When the first Secretary-General of the United Nations, Trygve Lie, laid the cornerstone of the New York building that was to house the United Nations, it contained a copy of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Human rights are literally the cornerstone of the United Nations.
Since then, States have established an ecosystem of international human rights bodies to assist them to advance this work. Among them, the ten treaty bodies; this Human Rights Council, with its Universal Periodic Review, investigations and Special Procedures experts; and my Office.
We are now at a crucial juncture, 75 years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and 30 years after the Vienna Declaration – against the backddrop of flaring conflicts, the Sustainable Development Agenda dangerously off-track, and environmental harm threatening humanity. International cooperation is vital, so that we can advance human rights.
This is what the United Nations Charter puts forward as a premise.
And it is why, before this Council session, I will focus my statement on cooperation between Member States and the ecosystem of international human rights bodies – a lifeline, which is strong because it is made of many cords bound together, like a sailor’s rope.
Poor cooperation leaves States adrift.
Selective cooperation weakens that lifeline’s force.
Mr President,
Engaging with a stable field presence of my Office is a hallmark of States that are constructively cooperating to advance human rights.
Ninety-five States or territories accommodate human rights field presences, and when this statement is uploaded to our website, they will be listed1. I pay tribute to their engagement. Let me give you a few examples.
Colombia recently extended our field presence to the year 2032. Our work has contributed considerably to the cause of peace, to greater protection of the civic space, to accountability for crimes committed during the armed conflict, as well as a victim-centred approach to transitional justice. Colombia has also recently renewed country visits by the Council’s Special Procedures, and engages constructively with treaty bodies. We will continue to contribute to police reform; to efforts to protect human rights defenders; and to responses to continuing violence. The news that four Huitoto children were rescued earlier this month, after surviving alone in the jungle for 40 days, was uplifting, but it was also a reminder that many, like their family, are still being forced to flee the violence of armed groups.
In Honduras, our country office works with the authorities and civil society on justice, legislative review, and land-related conflicts, among other issues. We are also assisting the creation of a human rights-compliant development model that aims to reduce poverty, inequalities and environmental damage. I remain concerned about conflicts regarding access to land, including in the Bajo Aguan region, and attacks against human rights and environmental defenders – such as the murder last week of yet another environmental defender, months after his brother and another activist were also killed.
In Guatemala, our field presence assists the authorities to address challenges regarding the rights of women, indigenous peoples, and people with disabilities; social protections; access to land; and business. I am deeply concerned about attacks against members of the judiciary, human rights defenders and journalists. Extension of my Office’s presence would contribute to continued support to the State and civil society.
Four months ago, in the context of widespread political protests, my Office formalised an agreement for a two-year workplan in Peru. I look forward to progress on many issues, including the protection of environmental human rights defenders; the prevention and management of social conflicts; and broader access to justice. For the way forward, accountability is crucial, alongside respect for the independence of key institutions, including electoral and judicial bodies.
The Office is engaged in discussions with Bolivia to continue cooperating and monitoring important human rights issues, following the decision of the Government to conclude the technical mission we had deployed since 2019.
Uganda has chosen not to renew the mandate of our Country Office, to my profound regret. The decision was swiftly followed by the adoption of profoundly disturbing legislation that further criminalizes homosexuality, setting up a particular social group for persecution. Uganda’s most recent official Special Procedures visit dates back to 2007. With widening inequalities and increasing restrictions on civic and political space, human rights engagement is more important than ever. We remain committed to working with Uganda to address these challenges, and I would also like to take this opportunity to express my solidarity and sympathy with the victims of last week’s horrendous school attack.
In Kenya, our team continues to work with security agencies to support policing that is compliant with human rights, notably during demonstrations. We also coordinate UN support to police and prison reforms. Kenya’s plan on Business and Human Rights, which was launched last month, is an example of the important progress that can result from cooperation across the full spectrum of human rights bodies. It first arose from a UPR recommendation, with additional steps recommended by the Working Group on Business and Human Rights, and I encourage follow up and engagement with the Special Procedures.
In Mauritania, our support to the authorities focuses especially on ending discrimination, notably the persistent issue of slavery; the rights of women and girls; and strengthening the rule of law, particularly with internal security forces. The Government has facilitated independent investigations of human rights violations and full access for my Office to all detention facilities. At least 38 cases of slavery have been brought to court under the Anti-slavery law, with 10 judgments made in the first two months of this year. I commend the authorities’ cooperation with the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery during his visit last year.
Regarding Mali’s request for the withdrawal of MINUSMA, let me be clear: human rights must always be above the fray of politics. In exercising the responsibilities entrusted to my Office, we are guided solely by our mandate. When serious human rights violations or abuses occur, irrespective of who the perpetrator is, we need to monitor, document and report on them, in the interests of all Malians, in addition to working on prevention and delivering support to national institutions. I am fully aware of how complex the situation is in Mali, as well as of Mali’s historic contributions to the human rights cause, particularly the Manden Charter of the 13th century. Human rights is essential for the future of the country, and my Office remains committed to continuing our work in Mali in cooperation with the transitional authorities, civil society and others. n respect of last month’s announcement of possible legal action against my staff and others, I count on the authorities to respect the privileges and immunities of the United Nations, and to ensure that no reprisals are taken against victims, witnesses, or their relatives.
Cambodia has been our longest field engagement, and we have supported many legal and institutional reforms, but I am alarmed by the shrinking of civic space in the lead-up to national elections in July.
In Sri Lanka, although the Government has regrettably rejected aspects of the Council’s resolutions related to accountability, it has continued to engage with our presence on the ground. Sri Lanka has received a dozen visits by mandate-holders in the past decade, and I encourage the authorities to implement their recommendations.
In the Philippines, a joint programme that addresses concerns identified by this Council has seen strong engagement by the Government, civil society, the national human rights commission and UN partners. The Philippines is also once again facilitating Special Procedures visits after a hiatus of several years. It is essential that the Government step up efforts to hold members of the security forces accountable for extrajudicial killings and other violations, and increases protection for human rights defenders.
In the Pacific, to advance better protection of the rights of people driven by climate change to leave their homes, our Regional Office is helping to support Fiji and Tuvalu in the development of a strong regional framework on climate change mobility.
With support from the Office, Mongolia adopted Asia’s first dedicated human rights defenders law.It has also established a national prevention mechanism on torture that will help address longstanding issues in prisons; and last week adopted an action plan on Business and Human Rights that will help to address the environmental impacts of extractive industries.
In a number of countries in the Asia-Pacific region, such as the Maldives and Timor-Leste, the Office has made contributions over many years in accompanying transitions away from conflict, or towards democracy. Similarly, we are working with the Government of Nepal on the proposed revision of transitional justice legislation. I hope the amendments will be in line with international norms and a victim-centred approach, to finally complete this important element of the peace agreement.
In Ukraine, our Human Rights Monitoring Mission has unimpeded access across all territory under Government control, including to places of detention for civilians and prisoners of war. The Government engages with us to implement recommendations and to discuss our findings. Ukraine’s cooperation with the Council’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry has also been significant, with access to all requested locations. I encourage Ukraine to further pursue this approach by providing the Commission with all the information it requests.
I urge the Russian Federation to cooperate with all the international human rights bodies – including my own Office – to address the serious human rights issues that the country faces. They include the closing down of civic space; judicial proceedings targeting human rights activists, political opponents and critics; and persistent allegations of torture and ill-treatment. Regarding Ukraine, I reiterate the need for cooperation with the Council’s Commission of Inquiry, and for my colleagues to have access to both Ukrainian territory occupied by the Russian Federation, and to the Russian Federation itself – not least, to visit civilian detainees, prisoners of war, and Ukrainian children and people with disabilities who have been taken to these areas.
My Office has for years sought access to areas under the effective control of de facto authorities in the South Caucasus region. People are being made more vulnerable by the absence of regular monitoring by, and contact with, the UN’s human rights machinery. Access would enable us to conduct human rights assessments and address people’s needs, as well help build confidence.
I encourage Armenia and Azerbaijan to accelerate peace efforts anchored in human rights. I also underline the importance of free and safe movement through the Lachin corridor, and the need to avoid any humanitarian impact on civilians.
I am deeply worried about the deteriorating human rights situation in Afghanistan, where the Taliban de facto authorities have dismantled the most fundamental principles of human rights, particularly for women and girls. Yet some openings for engagement have been possible, by the Special Rapporteur, by other experts, and notably, our field presence on the ground – for instance, through continued visits to prisons.
Iran continues to engage formally with my Office, including on issues pertaining to discrimination against women and girls; accountability for severe human rights violations; and imminent executions. Yet substantive implementation of the State’s obligations under international human rights law remains very limited, and I am concerned by the massive recent increase in executions, as well as continuing discrimination against women and girls. Iran does not cooperate with the Special Procedures country mandate, and has received only one Special Procedures mandate holder in the past 17 years.
Mr President,
The Council’s Universal Periodic Review makes absolutely clear that human rights scrutiny is in no way a violation of sovereignty but a legitimate matter of international concern. The inclusion of civil society voices and the permanent cycle of its scrutiny create a heightened awareness of human rights issues and focus attention on follow-up.
The UPR is not a one-off performance. It is a four and a half year process that is intended to culminate in the implementation of recommendations. But in round four of the reviews – as in previous rounds – many recommendations are simply being rolled over for repeat. So I urge States – all States – to step up their implementation efforts, as an expression of their genuine cooperation with the UPR. Voluntary mid-term reporting can be a useful tool in this respect.
The Council has also established 59 Special Procedures mandates and 14 investigative mandates.
Special Procedures mandate-holders generally enjoy positive cooperation with States. On average, they conduct 60 to 80 country visits per year, and 129 States have extended a standing invitation. Indeed, despite the pandemic, ten States have received five or more Special Procedures visits in the past five years: Argentina, Bangladesh, Canada, Ecuador, Honduras, Kyrgyzstan, Maldives, Mongolia, Qatar and Tunisia.
However, 19 countries2 have not received any visits in the past five years, despite receiving five or more requests - and even though seven3 of these States have issued a standing invitation.
I am deeply concerned that several mandate-holders have been subjected to personal abuse and threats. These attacks undermine the Council itself. Any hate speech or incitement to violence against mandate-holders, online or offline, is unacceptable. I will do my utmost to support the independence and integrity of the Special Procedures.
A number of the Council’s country mandates and investigative bodies face serious challenges with respect to both cooperation and access.
South Sudan is an exception, and I acknowledge the Government’s agreement to allow the Council’s Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan to base its Secretariat in the country. This significantly boosts the Commission’s ability to support the Government in addressing the country’s many human rights challenges. Regrettably, reported violent incidents affecting civilians rose by 12% in the first three months of this year, and there has been little action by the authorities to hold perpetrators to account, while senior government officials allegedly implicated in serious crimes remain in office.
Syria has not engaged with the Council’s Commission of Inquiry, or the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism, and has received only three Special Procedures visits in the past 8 years. While Syria does engage with my Office in Geneva, it has not cooperated with our office in Beirut since 2011. The human rights situation remains dire. I am hopeful that the authorities will engage with the General Assembly’s new initiative to address missing people on all sides, and that this can assist broader engagement.
Eritreahas rejected engagement with the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea, as well as the preceding Commission of Inquiry and the joint OHCHR-Ethiopian Human Rights Commission investigation. No Special Procedures visit to Eritrea has ever taken place, and yet the country is a current Council member. I ask Eritrea to change course and to engage with the full spectrum of human rights bodies.
Ethiopia has cooperated with the Office, enabling us to deploy international human rights monitors to the north. I also note the potential for cooperation on a comprehensive transitional justice policy. However, Ethiopia does not engage with the International Commission of Human Rights Experts established by the Council, and I continue to encourage such engagement ahead of its report.
The military regime in Myanmar has refused to cooperate with the Council’s Fact-Finding Mission, the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, or the Special Rapporteur. OHCHR has not had access to the country since 2019. In the meantime, the military deposed the democratically elected Government and committed widespread human rights violations that a human rights presence on the ground might have helped to mitigate or prevent.
Similarly, my Office has had no access to Nicaragua since 2018; and the Group of Human Rights Experts set up last year has received no cooperation from the Government. The authorities have continued to undermine the human rights of the Nicaraguan people, with extremely harsh repression of civil society and a drastically reduced civic space, including cancellation of the legal status of numerous organizations. Nicaragua has not attended its last three treaty body reviews, and its most recent official visit by a Special Procedure mandate-holder took place 14 years ago. Nicaragua will also leave the Organization of American States in November, further deepening the country’s isolation, and the fear and vulnerability of its people. I reiterate the readiness of my Office to engage with the Government, as expressed in two letters that I sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, which remain unanswered.
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has also isolated itself from many possibilities of engagement with the UN human rights system. Previously, although it consistently rejected the country-specific resolutions and mandates of the Council, including the country Rapporteur, there was some engagement with thematic mandates and the treaty bodies. But today, the country has fallen behind in its treaty reporting; there has been no Special Procedures visit since 2017; and OHCHR offers of technical assistance have not been followed through. As the country re-opens after the pandemic, and in the spirit of the Human Rights 75 initiative, I hope there can be new opportunities for engagement.
I also encourage Belarus to reverse its current position and to cooperate fully with the UN human rights bodies. A recent visit by the Special Rapporteur on Migrants was limited to the situation at the border with Poland. Belarus refuses to engage with the OHCHR human rights examination mandated by this Council; with the Special Rapporteur on Belarus; or with Special Procedures mandates on civil and political rights. Although Belarus is up to date with its formal reporting requirements to the treaty bodies, it has withdrawn from the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and discontinued our field presence in 2021. This significantly limits the ability of the Office to provide profoundly needed assistance.
Since 2016, Burundi has not granted access to, or cooperated with, the Council’s Commission of Inquiry or the Special Procedures, including the country mandate. It demanded the closure of our field presence in 2019. Given the country’s continued fragility, with wide-ranging lack of accountability and inequalities, greater engagement would enable us to support a more open civic space, among other pressing issues.
I am extremely worried by the deteriorating situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. In the occupied West Bank, excessive use of force and unlawful killings of Palestinians by the Israeli Security Forces have increased, including apparent extrajudicial killings. The recent escalation of violence in Gaza, as well as forcible transfer of Palestinians through evictions, demolitions of homes, the expansion of settlements and settler violence also cry out for human rights-based solutions. However, although Israel’s engagement with the UPR last month was constructive, its cooperation with the Special Procedures and the Independent International Commission of Inquiry is almost non-existent. In addition, for three years the authorities have not granted visas to my international colleagues to monitor issues on the ground. I sincerely hope that Israel’s acceptance of key recommendations during its fourth UPR cycle will be the basis for renewed, constructive engagement with my Office and the UN human rights ecosystem.
Mr President,
The human rights treaties, and the ten treaty bodies that monitor their implementation, set the foundation for the work of all other human rights bodies, including this Council.
In the past year, for example, China has cooperated with several treaty bodies, leading to important guidance for follow-up. They include concerns in relation to the National Security Law in Hong Kong SAR; discrimination against Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities in Xinjiang UAR; assimilation policies that undermine the identity of minorities, including Tibetan people; as well as restrictions on the civic space. My Office is seeking further engagement with China on these and other issues, and we also encourage China to seek the expertise of Special Procedures mandate holders.
Regular reporting to the treaty bodies is a key part of each State’s commitments – and it does not require a high GDP. Unlike many more wealthy States, Senegal has ratified all core human rights treaties, and is also fully up to date with all reporting obligations. While I have recently noted concerns, it is important to acknowledge that this is a country with a long tradition of positive cooperation. Belize, which has also ratified all core treaties, has made significant advances in its reporting, with the assistance of the Office. Samoa has ratified six of the treaties, with discussions underway on a seventh; it also has a very well-functioning follow-up mechanism.
But despite these examples of less wealthy countries that maintain full engagement with the treaty bodies, the system overall faces a significant lack of cooperation from its States parties.
Only 37 States or regional organizations4 are currently up to date with all their reporting requirements to the treaty bodies.
A total of 601 reports by States are overdue. Reports by 78 States5 have been overdue for more than ten years.
The treaty body with the smallest proportion of reporting up to date is the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination – a body whose goals and recommendations are fundamental to all human rights, everywhere. In this year in which we mark the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration, there is an urgent need for all States to implement recommendations by UN anti-racism bodies and the Agenda towards transformative change for racial justice and equality. I urge all States to take decisive action to dismantle systemic racism in every domain, and notably in the context of law enforcement, particularly against Africans and people of African descent.
Last year the Sub-Committee on the Prevention of Torture was forced to suspend its visit to Australia,6 due to failure to cooperate by officials at the regional level. I also want to note Nicaragua’s refusal of the Sub-Committee’s planned visit this year.
Backlogs of both State party reviews and individual communications are alarmingly high. As of 30 April, there were 385 State Party reports awaiting consideration. It would take the Committees just over three years to clear the backlog, at current resources – not taking into account the new reports that would come in during that time. The situation for individual complaints is also dire, with over 1,800 complainants currently waiting for a decision about their cases. Clearly, our resources are not commensurate to these important tasks, and we ask for greater support from Member States.
The treaty body strengthening process is at a critical juncture. It is essential that we build a more sustainable, cost-effective and fit for purpose treaty body system. The biennial General Assembly resolution on the treaty body system in December 2024 will be an important opportunity for Member States to take action. My Office has prepared options7 for a predictable calendar of reviews of States’ reports; harmonisation of working methods of the treaty bodies; and a digital leap forward, and I hope very much that you can engage with this process, so that we have a robust result in December 2024.
For the treaty bodies to be effective, their membership must also be diverse – including gender balance, But there are currently only two women among the 11 candidates nominated by States Parties for the forthcoming elections for the Committee Against Torture. I therefore intend to publish an infographic on the gender composition of all the human rights mechanisms so that States are able to ensure gender-balanced representation among the experts whom they nominate.
As part of our Human Rights 75 initiative, the Office has launched a campaign to promote ratification of all human rights treaties and optional protocols.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the most broadly ratified of the treaties, with 196 States parties: in other words, it includes every UN Member State – with the exception of the United States of America. I encourage the US to ratify it, and the five other human rights treaties that it has not yet ratified. I also concur with the International Independent Expert Mechanism to Advance Racial Justice and Equality in the context of Law Enforcement that in the US, the “deep and long-lasting entrenched legacy” of slavery includes structural racial discrimination in law enforcement. This requires very urgent action, as do the the disproportionate incarceration, poverty, ill-health and mortality – including maternal deaths – of people of African descent.
Mr President,
Attacks on people for their cooperation with the UN are a particularly insidious form of non-cooperation, and can have a chilling effect across the civic space. In line with the Council’s resolution 12/2, thirteen reports on intimidation and reprisals have been issued by the Secretary-General, with information on over 700 cases or incidents of reprisals in 77 countries. The 2022 report includes allegations of incidents in 42 countries. Twelve of those States are current members of this Council.
But the annual reprisals report does not provide a complete picture. When intimidation and repression of civil society is so intense that people simply refrain from taking the risk of cooperating with international bodies, we will receive no reports of reprisals – because nobody dares to interact with us. I am profoundly concerned about this strangulation of civil society in several countries.
Mr President,
Thirty years ago the Vienna Declaration paved the way to the creation of my Office, which is at the core of the UN human rights ecosystem.
The Office has grown from just two to 101 field presences over the past thirty years, in 95 countries. This reflects widespread recognition that cooperating with us to advance human rights has immense practical benefits, including our capacity to share best practises among States.
We would now like to scale up engagement, for example in Brazil, Central Asia, Ecuador, Kenya, Mozambique and the United States, as well as the Caribbean region. I also believe that it is important for us to establish a presence for the first time in China and India – two countries which together comprise more than one-third of the world’s population.
It is also vital that the Office steps up our work in humanitarian situations — which almost invariably trigger, or greatly exacerbate, human rights concerns. Our guidance must be more deeply integrated into all aspects of early warning and early action; planning and preparedness; and the UN’s operational responses to conflicts and disasters. I also look forward to your active support for our human rights advisor programme.
We need to double the budget of the Office in coming years to achieve these goals. We also need greater political support. There should ultimately be a Human Rights office in all countries, to provide support, but also to learn from each country’s experience in advancing human rights.
A strong UN Human Rights Office and a healthy, well-resourced human rights ecosystem are a global public good – especially in these turbulent times.
Thank you Mr President
[1] Afghanistan, Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Congo (Republic of), Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, El Salvador, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Fiji, The Gambia, Georgia, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Palestine, Papua New Guinea, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
All references to the State of Palestine should be understood in compliance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 67/19. All references to Kosovo should be understood in compliance with United Nations Security Council resolution 1244 and without prejudice to the status of Kosovo.
[2] Algeria, Bahrain, Cameroon, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Haiti, India, Israel, Malawi, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia
[3] India (19) ; Rwanda (9) ; Cameroon, Papua New Guinea (6) ; Malawi, Nicaragua, Zambia (5)
[4] Andorra; Armenia; Azerbaijan; Bahrain; Belarus; Belgium; Benin; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Chile; Denmark; El Salvador; Finland; France; Germany; Honduras; Iceland; Iraq; Italy; Kazakhstan; Kiribati; Kuwait; Lithuania; Netherlands; Norway; Philippines; Qatar; Russian Federation; Senegal; Singapore; Sweden; Tajikistan; Turkmenistan; Ukraine; United States of America; Uzbekistan; European Union
[5] Algeria; Antigua and Barbuda; Bahamas; Bangladesh; Barbados; Belize; Bolivia; Botswana; Brunei Darussalam; Burundi; Cabo Verde; Central African Republic; Chad; Comoros; Congo; Côte d’Ivoire; Croatia; Cyprus; Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; Democratic Republic of the Congo; Djibouti; Dominica; Dominican Republic; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Eswatini; Gabon; Gambia; Ghana; Grenada; Guinea; Guinea-Bissau; Guyana; Haiti; Hungary; India; Indonesia; Jamaica; Jordan; Kenya; Lebanon; Lesotho; Liberia; Libya; Madagascar; Malawi; Malaysia; Maldives; Mali; Malta; Mauritania; Mauritius; Monaco; Mozambique; Namibia; Nigeria; Panama; Papua New Guinea; Saint Kitts and Nevis; Saint Lucia; Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; San Marino; Serbia; Seychelles; Sierra Leone; Solomon Islands; Somalia; South Africa; Suriname; Syrian Arab Republic; Tanzania; Timor-Leste;Tonga;Trinidad and Tobago; Uganda; Vanuatu; Yemen; Zambia
[6] https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/02/un-torture-prevention-body-terminates-visit-australia-confirmsmissions#:~:text=The%20Subcommittee%20on%20Prevention%20of,been%20ratified%20by%2091%20countries
[7] https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/treaty-bodies/annualmeeting/35meeting/Working-paper-implementation-treaty-body-Chairs-conclusions.docx
