Inputs from OHCHR/Cambodia

Dear colleagues,

I have followed the vivid discussion about how to best engage UN human rights mechanisms in programming on the ground with great interest, and I agree with much that has been said. The concluding observations by treaty bodies and recommendations by special procedures mechanism do potentially offer a very valuable source of input for programme planning. However, in this forum it is hardly necessary to point out that the scope for recommendations from the treaty bodies and special procedures mandates to be factored into development programming is largely determined by the extent to which the work of these bodies is aligned to the realities on the ground and address the actual priorities in any given country situation.

At present considerable disparities exist in this regard, and serious efforts are underway to assist the mechanisms to make their conclusions and recommendations more grounded and directly linked to the imperatives of development programming and humanitarian action. A closer involvement of UN partners in this work could drastically improve the quality and relevance of the conclusions and recommendations put forward by the treaty bodies and through more intimate ownership also build a better basis for systematic follow up and implementation by UN agencies in the respective programmes. It is also worth remembering that some State Party reports are several years old, which could render treaty body observations irrelevant, especially with regard to countries in crisis or post-conflict situations, where the core issues may change dramatically in a relatively short period of time. This underlines the need to support and facilitate the submission of overdue reports. OHCHR through its field presences or in the absence of such through its geographic desks have an important role in actively engaging UNCT members more closely in briefing treaty bodies and in the follow up to concluding observations and recommendations. In order to strengthen the link between UNCTs and treaty bodies, it is important that OHCHR find ways of facilitating and encouraging the participation of UNCT members in treaty body sessions, especially pre-sessional meetings, and maintain close working relations to keep them involved throughout the reporting and implementation cycle. This could be seen as a kind of cycle in which pre-sessional input from UNCT members serve to strengthen the recommendations by the treaty bodies, after which the UNCT are in a better position to follow up on the issues raised through assistance to the government. Through its experience of working with government partners on the implementation of treaty recommendations, the UNCT should then in turn be better positioned to give feedback to the respective treaty bodies on the recommendations, progress on implementation and any adjustments needed in order to sharpen focus and applicability.

UNICEF’s experience in bringing their country representatives to CRC sessions could serve as a good model for this. In the same vein, treaty monitoring bodies should be encouraged to seek invitations to visit countries of particular interest or relevance, which would provide valuable opportunities to bring the work of the treaty bodies closer to the ground, improve awareness of the treaties and for committee members to gain first-hand experiences of how their work relates to and affects people's lives.

As regards the thematic mechanisms, pretty much the same thinking applies. UNCT members in cooperation with OHCHR offices or geographic desks should be fully involved in both the planning and carrying out field missions. With the agreement of the mandate holders, they could also play a very helpful role in the formulation of practical and implementable recommendations in mission reports. This again would help ensure stronger buy-in by UN agencies and motivate a more active role in assisting the governments in the implementation and follow up to reports and recommendations. However, thematic mandate holders do not necessarily have to carry out full official fact finding mission upon government invitation (which is sometimes hard to obtain) to make a valuable contribution. The special rapporteurs etc are experts in their respective areas and are often excellent resource persons to invite to specific events, such as workshops, seminars, conferences etc. This is a more low key and less formal way of engaging the mandates at the country level, but it often offers a very valuable opportunity for the experts to share their knowledge and experience and also to raise awareness of their mandates and the issues they are working with, but without necessarily making an in-depth assessment of the situation in the particular country they are visiting. We have had a couple of recent and successful examples of this in here in Cambodia with the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders and the Special Rapporteur on indigenous people.

Hope this hasty note will be of interest and use to some of you.

All the best,

Henrik Stenman
OHCHR/Cambodia