Israel and the Human Rights Council: Challenges to the Universal Periodic Review

The first cycle of the UN Human Rights Council‘s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) ended in March 2012 with participation from all 193 UN Member States.  However, at the start of the UPR’s second cycle in May 2012, Israel formally suspended all relations with the Council and the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights (OHCHR), which serves as the secretariat for Council functions. The integrity of the UPR’s second cycle is in jeopardy due to Israel’s suspended relations with the Council and the potential consequences if Israel ignores its review, scheduled for tomorrow.

The UPR provides an opportunity for all UN Member States along with civil society organizations to express their views about the status of human rights in each country.  Because every Member State participates, the UPR is critical to overcoming criticism that the Council is an overly “politicized” body, subject to the unequal influence of powerful states, in how it reacts to human rights violations in many countries. As the President of the Council noted in a letter to Israel in November 2012, “the 100% participation rate [of the UPR’s first cycle] was commended by all delegations which took the floor during the debate at the General Assembly plenary or during the interactive dialogue at the Third Committee held in New York on 14 November 2012.”

Israel’s formal suspension of all relations with the Council is a diplomatic protest based on Israel’s perception that several Member States, elected by the General Assembly to membership on the Council, are hostile towards Israel with respect to its continued occupation of Palestinian territories. Specifically, Israel points to the regular Agenda Item 7 for Council sessions which covers the “Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories.”

If Israel fails to participate in the UPR this January as scheduled, it would force the Council to choose between canceling the review of Israel all together – breaking the essential universality of the UPR – or, in the absence of a state report from Israel, moving forward with the review based solely on the submissions of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and civil society organizations, which could later be critiqued for being one-sided. Either way, Israel’s actions risk the future of the UPR by threatening its underlying validity and utility. By challenging the UPR, Israel sets a worrisome precedent, potentially laying the groundwork for other countries to also threaten noncooperation in political protest. As the Council President noted, Israel’s non-participation would also deprive the Israeli government and Israeli non-governmental organizations of the opportunity to engage in “dialogue and reflection at the national level on the human rights challenges that lie ahead and on the follow-up to be given to the recommendations received.”

Earlier this month, Israel signaled some willingness to reach a compromise that would not jeopardize the universality of the UPR. On January 10, Israel orally informed the President of the Council that Israel would request the Council to “postpone the whole UPR process of Israel.”  This request or a similar compromise on timing could avoid an immediate conflict. Nonetheless, last week, the United States’ representative to the Council told reporters that Israel is expected to boycott its review on Tuesday, though she emphasized U.S. support for Israeli participation and confirmed that Council efforts to find a solution are ongoing. [AFP; Yahoo]

More information from IJRC about the UPR is available from on this site and Office of the High Commissioner for Human Right provides a schedule of all upcoming reviews in the UPR second cycle.