A universal periodic review procedure (UPR) at the new Human Rights Council (Council) has been propounded as a means of restoring credibility, professionalism, universality and fair scrutiny of state performance in protecting and promoting human rights to the main political human rights body of the United Nations. But almost from the moment it was proposed, concerns have been raised not only over how the periodic review procedure could be structured to address these expectations but also whether it could avoid duplicating, or overturning, the work and recommendations of the seven functioning UN human rights treaty bodies. This article explores whether these concerns are warranted and whether the new procedure can bring added value and scrutiny to UN human rights programmes. It also offers suggestions for how the new procedure could address the Secretary-General's concern that the credibility of the Commission on Human Rights (Commission) was damaged because states sought...
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Felice D. Gaer (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: