the forty-sixth session of the Council - they were aimed at undermining the authority of the Council and the independence of the mandate holders. States and the Council must take a strong proactive stand against this trend. Mandate holders must be allowed unfettered access to all occupied territories. Multiple speakers noted the worrying rise of attacks against human rights defenders around the world. Democracies were under threat during the COVID-19 pandemic - the responsibility of the Council was even more vital. Cross-border migration movements were used as a pretext to crackdown against minorities that had been marginalised for decades. Stressing the crucial importance of democratising the multilateral trade system, notably to expand the voting rights of countries from the South, speakers said agreements between the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the United Nations should be reviewed accordingly. Extending a standing invitation to all Special Procedure mandate holders should be a prerequisite for a country wishing to be elected to the Council. Speakers regretted that some Member States were continuously ignoring the Council and its mechanisms. National mechanisms for implementation, reporting and follow-up could play an important role in improving implementation of human rights recommendations by joining them up with comparable targets of the Sustainable Development Goals and allowing for a coordinated and all-government approach to their implementation. General Debate on the Universal Periodic Review Mechanism Speakers said all United Nations Member States must follow-up in an effective manner on the recommendations received through the Universal Periodic Review. They condemned all kinds of reprisals against individuals, non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders cooperating with the United Nations human rights mechanisms. Speakers urged those present to uphold the principles of universality, transparency and equality in the context of the Universal Periodic Review, which had strengthened the human rights framework in several countries. A spirit of constructive engagement should continue to guide its future work. It was essential for the success of this mechanism to continue to provide capacity building programmes for the benefit of those States that expressed the need. This should be done with the consent of the State, in particular of developing countries and small island developing States. Speakers called on those present to remain vigilant lest the Universal Periodic Review be misused and manipulated. Given the current pandemic, it was urgent that human rights mechanisms delivered on their mandates; financial support should be provided to the Universal Periodic Review. The Universal Periodic Review process should consider all human rights in equal measure. Lack of progress in implementing recommendations was often due to lack of capacity, not lack of willingness to advance human rights. Speakers reiterated their concern about the sending and publication of letters to the countries, giving priority to some recommendations and ignoring others - a counterproductive practice inherited from the previous High Commissioner. They invited States to integrate commitments stemming from the Nairobi Summit on the International Conference on Population Development in their national mechanisms for reporting and follow-up and in their national implementation plans. Women and girls were further exposed by the financial consequences of the COVID-19 crisis and gender-based violence was on the rise as speakers encouraged States to end all forms of discrimination and address the paid and unpaid care economy. Many human rights defenders were intimidated and harassed all across the world. Radical solutions to guarantee the rights of stateless persons were required as the Council was urged to intensify efforts to address statelessness and end the suffering of stateless persons. States were urged to end the use of unilateral coercive measures as speakers emphasised the negative effects of sanctions on the ability of peoples in affected countries to enjoy their right to health, cutting the supply of, and access to medicine. Long-existing structural racism had led to the rise of discrimination against Asian minorities in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in some countries. The international community must bring pressure to bear on States to accede to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. The Universal Periodic Review offered an important space to address violations against the over 260 million people across the globe who were discriminated against based on work and descent: the imposition of social inequalities because of birth into certain descent or caste systems had drawn parallels with the system of apartheid. With this in mind, speakers noted that most consultations associated with the process were not inclusive, conducted across the country, nor organized according to a predictable schedule, resembling window dressing instead of a commitment to take action. Link: https://www.ungeneva.org/fr/news-media/meeting-summary/2021/03/morning-human-rights-council-holds-separate-general-debates