The revised
1503 procedure
The 1503
confidential communications procedure was reformed during the fifty-sixth
session of the Commission on Human Rights in 2000. The Working Group on
Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Mechanisms of the Commission on Human Rights, which met between the fifty-fifth (1999)
and fifty-sixth sessions of the Commission included in its report
(E/CN.4/2000/112) recommendations on how the 1503 procedure should be amended
(see chapter three). These recommendations were subsequently embodied in a
draft resolution entitled "Procedure for dealing with communications
concerning human rights" which was part of Commission decision 2000/109
(adopted without a vote on 26 April 2000). The Economic and Social Council, at
its resumed organizational session for 2000, approved the draft resolution on
16 June 2000. It became Council resolution 2000/3. In accordance with this
resolution, the procedure as amended may continue to be referred to as the 1503
procedure.
Pursuant to
Council resolution 2000/3 of 16 June 2000, a Working Group is designated on a
yearly basis by the Sub-Commission
on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights from among its members. It is
geographically representative of the five regional groups and appropriate
rotation is encouraged. Called the Working Group on Communications, it meets
annually immediately after the Sub-Commission session to examine communications
(complaints) received from individuals and groups alleging human rights
violations and any government responses. Manifestly ill-founded communications,
such as communications raising issues that fall outside the scope of the
Universal Declaration, are screened out by the secretariat, with the approval
of the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Communications: they are
not sent to the Governments concerned or submitted to the Working Group on
Communications. The fact that a communication is being transmitted to the State
and acknowledged to the complainant does not imply any judgement on the
admissibility or merits of the communication. Where the Working Group identifies
reasonable evidence of a consistent pattern of gross violations of human
rights, the matter is referred to the Working Group on Situations.
The Working Group
on Situations comprises, as before, five
members nominated
by the regional groups, due attention being paid to rotation in membership. It
meets at least one month prior to the Commission to examine the particular
situations forwarded to it by the Working Group on Communications and decide
whether or not to refer any of these situations to the Commission.
Subsequently, it
is the turn of the Commission to take a decision concerning each situation
brought to its attention in this manner.
Confidentiality
All initial steps
in the process are confidential until a situation is referred to the Economic
and Social Council. Since 1978, however, the Chairperson of the Commission on
Human Rights has announced the names of countries that have been under
examination. Thus, if a pattern of abuses in a particular country remains
unresolved in the early stages of the process, it can be brought to the
attention of the world community through the Economic and Social Council - one
of the principal bodies of the United Nations.
What are
the criteria for a communication to be accepted for examination?
To decide what
communications may be accepted for examination, the Sub-Commission on the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights has drawn up rules of procedure
(Sub-Commission resolution 1 (XXIV)of 13 August 1971). In general terms, these
rules may be summarized as follows:
* No
communication will be admitted if it runs counter to the principles of the
Charter of the United Nations or appears to be politically motivated.
* A
communication will only be admitted if, on consideration, there are reasonable
grounds to believe - also taking into account any replies sent by the
Government concerned - that a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested
violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms exists.
* Communications
may be submitted by individuals or groups who claim to be victims of human
rights violations or who have direct, reliable knowledge of violations.
Anonymous communications are inadmissible as are those based only on reports in
the mass media.
* Each
communication must describe the facts, the purpose of the petition and the
rights that have been violated. As a rule, communications containing abusive
language or insulting remarks about the State against which the complaint is
directed will not be considered.
* Domestic
remedies must have been exhausted before a communication is considered - unless
it can be shown convincingly that solutions at the national level would be
ineffective or that they would extend over an unreasonable length of
time.
Where to
send communications
Communications
intended for handling under the "1503" procedure may be addressed
to:
Support
Services Branch
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva
10, Switzerland
Fax: (41 22)
917 90 11
******
******
Fact Sheet
No.7/Rev.1, Complaint Procedures
(About Fact Sheets)
*
Introduction
*
Part
1: Complaints under the international human rights treaties
Overview
Procedure under
the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights
Procedure under
the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment
Procedure under
the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination
Procedure under
the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women
Procedure under
the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant
Workers and Members of Their Families
*
Part
2: Complaints to the Commission on Human Rights and the Commission
on the Status of Women
The 1503
procedure of the Commission on Human Rights
The procedure
of the Commission on the Status of Women
*
Annexes
Model Complaint
Form (Human Rights Committee, Committee against Torture, Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination)
Complaint
Guidelines (Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
Anyone may bring
a human rights problem to the attention of the United Nations and thousands of
people around the world do so every year. What kinds of complaints about
alleged human rights violations does the United Nations receive and how does it
deal with them? This Fact Sheet explains the procedures open to individuals and
groups who want the United Nations to take action on a human rights situation
of concern to them.
It is through
individual complaints that human rights are given concrete meaning. In the
adjudication of individual cases, international norms that may otherwise seem
general and abstract are put into practical effect. When applied to a
person’s real-life situation, the standards contained in international human
rights treaties find their most direct application. The resulting body of
decisions may guide States, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and
individuals in interpreting the contemporary meaning of the texts
concerned.
Individuals have
only relatively recently acquired the means to vindicate their rights at the
international level. This Fact Sheet examines complaints that are brought
directly under international human rights treaties and complaints filed through
special procedures with the Commission on Human Rights and the Commission on
the Status of Women.[1] Since the early 1970s international
complaint mechanisms have developed apace, and you can now bring claims to the
United Nations concerning violations of your rights under four of the six
so-called “core” human rights treaties. The four treaties concern:
(i) civil and political rights, set out in the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights; (ii) torture and cruel treatment, defined in the
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment; (iii) racial discrimination, proscribed by the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; and (iv)
sex discrimination, defined in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women. Each of these treaties establishes a
quasi-judicial committee to examine complaints. The complaint mechanisms are
designed to be uncomplicated and accessible to the layperson. You do not need
to be a lawyer or even familiar with legal and technical terms to bring a
complaint before the bodies concerned. On the contrary, the system is intended
to be as straightforward as possible.
The complaint
mechanisms under individual treaties are complemented by complaint procedures
before the Commission on Human Rights and the Commission on the Status of
Women. These two procedures, involving political bodies composed of State
representatives, are among the oldest in the United Nations system. They have a
different focus from complaints under the international treaties, which provide
individual redress through quasi-judicial mechanisms. Complaints to the
Commissions focus on more systematic patterns and trends of human rights
violations and may be brought against any country in the world. As with the
procedures under the treaties, the Commission mechanisms seek to avoid legal
and technical terms and procedures and are open to everybody. The Fact Sheet is
divided into two parts. The first examines complaint procedures under the individual
treaties in greater detail and the second concentrates on the Commissions. You
should be aware that these mechanisms operate on the basis of diverse mandates
and procedures. As a result, each mechanism has a variety of advantages and
disadvantages. You may wish to compare them before electing where your claim
may be considered most fruitfully.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part
1: Complaints under the international human rights treaties
Overview
This part of the
Fact Sheet explains the complaint mechanisms that are currently available under
the four international human rights treaties: the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture, the International
Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. A human rights
treaty is a formal document negotiated by States, which imposes binding
obligations to protect and promote rights and freedoms on States parties that
officially accept it (commonly through “ratification”). The full
texts of the treaties are accessible on the web site of the Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) at the following address:
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/intlinst.htm. [2]
The basic concept
is that anyone may bring a complaint alleging a violation of treaty rights to
the body of experts set up by the treaty for quasi-judicial adjudication. These
“treaty bodies”, as they are often called, are committees composed
of independent experts elected by States parties to the relevant treaty. They
are tasked with monitoring implementation in States parties of the rights set
forth in the treaties and with deciding on complaints brought against those
States. While there are some procedural variations between the four mechanisms,
their design and operation are very similar. Accordingly, what follows is a
general description of the typical features of a complaint under any of the
four treaties. Readers should then refer to the descriptions of the individual
treaties, which identify aspects differing from the general norm.
Against
whom can a complaint under a treaty be brought?
A complaint under
one of the four treaties can be brought only against a State that satisfies two
conditions. First, it must be a party to the treaty in question, having
ratified or otherwise accepted it. (To check whether a State is a party to the
treaty, consult the Treaty Body database on the OHCHR web site. To access the
database, click on Documents on the home page followed by Treaty body database, Ratifications and reservations and States parties; then check the relevant country.
Alternatively, you may contact the Petitions Team or the Division for the
Advancement of Women, depending on the treaty, via the contact details listed
at the end of this part of the Fact Sheet.)
Second, the State
party must have recognized the competence of the committee established under
the relevant treaty to consider complaints from individuals. In the case of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, a State recognizes
the Committee’s competence by becoming a party to a separate treaty: the
First Optional Protocol to the Covenant or the Optional Protocol to the
Convention. (To see the text of the Protocols and to check whether a State is a
party to either or both, consult the OHCHR web site as described above.) In the
case of the Convention against Torture and the International Convention on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination, States recognize the Committee’s
competence by making a declaration to that effect under a specific article of
the Convention, articles 22 and 14 respectively. (To check whether a State has
made either of these declarations, access the OHCHR web site as described
above, clicking on Declarations on procedural articles once you have selected the relevant
State.)
Who can
bring a complaint?
Anyone can lodge
a complaint with a committee against a State that satisfies these two
conditions, claiming that his or her rights under the relevant treaty have been
violated. It is not necessary to have a lawyer prepare your case, though legal
advice usually improves the quality of the submissions. Be aware, however, that
legal aid is not provided under the procedures. You may also bring a claim on
behalf of another person on condition that you obtain his or her written
consent. In certain cases, you may bring a case without such consent. For
example, where parents bring cases on behalf of young children or guardians on
behalf of persons unable to give formal consent, or where a person is in prison
without access to the outside world, the relevant committee will not require
formal authorization to lodge a complaint on another’s behalf.
What
information do you need to provide in your complaint?
A complaint to a
committee, also called a “communication” or a
“petition”, need not take any particular form. While the model complaint
form[3] and guidelines[4] appended to this Fact Sheet (as annexes 1 and 2) focus on
specific information, any correspondence supplying the necessary particulars
will suffice. Your claim should be in writing and signed.[5] It should provide basic personal information - your name,
nationality and date of birth - and specify the State party against which your
complaint is directed. If you are bringing the claim on behalf of another
person, you should provide proof of their consent, as noted above, or state
clearly why such consent cannot be provided.
You should set
out, in chronological order, all the facts on which your claim is based. A
crucial requirement is that your account is as complete as possible and that
the complaint contains all information relevant to your case. You should also
detail the steps you have taken to exhaust the remedies available in your
country, that is steps taken before your country’s local courts and
authorities. You should state whether you have submitted your case to another
means of international investigation or settlement. On these two matters, see
the section entitled “The admissibility of your case” below for
further important details. Lastly, you should state why you consider that the
facts you have outlined constitute a violation of the treaty in question. It is
helpful, though not strictly necessary, for you to identify the articles of the
treaty that have allegedly been violated. You should provide this information
in one of the secretariat’s working languages.
In addition, you
should supply all documents of relevance to your claims and arguments,
especially administrative or judicial decisions on your claim by national
authorities. It is also helpful if you provide copies of relevant national
laws. If they are not in an official language of the committee’s
secretariat, consideration of your complaint will be speeded up if you can
arrange for a translation (either full or summary).
If your complaint
lacks essential information, you will be contacted by the secretariat with a
request for the additional details.
When can
you make a complaint under the human rights treaties?
In general, there
is no formal time limit after the date of the alleged violation for filing a
complaint under the relevant treaties. It is usually appropriate, however, to
submit your complaint as soon as possible after you have exhausted domestic
remedies. Delay in submitting your case may also make it difficult for the
State party to respond properly. In exceptional cases, submission after a
protracted period may result in your case being considered inadmissible by the
committee in question.
The
procedure
If your complaint
contains the essential elements outlined above, your case is registered, that
is to say formally listed as a case for consideration by the relevant
committee. You will receive advice of registration.
At that point,
the case is transmitted to the State party concerned to give it an opportunity
to comment. The State is requested to submit its observations within a set time
frame. The two major stages in any case are known as the
“admissibility” stage and the “merits” stage. The
“admissibility” of a case refers to the formal requirements that
your complaint must satisfy before the relevant committee can consider its substance.
The “merits” of the case are the substance, on the basis of which
the committee decides whether or not your rights under a treaty have been
violated. These stages are described in greater detail below. The time within
which the State is required to respond to your complaint varies between
procedures and is also specified below in the sections dealing with them
individually.
Once the State
replies to your submission, you are offered an opportunity to comment. Again,
the time frames vary somewhat between procedures (see below for details). At
that point, the case is ready for a decision by the relevant committee. If the
State party fails to respond to your complaint, you are not disadvantaged.
Reminders are sent to the State party and if there is still no response, the
committee takes a decision on your case on the basis of your original
complaint.
Special
circumstances of urgency or sensitivity
Each committee
has the facility to take urgent action where irreparable harm would otherwise
be suffered before the case is examined in the usual course. The basis for such
interim action by individual committees is set out below for each procedure.
The common feature is that the committee in question may, at any stage before
the case is considered, issue a request to the State party for what are known
as “interim measures” in order to prevent any irreparable harm.
Typically, such requests are issued to prevent actions that cannot later be
undone, for example the execution of a death sentence or the deportation of an
individual facing a risk of torture. If you wish the committee to consider a
request for interim measures, it is advisable to state this explicitly. In any
case, you should identify as carefully and comprehensively as possible the
reasons why you consider such action to be necessary.
If there are
particularly sensitive matters of a private or personal nature that emerge in
the complaint, you may request that the committee suppress identifying elements
in its final decision so that your identity does not become public. The
committee may also, of its own motion, suppress these or other matters in the
course of consideration of the complaint.
The
admissibility of your case
Before the
committee to which you have brought your case can consider its merits or
substance, it must be satisfied that the claim meets the formal requirements of
admissibility. When examining admissibility, the committee may consider one or
several of the following factors:
á
If you are acting on behalf of another person, have you obtained sufficient
authorization or are you otherwise justified in doing so?
á
Are you (or the person on whose behalf you are bringing the complaint) a victim
of the alleged violation? You must show that you are personally and directly
affected by the law, policy, practice, act or omission of the State party which
you claim has violated or is violating your rights. It is not sufficient simply
to challenge a law or State policy or practice in the abstract (a so-called actio
popularis) without
demonstrating how you are individually a victim of the law, policy or practice
in question.
á
Is your complaint compatible with the provisions of the treaty invoked? The
alleged violation must relate to a right actually protected by the treaty. If
you have filed a complaint under the Optional Protocol to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, for example, you cannot claim a
violation of the right to property since the Covenant does not protect that
right. In such a case, your claim would be, in legal terms, inadmissible ratione
materiae.
á
Is your complaint sufficiently substantiated? If the relevant committee
considers, in the light of the information before it from all sides, that you
have not sufficiently developed the facts of your complaint or the arguments
for a violation of the Covenant, it may reject the claim as insufficiently
substantiated for the purposes of admissibility. This ground is analogous to
the rejection of a case by other courts, international and domestic, as
“manifestly ill-founded”.
á
Does your complaint relate to events that occurred prior to the entry into
force of the complaint mechanism for your State? As a rule, a committee does
not examine complaints dating from a period prior to this date and your
complaint is regarded, in legal terms, as inadmissible ratione temporis. There are, however, exceptions. In cases
where the effects of the event in question have extended into the period
covered by the complaint mechanism, a committee may consider the overall
circumstances. Further details are given in the sections on individual
procedures.
á
Have you exhausted all domestic remedies? A cardinal principle governing the
admissibility of a complaint is that you must, in general, have exhausted all
remedies in your own State before bringing a claim to a committee. This usually
includes pursuing your claim through the local court system, and you should be
aware that mere doubts about the effectiveness of such action do not, in the
committees’ view, dispense with this requirement. There are, however,
limited exceptions to this rule. If the exhaustion of remedies would be
unreasonably prolonged, or if they would plainly be ineffective (if, for
example, the law in your State is quite clear on the point at issue) or if the
remedies are otherwise unavailable to you (owing, for example, to denial of
legal aid in a criminal case), you may not be required to exhaust domestic
remedies. You should, however, give detailed reasons why the general rule
should not apply. On the issue of exhaustion of domestic remedies, you should
describe in your original complaint the efforts you have made to exhaust local remedies, specifying
the claims advanced before the national authorities and the dates and outcome
of the proceedings, or alternatively stating why any exception should
apply.
á
Is your claim an abuse of the complaints process? In rare cases, the committees
may consider a case to be a frivolous, vexatious or otherwise inappropriate use
of the complaint procedure and reject it as inadmissible, for example if you
bring repeated claims to the committee on the same issue although they have
already been dismissed.
á
Is your complaint being examined under another mechanism of international
settlement? If you have submitted the same claim to another treaty body or to a
regional mechanism such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the
European Court of Human Rights or the African Commission on Human and Peoples’
Rights,[6] the committees cannot examine your
complaint, the aim being to avoid unnecessary duplication at the international
level. This is another issue of admissibility that you should cover in your
original complaint, describing any claims you have made and specifying the body
to which you applied, the date and the outcome.
á
Is your complaint precluded by a reservation the State has made to the Optional
Protocol?[7] A State may have entered a procedural
reservation to the complaint mechanism limiting the committee’s
competence to examine certain communications. For example, States may preclude
a committee’s consideration of claims that have in the past been
considered by another international mechanism. In very rare cases, a committee
may decide that a particular reservation is impermissible and consider the
communication notwithstanding the purported reservation. (The text of
reservations may be found in the Treaty Body database described above.)
If you think
there is a risk that your claim may be considered inadmissible on one of these
grounds, it is helpful to present your counterarguments in the initial
complaint. In any event, the State party, when responding to your complaint,
will probably argue that your case is inadmissible if it considers that one of
these grounds may apply. You will then be able to present your view when
commenting on the State party’s submissions.
The merits
of your case
Once a committee
decides your case is admissible, it proceeds to consider the merits of your
complaint, stating its reasons for concluding that a violation has or has not
occurred under the various articles it considers applicable. A number of States
have also entered substantive reservations that may limit the scope of the
human rights obligations they assume under the treaties.[8] (The text of any reservations or declarations entered may be
accessed in the Treaty Body database on the OHCHR web site as described above.
Be sure to check that a reservation has not been subsequently withdrawn, as in
such cases the State party will have accepted, in the meantime, the full
obligation imposed by the relevant article.) In most cases, a committee will
decline to consider complaints falling within areas covered by a reservation,
though in exceptional circumstances, as noted above, it may find a reservation
impermissible and consider the case despite the purported reservation.
To form an idea
of what a committee considers to be the scope of the rights contained in the
treaty for which it is responsible, you may look at its previous decisions, its
so-called “General Comments” expanding on the meaning of various
articles, and its concluding observations on reports submitted periodically by
States parties to the treaty concerned. These documents are accessible on the
OHCHR web site through the Treaty Body database. There are also numerous
academic articles and textbooks on the jurisprudence of the various committees
that may be of assistance.
Consideration
of your case
The committees
consider each case in closed session. Although some have provisions for oral
components of proceedings in their rules of procedure,[9] the practice has been to consider complaints on the basis of the
written information supplied by the complainant and the State party. Accordingly,
it has not been the practice to receive oral submissions from the parties or
audio or audio-visual evidence (such as audio cassettes or videotapes). Nor do
the committees go beyond the information provided by the parties to seek
independent verification of the facts. It follows that they do not consider
briefs provided by third parties (often called amicus briefs).
Once the
committee takes a decision on your case, it is transmitted to you and the State
party simultaneously. One or more committee members may append a separate
opinion to the decision if they come to a different conclusion from the
majority or perhaps reach the same conclusion but for different reasons. The
text of any final decision on the merits of your case or of a decision of inadmissibility
will be posted on the OHCHR’s web site as part of the committee’s
jurisprudence at the following address:
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/8/jurispr.htm.
What
happens once a committee decides your case?
It should be
noted at the outset that there is no appeal against committee decisions and
that, as a rule, the decisions are final. What happens to your case
subsequently depends on the nature of the decision taken.
*
When the
committee decides that you have been the victim of a violation by the State
party of your rights under the treaty, it invites the State party to supply
information within three months on the steps it has taken to give effect to its
findings. See the descriptions of the specific procedures for further details.
*
When the
committee decides that there has been no violation of the treaty in your case
or that your complaint is inadmissible, the process is complete once the
decision has been transmitted to you and the State party.
*
When the
committee considers your case admissible, either in general or with reference
to specific claims or articles, the general procedure set out above applies.
That is to say, the State party is requested to make submissions on the merits
within a specific time frame. You then have a period for comment on the
submissions, following which the case is usually ready for consideration by the
committee. See under the particular procedures for further details.
Procedure
under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights
Introduction
The International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights covers a broad range of civil and
political rights ranging from the right to life to the right to a fair trial
and the right to non-discrimination. Individual rights that may be invoked
before the Committee are set out in articles 6 to 27 inclusive, comprising Part
III of the Covenant. The complaint mechanism for alleged violations of those
articles is contained in the First Optional Protocol to the Covenant, a separate
treaty open to States parties to the Covenant. States that have become a party
to the Optional Protocol recognize the competence of the Human Rights Committee
– a panel of 18 independent experts who meet three times a year –
to receive complaints from persons within their jurisdiction alleging
violations of their rights under the Covenant.[10]
Details of
the procedure
The following
comments expand on the general description of procedures before the committees.
Complaints under the Optional Protocol that contain the necessary elements are
referred to the Committee’s Special Rapporteur on New Communications. The
Special Rapporteur decides whether your case should be registered under the
Optional Protocol and issues any pertinent instructions.
If the case is
registered, the Committee’s usual course of action, given the large
number of complaints received under this procedure, is to consider the
admissibility and merits of the case simultaneously. To this end, the State
party against whom the complaint is directed has six months to present its
submissions on the admissibility and merits of the case. When it does so, you
have two months to comment, following which the case is ready for a decision by
the Committee. As noted above, if the State party fails to respond to your
complaint, you are not disadvantaged. In such a case, the State party receives
two reminders after the six-month deadline has passed. If there is still no
reply, the Committee considers the complaint on the basis of the information you
initially supplied. On the other hand, if the State party presents submissions
after a reminder, they are transmitted to you and you have the opportunity to
comment.
Occasionally ,
the Committee adopts a different procedure to maximize the time at its disposal
to consider communications and to spare both States parties and complainants
needless effort. For example, if a State party, within two months of receiving
a complaint, presents submissions relating only to admissibility and the
Committee considers that there may indeed be serious doubts on that score, it
may invite you to comment only on those submissions. The Committee will then
take a preliminary decision on admissibility alone and proceed to the merits
stage only if the case is declared admissible. If it is, the State party is
given a further six months to present submissions on the merits of the
communication and you are in turn requested to comment within two months. You
will be informed of any such departure from the usual practice.
You should be
aware that, given the large number of cases brought under the Optional
Protocol, there may be a delay of several years between the initial submission
and the Committee’s final decision.
Special
circumstances of urgency
For the Human
Rights Committee, situations of urgency requiring immediate action fall
under rule 86 of its rules of procedure. In such cases, the
Committee’s Special Rapporteur on New Communications may issue a request
to the State party for interim measures with a view to averting irreparable
harm before your complaint is considered. The Committee views compliance with
such a request as inherent in a State party’s obligations under the
Optional Protocol and any failure to comply as a breach thereof.
Additional
pointers on the admissibility of your case
There are two
aspects of the admissibility of a case that require further comment. First, the
Human Rights Committee has developed specific exceptions to the rule that the
events complained of should have occurred after the entry into force of the
Optional Protocol for your State. If, since the date of entry into force, the
events have had continuing effects that violate the Covenant, for example if
the State has failed to resolve the status of a person who “disappeared”
prior to the date in question or if a person is serving a term of imprisonment
following an unfair trial prior to that date, the Committee may decide to
consider the whole circumstances of the complaint. Alternatively, it is usually
a sufficient ground for the Committee to examine the whole complaint if, after
the date of entry into force of the Optional Protocol, there has been a court
decision or some other State act relating to an event preceding that
date.
Two points may be
made regarding the question of simultaneous examination of the same claim under
another mechanism of international settlement. The Committee has decided that,
for its purposes, the “1503 procedure” (described later in this
Fact Sheet) and complaints to a special rapporteur of the Commission on Human
Rights do not constitute such a mechanism. Accordingly, your claim to the Human
Rights Committee will not be declared inadmissible if you are concurrently
pursuing options such as these. Second, the Committee has taken the view that,
inasmuch as the Covenant provides greater protection in some respects than is
available under other international instruments, facts that have already been
submitted to another international mechanism can be brought before the
Committee if broader protections in the Covenant are invoked. It should be
added that, in the Committee's view, complaints dismissed by other
international mechanisms on procedural grounds have not been substantively
examined; the same facts may therefore be brought before the Committee.
After the
Committee’s decision - some further remarks
*
When the
Committee decides that you have been the victim of a violation by the State
party of your rights under the Covenant, the State is invited to provide
information, within three months, on the steps it has taken to give effect to
the Committee’s Views. The basis for this requirement is that the State
party, in article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, has guaranteed you an
effective remedy for any violation of your rights. Its response will be transmitted
to you for comment. The Committee often indicates what an appropriate remedy
would be, for instance payment of compensation or release from detention. In
the event of failure by the State party to take appropriate steps, the case is
referred to a member of the Committee, the Special Rapporteur on Follow-up of
Views, for consideration of further measures to be taken. The Special
Rapporteur may, for example, issue specific requests to the State party or meet
with its representatives to discuss the action taken. Unless, exceptionally,
the information is suppressed, it is published together with the action taken
by the Special Rapporteur in an annual report on follow-up.
*
When the
Committee considers your case admissible, either in general or with reference
to specific claims or articles, the State party is requested to present its
submissions on the merits within six months. You then have a two-month period
to comment on the submissions, following which the case is usually ready for
consideration by the Committee.
Procedure
under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment
Introduction
The Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
was adopted on 10 December 1984. Among other obligations, the treaty requires
States parties not to return persons to States where there are substantial
grounds for believing they would face torture and imposes a series of measures
aimed at ensuring that acts of torture, wherever they are committed, are
appropriately investigated and prosecuted. The substantive obligations are set
out in articles 1 to 16, comprising Part I of the treaty. The complaint
mechanism for invoking breaches of your rights under the Convention is contained
in article 22. States parties that so wish may lodge a declaration under that
article recognizing the competence of the Committee against Torture - a panel
of 10 independent experts that meets twice a year - to consider complaints from
an individual or group of individuals alleging violations of their rights under
the Convention by that State.[11]
Details of
the procedure
Upon
registration, the Committee invites the State party to comment within six
months on the admissibility and merits of the complaint. Depending on the
reaction of the State party, one of two courses will be followed.
-
If the State party comments only on the admissibility of the complaint within
two months, you are given four weeks to comment on its submissions. The Committee
then adopts a decision on admissibility. If the case is considered
inadmissible, it is closed. If it is held to be admissible, the State party has
four months to comment on the merits of the case. You then have six weeks to
comment on the merits, following which the Committee can take a final decision
on the substance of the case.
-
Alternatively, if the State party comments on both the admissibility and the
merits (usually at the six-month point), you have six weeks to comment on its
submissions. The Committee is then in a position to make a combined decision on
the admissibility and merits of the case.
As fewer cases
are brought before the Committee against Torture, a case is typically concluded
within one or two years of the date of registration. In the case of a decision
on admissibility alone, the period can be significantly shorter.
Special
circumstances of urgency
Rule 108(1) of
the Committee’s rules of procedure is the basis for a complainant to seek
interim measures by the Committee against Torture to prevent irreparable harm
while the communication is being considered. Most commonly, such requests arise
in the context of claims under article 3 of the Convention where a deportation
is pending and there is a foreseeable risk of the complainant suffering torture
in the receiving State. The Committee’s Special Rapporteur on New
Complaints and Interim Measures decides whether a request for interim measures
to the State party should be made under this rule.
An
additional pointer on the admissibility of your case
You should be
aware that complaints to the Committee against Torture differ in some respects
from the above general outline of admissibility requirements. In addition to
the requirement that your complaint should not currently be under examination
by another procedure of international investigation or settlement, it should
not have been the subject of a decision in the past by such a mechanism. If it
has, it will be deemed inadmissible. Moreover, the Committee’s rules of
procedure state that a complaint may be rejected as inadmissible if it is
manifestly unfounded, and if the time elapsed since the exhaustion of domestic
remedies is so unreasonably prolonged as to render consideration of the
complaint by the Committee or the State party unduly difficult.
Consideration
of your case
The rules of
procedure of the Committee against Torture authorize it to seek the attendance
in person of one party or the other to provide further clarifications or to
answer questions when it considers the merits of a complaint. In accordance
with the principle of equal procedural protection, the other party then also
has the opportunity to attend. Your case will not be prejudiced by any failure
to attend in person. It should be noted, however, that such instances are
exceptional rather than routine. In addition, the Committee may obtain any
documentation from United Nations bodies, specialized agencies or other sources
that may assist it in considering the complaint.
After the
Committee’s decision - some further remarks
á
When the Committee finds that a State action or proposed action, for example in
the case of a pending deportation, has violated or would violate the State
party’s obligations under the Covenant, it forwards its Views to the
State party with a request for information on their implementation within 90
days. The pertinent provision is rule 112(5) of the Committee’s rules of
procedure, under which the State party is required to report the action it has
taken on the Committee’s findings. In the light of the information
provided, the Committee’s Rapporteur for follow-up takes such further
action as may be appropriate.
á
When a decision is declared admissible, the State party has four months to
present its submissions on the merits. You then have six weeks to comment on
them.
Procedure
under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination
Introduction
The International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, adopted on
21 December 1965 sets out a series of obligations for States parties to ensure
legal and practical enjoyment of the right to be free from racial
discrimination. While the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
also contains free-standing provisions concerning non-discrimination on the
basis of race, the Convention is a specialized treaty that deals with a wide
variety of issues arising in this area in greater detail. The Committee
established under the Convention also possesses expertise on issues of race.
The substantive obligations are set out in articles 1 to 7 of the Convention,
comprising Part I of the treaty. As in the case of the Convention against
Torture, the Convention itself establishes the mechanism for bringing claims of
a breach of your rights. States parties that so wish may make a declaration
under article 14 accepting the competence of the Committee on the Elimination
of Racial Discrimination - a panel of 18 independent experts that meets twice a
year - to consider complaints from an individual or group of individuals
alleging violations of their rights under the Convention by that State.[12]
Who can
bring a complaint and when should you do so?
In contrast to
complaints under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights or the Convention against Torture, complaints under this
Convention may be brought not only by or on behalf of individuals but also by
or on behalf of groups of individuals. The details to be provided are basically
those described in the general scheme above.
It is important
to note that complaints to this Committee must be submitted within six
months of the final
decision by a national authority in your case.
Details of
the procedure
Upon registration
of a case, the State party has three months to present submissions on the
admissibility of the complaint or, if it has no objection to the admissibility,
on the merits.
-
If the State party presents arguments on admissibility, you have six weeks to
comment before the Committee takes a decision on admissibility. If it considers
the case to be admissible, the State party has three further months to present
submissions on the merits. You then have six weeks to comment before the
Committee takes a final decision on the merits of the case.
-
Alternatively, if the State party has no objection to the admissibility of the
complaint and presents its submissions solely on the merits, you also have six
weeks to comment before the Committee takes a final merits decision.
As relatively few
communications come before this Committee, your claim will typically be
resolved more quickly, probably within a year. If a decision is required only
on admissibility, it may be taken within an even shorter period.
Special
circumstances of urgency
As with the other
procedures described, you may seek interim measures by the Committee to prevent
irreparable damage while the communication is being considered. The basis for
such a request by the Committee to a State party is rule 91(3) of the rules of
procedure.
Additional
pointers on the admissibility of your case
You should be
aware that complaints to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination differ on two issues of admissibility from the general procedure
outlined above. First, your complaint will not be considered inadmissible if
the same matter is pending before or has been the subject of a decision by
another international procedure. Second, as already emphasized, complaints
brought after a six-month time limit will, as a rule, be declared inadmissible.
Consideration
of your case
The rules of
procedure of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
authorize it to invite the person filing the complaint (or his/her representative)
and State party representatives to attend the proceedings in order to provide
additional information or to answer questions on the merits of the case. Again,
however, it should be noted that such instances are exceptional rather than
routine.
After the
Committee’s decision - some further remarks
The courses of
action open to the Committee are similar to those outlined above for the
Committee against Torture, with one additional detail. When the Committee takes
a decision (called an "Opinion") on the merits of a complaint, it
often makes suggestions and/or recommendations even if it has formally found
that there has been no violation of the Convention. These suggestions or
recommendations may be general or specific and addressed either to the State
party in question or to all States parties to the Convention. Under rule 95(5)
of the Committee’s rules of procedure, the State party is invited to
inform the Committee in due course of the action it has taken on its
suggestions and recommendations. On receipt of that information, the Committee
takes whatever steps it deems to be appropriate.
Procedure
under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women
Introduction
The Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, adopted on 18
December 1979, guarantees the right of all women to be free from discrimination
and sets out obligations for States parties designed to ensure legal and
practical enjoyment of that right. While the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights also contains free-standing provisions for
non-discrimination on the basis of gender, the Convention is a specialized
treaty that deals in greater detail with a wide variety of issues arising in
this area. The Committee established under the Convention also possesses
expertise on issues of discrimination against women. The substantive
obligations are set out in articles 1 to 16 of the Convention, comprising Parts
I to IV.
As in the case of
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the complaints
mechanism for the Convention is contained in an Optional Protocol, which was
adopted on 6 October 1999. It is a separate treaty open to States parties
to the parent Convention. States that have become a party to the Optional
Protocol recognize the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women – a panel of 23 independent experts that
meets twice a year – to receive complaints from persons within their jurisdiction
alleging violations of their rights under the Convention. The Optional Protocol
contains a number of innovations that are described below.
Who can
bring a complaint, what must be submitted and when can you do so?
As with the
procedure under the International Convention on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination, complaints may be submitted by or on behalf of individuals or
groups of individuals. If you submit a complaint on behalf of one or more
persons, you must either show proof of their consent or justify acting on their
behalf without their consent. While the Committee has not yet begun to
interpret the circumstances that would justify acting without the consent of
the alleged victim(s), the jurisprudence on this point of the other Committees,
notably the Human Rights Committee, may provide some guidance.
With regard to
the material to be submitted, you are referred to the procedures described
above. Annex 2 to this Fact Sheet contains a set of Complaint Guidelines.
There is no time
limit as such for the submission of communications but, as already noted, it is
a considerable plus if complaints are filed expeditiously.
Details of
the procedure
The procedure
followed by the Committee is expected to be similar to that of the Human Rights
Committee. If the case is registered, the Committee is likely to consider the
admissibility and merits of the case simultaneously. The State party against
whom the complaint is directed will then have six months to present its
submissions on the admissibility and merits of the communication. Once it has
done so, you will be assigned a fixed period within which to comment, following
which the case will be ready for a decision by the Committee.
Occasionally, the
Committee will adopt a different procedure to maximize the time at its disposal
to consider communications and to spare both States parties and complainants
needless effort. For example, if a State party files submissions at an early
point that cast serious doubt on the admissibility of the complaint, the
Committee may invite you to comment on those submissions. It will then take a
preliminary decision on admissibility alone and will proceed to the merits
stage only if the case is declared admissible. If it is, the State party will
be given a further period to comment on the merits of the communication and you
will in turn be requested to comment thereon. You will be informed of any such
departure from the usual practice.
Special
circumstances of urgency
Under article 5
of the Optional Protocol (as spelled out by rule 63 of the Committee’s
rules of procedure), the Committee may issue a request to the State party for
such interim measures as may be necessary to avoid possible irreparable damage.
Additional
pointers on the admissibility of your case
The requirements
of admissibility build on the experience of the other treaty bodies. The
grounds of inadmissibility are set out in article 4 of the Optional Protocol
and follow the general pattern set out above. However, you should note two
elements which differ from that description. First, as with the Committee
against Torture, your complaint will be inadmissible if it has already been
decided upon by another procedure of international investigation or settlement.
The Committee also has explicit authority to reject at an early stage
complaints that are manifestly ill-founded or, in other words, plainly
unjustified.
Consideration
of your case
There is one
point to add to the general description of how cases are considered. The
Committee may seek, through the Secretary-General of the United Nations, any
documentation from United Nations or other bodies that may assist it in the
disposal of the complaint. In this case, to preserve procedural equity, each
party will be afforded an opportunity to comment on such documentation or
information within a fixed period (yet to be determined).
After the
Committee’s decision - some further remarks
While the general
description applies here too, the Optional Protocol itself sets out a special
procedure for cases in which the Committee finds that there has been a
violation of your rights under the Convention. It should first be noted that
when the Committee takes a decision (formally called "Views") on the
merits of a case, it may also, like the Committee on the Elimination of Racial
Discrimination, make recommendations. Pursuant to the follow-up procedure set
out in article 7 of the Optional Protocol, the State party is required, within
six months of receiving the Committee’s decision and recommendations, to submit
a written response detailing any action taken thereon. The Committee may invite
the State party to submit further information, either directly or through its
next periodic report to the Committee, on the general situation of
implementation of Convention rights in the State party.
Procedure
under the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All
Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
Introduction
The International
Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members
of Their Families, adopted on 18 December 1990, imposes obligations on States
parties to protect and guarantee a comprehensive range of rights on behalf of
migrant workers and their families. The substantive obligations are set out in articles
7 to 71 of the Convention, comprising Parts II to VI. The Convention contains
its own individual complaint mechanism. States parties that so wish may make a
declaration under article 77 accepting the competence of the Committee on the
Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families -
a panel of 10 independent experts meeting annually - to consider complaints
from an individual or group of individuals alleging violations of their rights
under the Convention by that State.[13] It may be
some time before ten States parties make the declaration under article 77
required for the complaint mechanism to enter into force.
As the
Convention’s complaint mechanism has not yet entered into force, the
Committee has not yet developed rules of procedure and practice relating to
individual complaints. It may, however, be expected to adopt similar procedures
to those applied by the other treaty bodies and to interpret similarly the
elements of admissibility set out in article 77.
Individuals
subject to the jurisdiction of a State party that has made the declaration
under article 77 (or persons acting on their behalf) may make complaints to the
Committee, claiming that their individual rights set out in the Convention have
been violated by the State party. A complaint is not admissible if it is
anonymous, an abuse of the right of submission of such communications or
incompatible with the provisions of the Convention. It is also inadmissible if
the same matter has been, or is being, examined under another procedure of
international investigation or settlement; or if all available domestic
remedies have not been exhausted. As with the other procedures, the domestic
remedies requirement does not apply if their application is unreasonably prolonged
or if they are unlikely to bring effective relief. A State party has six months
to present its submissions on admissibility and the merits. The Committee will
then meet in closed session to examine the complaint and forward its views to
the State Party concerned and to the individual.
How to
direct complaints to the treaty bodies
For complaints to
the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture and the Committee on
the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, direct your correspondence and
inquiries to:
Mail Petitions
Team
Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations
Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10,
Switzerland
Fax +
41 22 9179022 (particularly for urgent matters)
E-mail tb-petitions.hchr@unog.ch
For complaints to
the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, direct your
correspondence and inquiries to:
Mail Committee
on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
c/o Division for
the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs
United Nations
Secretariat
2 United Nations
Plaza
DC-2/12th Floor
New York, NY
10017
United States of
America
Fax +
1-212-963-3463
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 2:
Complaints to the Commission on Human Rights
and the
Commission on the Status of Women
The 1503
Procedure of the Commission on Human Rights
Introduction
The procedure
before the Commission on Human Rights, called the 1503 procedure after the
resolution of the Economic and Social Council whereby it was established,[14] is the oldest human rights complaint mechanism in the United
Nations system. Under this procedure the Commission, a political body composed
of State representatives, generally deals with situations in countries rather
than individual complaints.[15]
The procedure was
substantially amended in 2000 by the Economic and Social Council to make it
more efficient, to facilitate dialogue with the Governments concerned and to
provide for a more meaningful debate in the final stages of a complaint before
the Commission on Human Rights.[16] It is this so-called revised 1503
procedure that is explained below.
Who can
submit a complaint under the 1503 procedure?
Under the 1503
procedure, the Commission has the mandate to examine a consistent pattern of
gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms
occurring in any country of the world. Any individual or group claiming to be
the victim of such human rights violations may submit a complaint, as may any
other person or group with direct and reliable knowledge of such violations.
Where an NGO submits a complaint, it must be acting in good faith and in
accordance with recognized principles of human rights. The organization should
also have reliable direct evidence of the situation it is describing.
What
material should I submit under the 1503 procedure?
First, you must
provide identifying particulars since a complaint cannot be anonymous. You
should direct your complaint to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human
Rights or the United Nations, ideally specifying that you wish the complaint to
be dealt with under the 1503 procedure. You should set out the purpose of the
complaint and the rights alleged to have been violated. You may submit this
material by normal mail, facsimile message or e-mail.[17]
Each complaint
should describe the relevant facts in as much detail as possible, providing
names of alleged victims, dates, locations and other evidence. As the procedure
primarily examines patterns of violations rather than individual violations as
such, it is advisable for a complaint not simply to focus on the facts of an
individual’s case but, if possible, to expand on a group or series of
such cases. It is not sufficient to rely on mass media reports; specific
evidence should be provided. In short, there must be reasonable grounds to
infer from the material that the alleged pattern of gross human rights
violations exists.
Criteria of
admissibility
Various
conditions need to be met for your complaint to be considered admissible. If it
does not satisfy these criteria, it may be rejected.
Your complaint
should be submitted within a reasonable time following the exhaustion of
available remedies in your own country. You should ideally show that you have
exhausted such remedies. Your complaint should not contain abusive or insulting
language. The submission of complaints overlapping with other procedures in the
United Nations system and the duplication of complaints already considered by
such procedures should be avoided. Lastly, no complaint should be politically
motivated or run counter to the principles of the United Nations.
How does
the 1503 procedure operate?
You may submit a
complaint at any time. If your complaint gets through the initial screening
process described below, it will be considered by the formal 1503 procedure
bodies which meet annually.
Step
1: Initial screening (Secretariat together with the
Chairperson of the Working Group on Communications)
The Secretariat
screens all complaints as they arrive. Your complaint may be rejected as
manifestly ill-founded by the Secretariat acting jointly with the Chairperson
of the so-called Working Group on Communications (see step 2 below). If your
complaint makes it to the next stage of the process, it will be acknowledged
and forwarded to the Government concerned for comment. Government replies
remain confidential and are not communicated to you.
Step
2: Working Group on Communications
In late summer
(usually August),[18] the Working Group on Communications meets to assess
complaints that have passed the initial screening stage over the last year and
have been forwarded to the Government concerned for comment at least twelve
weeks before the meeting of the Working Group. It examines complaints and any
replies received from Governments with a view to bringing to the attention of
the Working Group on Situations any situations that appear to reveal a
consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights
and fundamental freedoms. The Working Group comprises five members of the
Sub-Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. It may decide
to hold over a communication to obtain replies or further information from the
Governments concerned or for other reasons.
The proceedings
of the Working Group are confidential. They are also conducted on the basis of
written material only, so that neither Governments nor complainants appear
before it. It should be noted that most complaints fail to proceed beyond this
point. Governments are advised of the decisions of the Working Group but you
are not.
Step
3: Working Group on Situations
Early in the
following year (usually February), the Working Group on Situations meets to consider situations referred
to it by the Working Group on Communications.[19] It
also considers any situations of which the Commission on Human Rights itself
remains seized from its previous session (see the next stage in the process).
The Working Group decides whether, in the light of all the material from the
previous stages of the process, the situation referred to it appears to reveal
a consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights
and fundamental freedoms. The Group has five members, who are usually nominated
by the regional groups of States within the Commission on Human Rights in order
to ensure equitable geographic distribution.
The Working Group
has a variety of options for dealing with the situations before it. It may
forward a situation to the Commission, in which case the Working Group usually
makes specific recommendations for action. Alternatively, it may decide to keep
a situation pending before it or to close the file.
As with the
Working Group on Communications, the proceedings of the Working Group on
Situations are confidential and based on written material only, so that neither
Governments nor complainants appear before it. Governments are advised of the
decisions of the Working Group, including any recommendations made to the
Commission, but you are not.
Step
4: Commission on Human Rights
Approximately
a month after the previous stage (usually March), the Commission on Human Rights, meeting in
closed session, considers the situations referred to it by the Working Group on
Situations. Representatives of the Governments concerned are invited to address
the Commission and answer questions. At a subsequent meeting shortly
thereafter, the Commission considers its final decision, again in closed
session. Representatives of the Government concerned may also be present at
this point.
The Commission
has a variety of options for dealing with situations that come before it. It
may elect to keep a situation under review in the light of any further
information received or it may keep it under review and appoint an independent
expert. Alternatively, it may discontinue the matter under the 1503 procedure
and take it up instead under a public procedure,[20] or
discontinue the matter when no further consideration is warranted. If it wishes,
it may also make recommendations to its parent body, the Economic and Social
Council.
After the
Commission has considered the situations before it, the Chairperson announces
at a public meeting the names of the countries examined under the 1503 procedure
and those of countries no longer dealt with under the procedure.
Confidentiality
of the 1503 procedure
Although you must
state your name when making a complaint, you may request that it be suppressed
if the complaint is forwarded to the Government concerned. All material
provided by individuals and Governments, as well as the decisions taken at the
various stages of the procedure, remain confidential and are not made public.
This also applies to situations that have been discontinued, unless the Economic
and Social Council decides otherwise or the Government concerned expresses the
wish that the dossiers be made public. However, while these rules of
confidentiality are binding on the United Nations bodies dealing with your
complaint, they do not preclude you from disclosing the fact that you have
submitted a complaint under the 1503 procedure.
Advantages
and possible drawbacks of the 1503 procedure
As with all other
procedures described in this Fact Sheet, the 1503 procedure has advantages and
disadvantages that you should ponder before deciding under which mechanism you
may best submit your complaint. The pluses of the 1503 procedure are that you
may submit a complaint against any country without needing to check whether it
has ratified a particular treaty or limited its obligations under the
instrument. Once you have submitted a complaint, you do not have to respond
again at a later point with further information – the initial complaint
is sufficient. With the 1503 procedure, it is possible for your complaint to
reach the highest level of the United Nations human rights machinery, the
Commission on Human Rights. It may thus result in very significant pressure
being brought to bear upon a State to change laws, policies or practices that
infringe internationally guaranteed human rights. Possible drawbacks of the
procedure are that you will not be informed of the decisions taken at the
various stages of the process or the reasons for them. Nor will you be
informed of the relevant Government’s responses to your complaint. You
should also be aware that the procedure can be protracted and, unlike the
procedures described in Part 1, there is no provision for urgent measures of
protection.
How to file
complaints under the 1503 procedure
For complaints
under this procedure, direct your correspondence and inquiries to:
Mail Commission/Sub-Commission
Team (1503 Procedure)
Support Services
Branch
Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations
Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10,
Switzerland
Fax +
41 22 9179011
E-mail 1503.hchr@unog.ch
The Procedure
of the Commission on the Status of Women
While the 1503
procedure is designed to reveal gross violations of human rights in particular
countries, the confidential complaint procedure of the Commission on the Status
of Women is designed to identify global trends and patterns concerning
women’s rights. It was established pursuant to a series of resolutions of
the Economic and Social Council, under which the Commission considers confidential
and non-confidential complaints on the status of women. [21] As with the 1503 procedure, its primary aim is not to afford
direct redress to victims of human rights violations.
The
procedure
The
Commission’s Secretariat receives complaints each year from individuals
and organizations. It acknowledges their receipt and briefly describes the
procedure to complainants. The Secretariat then summarizes the complaints and
sends them to the Governments concerned for comment. Complainants’ names,
however, are only divulged to the Governments concerned (and subsequently to
the Commission) with the complainant’s express permission.
Complaints are
then considered by a Working Group on Communications composed of five members
of the Commission on the Status of Women, representing all geographical
regions, which meets during the Commission's annual session (usually in the
spring). During its private meetings, it considers all communications and the
replies of Governments, with a view to bringing to the Commission’s attention
those that “appear to reveal a consistent pattern of reliably attested
injustice and discriminatory practices against women”. The Working Group
then prepares a report for the Commission that “will indicate the
categories in which communications are most frequently submitted to the
Commission”. Individual complainants are not provided with
Governments’ replies or the report of the Working Group.
The Commission on
the Status of Women considers the Working Group’s report in a closed
meeting. It then reports to the Economic and Social Council, making
recommendations, if it sees fit, for action by the Council on the
“emerging trends and patterns of communications”. It is not
authorized to take any other action.
How to file
complaints under the Commission on the Status of Women procedure
For complaints to
this Commission, direct your correspondence and inquiries to:
Commission on the
Status of Women
c/o Division for
the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs
(the remaining contact
details of the Division are given at the end of Part 1 above)
GUIDELINES CONTACT INFORMATION
Human
Rights Complaints
Model
Complaint Form
Mail: Petitions Team
Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations
Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10,
Switzerland
Fax: + 41 22 917 9022
(particularly for
urgent matters)
E-mail: tb-petitions@ohchr.org
Human Rights
Committee
Committee
against Torture
Committee on
the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
Committee on
the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
Complaint
Guidelines
Mail: Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women
c/o Division for
the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs
United Nations
Secretariat
2 United Nations
Plaza, DC-2/12th Floor
New York, NY
10017, United States of America
Fax: + 41 22 917 9022
Commission
on Human Rights
Mail: Commission/Sub-Commission Team (1503
Procedure)
Support Services
Branch
Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations
Office at Geneva
1211 Geneva 10,
Switzerland
Fax: + 41 22 917 9011
E-mail: 1503@ohchr.org
Commission
on the Status of Women
Mail: Commission on the Status of Women
c/o Division for
the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs
United Nations
Secretariat
2 United Nations
Plaza, DC-2/12th Floor
New York, NY
10017, United States of America
Fax: + 41 22 917 9022