28/30 Summary report on the outcome of the Human Rights Council panel discussion on the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights - Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

GE.14-23906



Human Rights Council Twenty-eighth session

Agenda items 2 and 3

Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner

for Human Rights and reports of the Office of the

High Commissioner and the Secretary-General

Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,

political, economic, social and cultural rights,

including the right to development

Summary report on the outcome of the Human Rights Council panel discussion on the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights

Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

Contents

Paragraphs Page

I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 – 3 3

II. Opening statement by the Deputy High Commissioner .......................................... 4 – 11 3

III. Contributions of panellists ...................................................................................... 12 – 25 5

IV. Summary of the discussion ..................................................................................... 26 – 50 9

A. The concept of prevention and prevention tools ............................................. 28 – 32 9

B. Responsibility to prevent human rights violations .......................................... 33 – 34 10

C. Early warning.................................................................................................. 35 – 37 11

D. Prevention actors ............................................................................................ 38 – 41 12

E. Human rights education and culture ............................................................... 42 – 44 13

F. International solidarity and cooperation, and the question of resources ......... 45 – 47 14

G. Combating impunity, and other conditions facilitating prevention ................. 48 – 50 14

V. Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 51 – 53 15

I. Introduction

1. On 18 September 2014, the Human Rights Council held, pursuant to its resolution

24/16, a panel discussion on the role of prevention in the promotion and protection of

human rights. In decision 24/16, the Council requested the Office of the United Nations

High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to organize the panel discussion in

consultation with States, relevant United Nations bodies, funds and programmes, treaty

bodies, special procedures and regional human rights mechanisms, and civil society,

including non-governmental organizations, and national human rights institutions, with a

view to ensuring multi-stakeholder participation. The Council also requested OHCHR to

prepare a report on the outcome of the panel discussion in the form of a summary, and to

present it to the Council at its twenty-eighth session. The present report was prepared

pursuant to that request.

2. Pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 24/16, the panel discussion aimed to

contribute to developing further the concept of prevention of human rights violations and

raising awareness of prevention in the promotion and protection of human rights among

States and other relevant stakeholders in order to encourage its reflection in relevant

policies and strategies at the national, regional and international levels.

3. The panel discussion was chaired by the President of the Human Rights Council,

and moderated by the Adviser on Human Rights and Refugees at the Quaker United

Nations Office in Geneva, Rachel Brett. The Deputy High Commissioner gave an opening

address. The panel comprised the Special Rapporteur on minority issues, Rita Izsák; the

Vice-Chairperson of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the

Child and of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Benyam Dawit Mezmur; the

Chairperson of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, Sima Samar; the

Secretary-General of the Association for the Prevention of Torture, Mark Thomson; and the

Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Renato

Zerbini Ribeiro Leão.

II. Opening statement by the Deputy High Commissioner

4. In her opening remarks, the Deputy High Commissioner stated that all must strive,

as a matter of sound policy and moral conscience, to prevent violations of human rights

before they escalate into mass atrocities or conflict. She recalled that the duty of States to

take legislative, administrative and other appropriate measures to prevent human rights

violations was well established in law. She referred to the repeated statements made by the

Human Rights Committee that States parties to the International Covenant on Civil and

Political Rights have an obligation, in responding to human rights violations, to take

preventive action to avoid recurrence. The toolbox of preventive measures spanned the

entire range of human rights responses.

5. Risk factors that may lead to serious violations of human rights included severe

discriminatory practices. The construction of identities in terms of “us” and “them”, and the

depiction of a targeted group as dangerous, disloyal, inferior or a security or economic

threat, were often precursors for an escalation in human rights violations. She referred to a

statement made by the Special Rapporteur on minority issues, who had warned that, while

there was much discussion about the importance of prevention of mass atrocity crimes,

such as ethnic cleansing and genocide, Governments, civil society and the international

community must be alert to warning signs much earlier – when the very first words of hate

speech are uttered, or when media start to promote negative stereotypes.

6. Mechanisms for early warning of human rights violations are already in place. They

included the special procedures, who every year conduct some 80 country visits and send

about 500 communications on both urgent and chronic human rights situations and cases;

and the systematic scrutiny of treaty bodies; and the universal periodic review. The Human

Rights Council also had a mandate to contribute, through dialogue and cooperation, to the

prevention of human rights violations. In addition, non-governmental organizations also

played an indispensable role in early warning, for example by collecting and processing

data and suggesting options for action.

7. The Deputy High Commissioner recalled that the Secretary-General had given top

priority to prevention in his five-year action agenda for 2012-2017. His ground-breaking

Human Rights Up Front plan of action was founded on a commitment to the more

deliberate, thoughtful and coordinated use of the full range of United Nations resources,

mandates and skills in order to strengthen the ability of the United Nations system to

prevent and respond to serious human rights violations and complex crises effectively. The

plan of action recognized that patterns in human rights violations provide clear warning

signs of a looming crisis, and reflects a strong commitment to pool and analyse all available

information from actors within the United Nations, activating high-level engagement and

leadership at Headquarters. The aim of the Human Rights Up Front plan of action was to

become more effective at ensuring that the information gathered by human rights

mechanisms were brought to the attention of the relevant actors, and that their

recommendations were followed up on and implemented. This effort had to engage not

only the States in question and the entities of the United Nations family but also regional

actors and the wider international community.

8. The post-2015 process provided an opportunity to ensure policy coherence in terms

of governance and justice and to encourage the realization of human rights related to

personal security, public participation and access to effective justice systems. A number of

the sustainable development goals under discussion had great potential for preventing

human rights violations.

9. The Deputy High Commissioner recalled that preventing human rights violations

was at the core of the mandate and activities of OHCHR. The measures at its disposal

included public advocacy, education and awareness-raising campaigns, quiet diplomacy

and good offices, and also the very practical, hands-on work of capacity-development and

technical assistance, which OHCHR undertook through its field presences. OHCHR

provided States with advice on the design and implementation of laws, policies, thematic

strategies and plans of action, and had developed a variety of specific practical tools,

including training materials, guidance notes and comprehensive databases.

10. Ultimately, however, States themselves were primarily responsible for preventing

human rights violations. OHCHR knew what worked: effective and broadly accessible

justice systems, backed by effective, human rights-compliant laws and institutions. The

Deputy High Commissioner highlighted the vital role that national human rights institutions

could play in prevention. Currently, it was mainly in the area of torture prevention that such

institutions exercised a specific preventive mandate, being designated as national

preventive mechanisms under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and

Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, although this could very

usefully be extended to other areas.

11. Lastly, the Deputy High Commissioner welcomed the fact that regional

organizations were strengthening the preventive dimension of their human rights activities,

and recalled that robust national protection systems with a strong emphasis on preventive

measures could usefully be complemented by regional and international mechanisms.

III. Contributions of panellists

12. In her introductory remarks, the Adviser on Human Rights and Refugees at the

Quaker United Nations Office in Geneva and panel moderator, Rachel Brett, introduced the

panellists, highlighting their extensive experience and contributions to the field of human

rights. She outlined various aspects of prevention: firstly, prevention through the creation of

a protective and enabling human rights framework, given that, at the national level, it was

critical to have human rights provisions that can be invoked in and applied by the courts;

secondly, prevention through inclusion, which was more than non-discrimination, but

included the positive obligation to bring in different people and groups; and thirdly,

prevention through participation.

13. Recalling the High Commissioner’s opening remarks to the Human Rights Council

at its twenty-seventh session that minorities were often victims of violence and atrocity

crimes, Ms. Brett invited the Special Rapporteur on minority issues, Rita Izsák, to outline

risk factors that constitute early warning signs for preventing and addressing violence and

mass atrocity crimes against minorities. The Special Rapporteur gave a rundown of her

findings contained in her annual report to the General Assembly,1 in which she listed the

risk factors identified during the course of her mandate: exclusion and inequalities; deficits

of democracy, good governance and rule of law; hate speech and stigmatization; history of

violence with impunity and tensions without reconciliation; denial or deprivation of

citizenship; political or regime change; multiple or intersectional discrimination; harmful

actions of non-State actors; and armed conflict. She emphasized that, of these, the key risk

areas for prevention work were exclusion and inequality, deficits of democracy, good

governance and rule of law, and hate speech.

14. The Special Rapporteur on minority issues stated that the likelihood of unrest and

violence grew whenever there were greater horizontal inequalities between different ethnic

or cultural groups in terms of political and economic status. For that reason, it was essential

that minorities and indigenous peoples be involved fully, including in shaping and

implementing development policies. Competition over territory and the distribution of

resources and power along ethnic lines could cause tensions. The Special Rapporteur

emphasized the importance of ensuring that minorities participated in the planning,

implementation and development of the post-2015 development agenda, underlining that it

was crucial to reach the most vulnerable and marginalized groups in society rather than just

those most easily accessible. She reminded the Council that hate speech was a process

aimed at dehumanizing and demonizing others and that affects not only the groups targeted

but also the majority by desensitizing it.

15. In answer to the moderator’s question on the elements that could play a key role in

preventing violence and atrocities against minorities, the Special Rapporteur on minority

issues referred to understanding the status and challenges facing different communities;

implementing international human rights standards; ensuring institutional attention to

minority issues; strengthening security measures and law enforcement bodies; granting

space for civil society; and cooperation with regional and international bodies. She

emphasized that an important tool for tackling ethnically or culturally biased favoritism in

the distribution of power and resources was good governance, which implied inclusion. It

was not enough to have good legislation in place; there had to be institutions with the

budget and independence to monitor the situation and to address tensions. Prevention work

would also be enhanced by the implementation of international human rights standards,

1 A/69/266.

including minority rights. The protection and promotion of cultural identities would lead to

fewer conflicts and less tension.

16. The moderator asked the Vice-Chairperson of the African Committee of Experts on

the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Benyam Dawit Mezmur, what measures needed to be

taken to prevent violence against children. Mr. Mezmur replied that both the Convention on

the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child

explicitly requested that children grow up in an atmosphere of love, happiness and

understanding. Apart from being an obligation flowing from international human rights

law, the prevention of violence against children was morally compelling, developmentally

sound and cost-effective. He outlined the current global challenges in the implementation of

children’s rights, pointing out that 165 States had set 18 years as the minimum age for

marriage, although 150 of them made exceptions. In 28 States that were home to one third

of the world’s children, corporal punishment was allowed in all settings. Furthermore, in

three States, it was still legal to execute a person for violations committed as a child. The

panellist emphasized that education – whether formal, non-formal or informal – was a key

factor in the prevention of violence against children, and that there was a need to move

from reporting what has happened to reporting before it happens.

17. According to the Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, the

largest prevention challenge on the ground was what he termed “one chapter behind” laws,

the use of twentieth century laws to respond to twenty-first century problems. What was

needed in all States were explicit and comprehensive bans, supplemented by specific bans

of, for example, domestic violence, corporal punishment and honour crimes. The

Convention on the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of

the Child were normative documents that had to be translated into national laws given that

situations on the ground differed, depending on whether violence against children, corporal

punishment or other forms of violence against children were explicitly prohibited in

legislation. Lastly, the panellist highlighted the need for a data-collection system, a birth

registration system and a system for assessing and detecting risk factors. When conducting

research into risk factors in relation to violence, it was also essential to identify positive

factors that could protect children. Prevention required long-term investment and planning

by stakeholders and had to focus on the prevention of re-victimization, for instance by

means of child-sensitive recovery and social reintegration services.

18. In response to the moderator’s request for examples of effective strategies for

preventing violence against children at the regional level, the panellist welcomed the

preventive work of regional organizations, which complemented work carried out at the

international level, and also filled gaps. Regional organizations had expertise that was more

relevant to the regions. Regional organizations in Africa had been able to address the trust

deficit, where Governments, civil society or stakeholders felt that the approach was top-

down rather than bottom-up. Regional organizations had a greater capacity for early

detection, and could draw on experience from comparable situations in regional countries.

Regional preventive efforts were therefore particularly effective, given that some countries

respond best to examples drawn from neighbouring ones.

19. The Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on the Rights of the Child also emphasized

the importance of working closely with parliamentarians, who were in a key position to

influence prevention. He provided concrete examples of regional successes, such as tapping

into social and cultural structures on the ground, for example, children who, rather than

being put through formal judicial procedures, go through the informal justice sector. He

also pointed out that children could play a role in the prevention of violence. According to

the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, children can have

responsibilities, taking into account their maturity and capacity, without violating the

provisions of the Charter itself; for example, when the Child Rights Act was being debated

in Nigeria, there was concern that children were being given too many rights. With the help

of regional organizations, however, a provision on the responsibilities of children was

included to address such issues as peer-to-peer violence. The panellist underscored the

necessity of government budgeting for prevention work. Regional organizations had helped

Governments address this issue in Africa; in South Africa, for example, social workers

were not only provided for by law, but also had a budget line. As an example of a good

practice, he referred to the process and activities surrounding 16 June, the Day of the

African Child, addressing harmful practices. Quiet diplomacy had also proved an effective

tool in the African region.

20. Noting the vital role of national human rights institutions in a strong national human

rights prevention system, the moderator invited the Chairperson of the Afghanistan

Independent Human Rights Commission, Sima Samar, to share examples of the preventive

work conducted by her organization. Ms. Samar provided four recommendations for action

based on challenges that the Commission had faced. Firstly, lack of education and of

awareness of rights was the greatest obstacle to the enjoyment of all human rights by all

persons. The Commission strove to counter this situation by including human rights

education in all sectors of the education system, including training and teaching curricula

for schools, teachers, police, judges, intelligence services and other civil servants. The

second action recommended was human rights monitoring. The Commission monitored

detention centres and prisons, hospitals and schools and camps for internally displaced

persons and refugees. It also monitored the situation of economic, social and cultural rights,

and issued assessment reports. It also worked in the area of transitional justice as a

prevention tool. Thirdly, it was important to consider existing laws in each country. The

Commission participated in legal reform and publicly criticized human rights violations,

working with civil society and the media for advocacy purposes. It also pushed for the

inclusion of human rights in legislation. Fourthly, on the issue of protection and promotion,

the panellist emphasized the importance of providing practical protection to people in

danger, promoting good governance and working on transitional justice to end the culture

of impunity.

21. The moderator requested the panelist to explain what has worked best at the national

level in the prevention of violence against women in Afghanistan. The panellist reiterated

her view that lack of awareness of human rights was the largest obstacle. Her organization

promoted the universality of human rights, and emphasized that culture and religion could

not take priority over these rights. The organization had also conducted research on issues

that were considered taboo in the country, such as rape and honour killings. This was the

first time that data had been collected on these problems, which made it possible to draw

attention to them as crimes that the State had to address. Another goal of the Commission’s

work was to include women in different sectors of society, such as security forces, for

example, by striving to assure a environment that meets women’s needs, thus making it

possible for them to train and become police officers. Lastly, the Commission had worked

with the media, the United Nations and civil society to advocate for the inclusion of

women’s rights in national legislation. Once this has been achieved, the next challenge will

be to ensure that the law is implemented.

22. Recalling that the concept of prevention in relation to torture was more developed

than those of preventing other human rights violations, the moderator asked the Secretary-

General of the Association for the Prevention of Torture, Mark Thomson, to explain this

concept and how it could be applied to other areas. Mr. Thomson highlighted two key

elements for the prevention of torture. The first was direct prevention (or mitigation of

violations) by reducing risk factors and possible causes. Direct prevention was forward-

looking and was aimed at creating an environment where torture was unlikely to occur. The

second was indirect prevention (or non-repetition), which was the prevention of the

repetition of cases that have already occurred by means of denunciation, litigation,

prosecution and sanctions, aimed at convincing potential torturers that the “costs” are

greater than the possible “benefits”. He underscored the fact that these approaches were

applicable across the spectrum of the prevention of human rights violations. He also

outlined the tangible aspects of direct prevention, such as assessing root causes rather than

focusing on symptoms, identifying and addressing risk factors at different levels, in terms

of situations (for example, cases of deprivation of liberty) and persons at risk and their

vulnerabilities, environmental factors, gaps in protection, and the institutional culture that

created incentives and/or failure to deter. Lastly, prevention required a holistic,

multidisciplinary approach, involving multiple actors on many fronts. It also required

constructive ongoing dialogue with authorities on ways and means to address risk factors.

23. The moderator asked the panellist to elaborate on strategies that were effective in the

prevention of torture, how they could be applied in other areas and the role that civil society

could play in this process. The panellist underscored the importance of using holistic

strategies that included four complementary elements: a strong legal and policy framework

that prohibited and prevented torture (ratification of core human rights treaties, legislation,

but also regulations); implementation of the said legal framework through prosecution and

sentencing, as well as training, capacity-building and procedural safeguards, such as

registers in places of detention and video recordings of interrogations; independent

oversight, including regular monitoring of places of detention by independent bodies, in

particular by national preventive mechanisms under the Optional Protocol to the

Convention against Torture; and communication and contributions to public debates, given

the need for strong public opposition to torture. With regard to the third element, the

panellist pointed out that, where national preventive mechanisms were compliant with the

Optional Protocol, had a strong legal basis and adequate human and financial resources, and

fully implemented their preventive mandate, they could contribute effectively to reducing

the risk of torture in places of detention. When independent members of civil society had

full access to all areas, they could provide officials with informed recommendations based

on their analysis. Again, all of these strategies could be applied across the spectrum of the

prevention of human rights violations.

24. After stating how the work of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural

Rights had been instrumental in clarifying the duty to prevent violations of economic,

social and cultural rights, the moderator invited the Vice-Chairperson of the Committee,

Renato Zerbini Ribeiro Leão, to share the Committee’s observations in this regard. He

explained that the prevention work of the Committee was carried out at all stages, including

during the preparation of lists of issues, concluding observations, general comments and

letters. In the lists of issues addressed by the Committee, States are requested to provide

information on measures taken to prevent violations, such as ensuring access to education,

the work of civil society and access to economic, social and cultural rights in general. The

Committee requested States to make reference to specific actions pursuant to the

International Covenant on Social, Cultural and Economic Rights. Concluding observations

included specific recommendations for States to take preventing measures in accordance

with the Covenant and in the light of the general comments issued by the

Committee. Lastly, the Committee could also address letters to States parties on ways in

which they should comply with the Covenant, for example by incorporating the Covenant

into domestic laws and raising awareness of its provisions. For example, in a letter dated 16

May 2012, the Committee expressed its concern surrounding austerity measures taken by

States parties and increasing inequality. It emphasized that States should at all times avoid

making decisions that result in the denial or infringement of rights. The panellist also

highlighted the Committee’s wish that the provisions of the Covenant be incorporated into

State legislation, that States harmonize their legislation with the Covenant, promote the

Covenant and use it in legal proceedings. He reminded States that ratifying the Optional

Protocol to the Covenant was also an important preventive action.

25. The moderator asked the panellist to share examples of good practices identified by

the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and to highlight areas where

progress had been made. The panellist highlighted combating poverty and inclusive

education also for girls across different regions and countries around the world. The

Committee had also stressed the need for reliable indicators and up-to-date statistics,

particularly in relation to populations who had difficult access to rights. Statistics had made

it possible to discern which rights were best protected by States. The involvement of States

had led to more reliable statistics and indicators. The involvement of civil society should

also be promoted. Lastly, treaty bodies helped to identify governmental best practices and

to convey them to other Governments.

IV. Summary of the discussion

26. During the interactive discussion, delegations from Algeria, Angola, Australia (also

on behalf of a group of States), Austria, Azerbaijan, Cuba, Estonia, the European Union,

Georgia, India, Lithuania, Maldives, Morocco, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation,

Poland, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation (on behalf

of a group of like-minded States), Senegal (on behalf of French-speaking countries), Sierra

Leone, Slovenia, Timor-Leste, Ukraine and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) took the

floor. The statements of Burkina Faso, Denmark, Ecuador, Indonesia, Ireland, Pakistan,

Rwanda, Thailand and the United States of America were not made owing to lack of time.

Copies of their statements were, however, posted on the extranet of the Human Rights

Council.

27. Representatives of non-governmental organizations and observers also took the

floor, including the African Technology Development Link, Americans for Democracy and

Human Rights in Bahrain, the International Association for Democracy in Africa, the

International Committee of the Red Cross and United Schools International.

A. Concept of prevention and prevention tools

28. Several delegations emphasized that the adoption of preventive measures was an

absolute and urgent necessity, and that there was a vital need to strengthen preventive

approaches to human rights violations. Some pointed out that prevention was one of the

most effective ways to protect human rights, and expressed the view that the prevention of

violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law was not

only necessary but achievable. Some delegations considered that the numerous crises

around the world leading to human rights violations demonstrated the importance of

strengthening prevention and the need to understand the various aspects of prevention

better in order to design practical preventive tools. Several delegations pointed out that, at

the national and international levels, mechanisms and tools for prevention already existed.

It was implementation that needed to be further developed. Several delegations emphasized

the fact that the Human Rights Council had a crucial role to play in strengthening national

protection mechanisms and contributing to the prevention of human rights violations, and

that it has at its disposal all the necessary tools – the universal periodic review mechanism,

the special procedures and the treaty bodies – to strengthen national protection mechanisms

and to help countries to become more resilient in the face of human rights crises.

29. Delegations agreed that the discussions held by the Human Rights Council, the

universal periodic review mechanism, the work of the special procedures and the treaty

bodies and the technical assistance given by OHCHR advanced the prevention objective.

Support for institution-building, strengthening the rule of law and accountability

mechanisms, encouraging equitable and inclusive social structures and economic growth,

sharing best practices and responding to early warning signs, the ratification of international

human rights instruments, human rights-compliant legislation and the dissemination of a

human rights culture were some of the prevention tools mentioned by delegations.

30. One delegation expressed the hope that the panel discussion would be a stepping

stone towards the creation of prevention mechanisms urgently needed in many parts of the

world today witnessing grave human rights violations. Another delegation believed that

strengthening existing mechanisms was necessary, including to avoid misuse of biased

allegations of human rights violations, in particular in the field of the rights of ethnic and

national minorities, as a pretext for military intervention. Another supported the call for

strengthening existing prevention mechanisms and ensuring that preventing genocide and

other massive abuses of human rights was a priority above all other political and economic

interests.

31. Some delegations stated that the concept of prevention was not clear and needed to

be defined in more explicit and measurable terms, and in a more nuanced and consensual

manner. There was a need to engage in evidence-based research to understand all aspects of

prevention and to develop tools, involving all stakeholders, in particular Member

States. They warned that the development of such tools should eschew politicization,

“naming and shaming” and intrusive approaches by powerful or influential States, and

should be based on the principles of universality and non-selectivity. It was stressed that a

universal agreement taking into account the suggestions and concerns of all Member States

was important, as it would help in the design of an acceptable mechanism for common and

quick action and ensure effective implementation. An impartial and transparent assessment

of all situations with accountability as the guiding norm for those involved in the analysis

and execution was recommended. Mr. Thomson responded to States’ concerns about

prevention being used as an international “naming and shaming” exercise by explaining

that the intention was quite the opposite – to assess risk factors and causes in order to

address them responsibly, and to find solutions with long-term effects on risk reduction.

The purpose was also to bring different actors together to find solutions, for which

openness was required.

32. Some delegations were of the view that there was a need to go beyond the

theoretical and conceptual framework of prevention. Others highlighted that specific

national contexts should be considered when designing preventive technical assistance; one

delegation emphasized the need to ensure that assistance was relevant to local actors, using

words, concepts and ideas that resonated locally. Another delegation added that a

standardized approach to developing and exporting training packages or assistance had to

be avoided. Another emphasized that the concept of prevention had to encompass all

human rights, while yet another highlighted the importance of ensuring the protection of

minority rights (including through the mainstreaming of minority rights in the United

Nations system) with a view to preventing conflicts.

B. Responsibility to prevent human rights violations

33. Delegations and panellists stressed the fact that the promotion and protection of

human rights and, by extension, the prevention of human rights violations are primarily the

responsibility of States. States were able to create an environment conducive to the

prevention of human rights violations by, for example, adopting domestic legal and

institutional frameworks and strengthening their implementation. Ms. Brett and Mr. Zerbini

Ribeiro Leão pointed out that this national responsibility extended to Governments at all

levels, and that interaction and cooperation between State institutions and different levels

and branches of the Government were indispensable. Some delegations emphasized that it

was imperative that all prevention efforts respect fully the sovereignty, independence and

territorial integrity of all States Members of the United Nations, while one delegation stated

that all non-national attempts to be prescriptive in relation to managing human rights should

be avoided. Other delegations stated that the responsibility to prevent did not constitute a

threat to States’ sovereignty. Several stressed that the responsibility to prevent was closely

linked to the responsibility to protect and that the international community should

encourage States to meet their responsibility to prevent human rights violations and to

protect their populations, and help them in these efforts. Others considered the concept of

responsibility to protect to be controversial, and should be decoupled from the

responsibility to prevent. One delegation suggested that the human rights situation in a

country was more likely to be improved by actions taken by the State and its citizens rather

than through an external intervention. This was especially true in the long run, given that

external actors could only provide support for a limited period. The answer thus lay in

providing State institutions with adequate resources, sensitizing them and making them

aware of the language of human rights.

34. Mr. Thomson agreed that national responsibility was a key factor in prevention. He

emphasized, however, that a preventive framework very useful for States could be

developed internationally. National preventive mechanisms that function under the

Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture respected State sovereignty, while

other mechanisms whose purpose would be to assist States parties in implementing their

obligation to prevent human rights violations could follow the same model. While it was

possible to emphasize national responsibility, it made sense to do this through the lens of

international human rights law. The Special Rapporteur added that, whereas most States

had ratified relevant human rights instruments, implementation was often lacking. Ms.

Samar reaffirmed that it was the State’s responsibility to prevent, emphasizing at the same

time that the universality of human rights could not be negotiated on the pretext of a

country’s sovereignty or other local factors. She also underlined the necessity of political

commitment of the State’s leaders to the promotion and protection of human rights to make

those values a reality.

C. Early warning

35. Both delegations and panellists stressed the importance of early warning in

prevention efforts. Some stressed that human rights violations were important early

indicators of a potential for atrocity crimes. Several delegations welcomed the Secretary-

General’s Human Rights Up Front initiative aimed at strengthening the early warning

capacity of the whole United Nations system as an important contribution to the prevention

of human rights violations. Some emphasized in this regard that States should be in charge

of the implementation of the initiative, and cautioned that prevention work had to be carried

out without undermining the fundamental principles of the United Nations and that the

promotion and protection of human rights should not focus on imposing unilateral coercive

measures or condemning States. One delegation urged all States to internalize the initiative.

The Special Rapporteur emphasized the importance of the initiative, early warning

mechanisms and the political will to act upon the early warning signs. She stressed the need

for cooperation between the United Nations offices in Geneva and New York in this regard,

and cautioned that problems observed during visits to countries by special procedures

mandate holders should be reported immediately so that early action could be taken

promptly.

36. One delegation stated that comprehensive early warning capacities and the full use

of existing international instruments, mechanisms and procedures were required to translate

prevention into practice. Another delegation encouraged States and other stakeholders to

strengthen their efforts to identify warning signs. Another pointed out that attention to

violations of minority rights at an early stage would make an invaluable contribution to the

culture of prevention within the United Nations, saving lives and promoting stability and

development. The incorporation of minority rights indicators into early warning systems

would also enable earlier identification of potential conflicts. The Special Rapporteur

informed those present in this regard that the 2014 Forum on Minority Issues would address

the issue of preventing violence and atrocity crimes targeting minorities.

37. One delegation stated that the Human Rights Council had to, through such

mechanisms as the universal period review or the special procedures, provide information

that could be used for early warning purposes and be incorporated into responses of the

entire United Nations system. It was also mentioned that a vibrant civil society and the

media could act as early warning agents.

D. Prevention actors

38. Delegations and panellists emphasized that, apart from States, other actors play an

important role in prevention efforts. In their view, strategic and integrated prevention

policies could only be successful when multi-stakeholder participation was ensured.

Delegations pointed out that international and regional systems should assist States in the

domestic implementation of such policies, and that United Nations human rights

mechanisms and bodies played a role in supporting States in preventing violations. The

prevention of human rights violations was at the heart of the United Nations system.

Cooperation between States and the United Nations was seen as the key to effective

prevention. Some delegations emphasized the need for further development and

enhancement of cooperation between regional actors and the United Nations, especially by

sharing good practices, jointly identifying gaps and overlap and defining common

priorities.

39. One delegation stated that the role of the international community, including

relevant United Nations agencies, should be to enhance partnerships with States. This

should include the allocation of financial, technical and human resources by donors and

United Nations agencies, and be aligned with national priorities of the States concerned.

Some delegations listed support for national mechanisms and institutions though capacity-

building and technical assistance as one of the main roles of OHCHR in prevention efforts.

The important role of civil society, national human rights institutions, researchers and

media in preventing human rights violations by monitoring, advocacy, human rights

education and awareness-raising was also acknowledged by delegations and panellists. The

involvement of civil society in prevention efforts was seen as crucial. The need for States to

promote and maintain a safe and enabling environment for civil society was emphasized by

several delegations. The issue of preventing reprisals against civil society participating in

the work of the Human Rights Council was raised by one non-governmental organization in

this regard. At the national level, the role of human rights institutions was seen as

fundamental, and several delegations called upon States to strengthen the role and mandate

of institutions in compliance with the Paris Principles. Some delegations also emphasized

the role of scientific institutions and businesses.

40. Mr. Mezmur stated that the preventive role of regional and United Nations bodies

was complementary, as were regional instruments and United Nations instruments, and

highlighted the importance of research in challenging assumptions. Comprehensive systems

had to be established for data collection and accountability. Ms. Samar highlighted the need

for a united approach to prevention for United Nations agencies, and emphasized that

women, minorities, vulnerable groups and victims of violations had to be included in

prevention strategizing and policymaking if the policies were to be practical and

implementable. Mr. Thomson emphasized that various actors should be involved in

different ways to assist States, and that effective prevention was not possible without

dialogue with the public. The Special Rapporteur stated that there was a need to manage

diversity in societies constructively, and to return to the principle of inclusivity. She also

pointed out that, in post-violence situations, minorities whose rights had been violated had

to be part of the peacebuilding process, and that ensuring their right to truth was essential to

preventing a recurrence of violations.

41. Reiterating that that inclusion of victims of human rights violations in prevention

discussions and efforts was crucial, Ms. Brett pointed out that, while regional organizations

and the United Nations were not and should not be primary actors in prevention, they had a

very important role in identifying and sharing best practices and identifying risk factors that

could otherwise pass unnoticed until it was too late. Awareness-raising was needed not just

among Governments, people and State institutions, but also at the national, regional and

international levels.

E. Human rights education and culture

42. Delegations and panellists agreed that human rights education was a key factor to

prevention. According to one delegation, the prevention of human rights violations could be

best achieved in cultures where everyone’s human rights and dignity were respected.

Another delegation emphasized that professionals had to be trained in order to create a

wider understanding of human rights, equality and non-discrimination, with a view to

combating stereotypes and violence, fostering respect for diversity, promoting tolerance

and intercultural dialogue, and raising awareness of the universality, indivisibility and

interrelatedness of all human rights. Another delegation pointed out that, in order to build a

human rights culture in all countries, informal preventative structures had to be cultivated

alongside formal institutions. Emphasis should be placed on cultivating values, norms and

respect for human rights, especially in emerging democracies. The delegation requested that

this aspect be highlighted in future discussions on the role of prevention in the promotion

and protection of human rights, which should, inter alia, explore ways of strengthening

relevant formal and informal structures within communities.

43. Another delegation advocated for fostering familiarity with international human

rights laws, treaties, conventions and agencies as the most sustainable method for sovereign

Governments to discharge their responsibility to promote and protect human rights.

According to another, awareness-raising was an important preventive measure given that

some human rights abuses are committed inadvertently owing to a lack of awareness. The

delegation cited the example of female genital mutilation, the harmful effects of which are

at times not known to or appreciated by the perpetrators. One observer stated that States

had the responsibility to integrate international norms in national law and to disseminate

knowledge of the rules.

44. Mr. Mezmur agreed that violations could be unintentional and be due to neglect, and

explained that this was why a criminal law-based approach was not always the best way to

deal with human rights issues. He also highlighted the importance of seeing children as

agents of change and of starting human rights education early, and identifying and

promoting positive values, such as respect and inclusion. He cited a national example where

intergenerational values promoting respect for others' differences were fostered. Children

had to learn that they could disagree without being disagreeable, and be perceived as human

beings in their own right. Mr. Zerbini Ribeiro Leão pointed out that the Committee on

Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had seen how important it was to provide

information on the rights contained in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and

Cultural Rights to the general public and various State actors, in particular members of the

executive branch of government. Ms. Brett pointed out that human rights education was not

only about teaching about human rights instruments, but also how they were taught. It was

a process, not just an event, and should permeate all levels of the educational system. The

Special Rapporteur emphasized that education was the key to challenging dangerous

ideologies. She added that it was necessary to learn how to manage diversity in society

constructively. It was of utmost importance to return to the principle of inclusivity not only

in government but also in primary education, where learning about diversity should be

included in curricula.

F. International solidarity and cooperation, and the question of resources

45. According to some delegations, preventive efforts should concentrate on

international solidarity, capacity-building and financial aid instead of public denunciations

and sanctions. The Human Rights Council would be more successful if existing guidance

were used to enable countries rather than condemn them. Concern was expressed about

powerful States using the United Nations to impose their beliefs on others; more emphasis

had to be placed on a spirit of cooperation. Mr. Thomson provided an example of

cooperation: the prevention of torture, while a sensitive topic, was an area in which over the

past 10 years an increasing number of States had begun to work together, recognizing that

they faced the same problems and that they could learn from each other, for example by

joint visits to national preventive mechanisms. He considered that this approach could be

followed in other areas.

46. Some delegations expressed concern that political will, legislation and plans were

not sufficient to prevent human rights abuses, given that resources were necessary for

serious preventive efforts, and they were not always readily available. The point was made

that ensuring the right to development is a form of prevention; developing countries

therefore needed resources to raise their development level in order to address all aspects of

prevention. One delegation argued that fulfilling the right to development would also

alleviate poverty, which had been seen to be a contributing factor to human rights abuses,

such as child, early and forced marriage.

47. Mr. Mezmur suggested that lack of money was not always the “root of all evil”.

Compliance with human rights did not necessarily correlate with countries with high levels

of resources. Many of the countries making progress at the regional level did not have

extensive resources. He argued that the prevention of violence against children was cost-

effective, and budget provisions needed to be made for prevention. The first step, however,

was birth registration so that children could be counted and progress measured. According

to Mr. Zerbini Ribeiro Leão, States were required to provide in the reports that they

submitted to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights information on

resources allocated to the protection of economic, social and cultural rights and their

effectiveness, outcomes and expected results. They were to indicate financial, educational

and social matters that had an impact on policies for prevention. The Special Rapporteur

pointed out that sometimes it was creativity rather than resources that was needed for

prevention. Mr. Thomson also addressed the issue of prevention in the absence of

resources, proposing the idea of using codes of conduct to give people incentives to follow

different modes of behaviour, ultimately a cost-free way of changing organizational

cultures to more human rights-based ways than the application of sanctions.

G. Combating impunity, and other conditions facilitating prevention

48. Several delegations and panellists highlighted the importance of accountability and

actions to combat impunity and ensure the rule of law in order to prevent violations,

including the importance of criminalization and prosecution and the preventive role of the

International Criminal Court. One delegation called upon all States that had not yet acceded

to the Rome Statute to do so. Another argued that there was a need to build a framework

where human rights violations were transparently exposed and sanctioned without

exception. According to one observer, consequences for violations were the only way to

ensure that they did not take place in the first place.

49. The delegations and panellists also highlighted other conditions necessary for the

effective prevention of human rights violations, such as tackling risk factors, including

inequality, poverty, marginalization, lack of awareness and education, and assuring good

governance, a democratic system and the rule of law, including a legal system of equal and

fair access to justice for all. Some delegations argued that preventive action should

concentrate on eradicating poverty, formulating inclusive policies and strengthening

education, in quantity as much as in quality.

50. Mr. Zerbini Ribeiro Leão stressed the fact that the Committee on Economic, Social

and Cultural Rights had recognized that a robust legislative framework was indispensable

for the preventive action involved in combating discrimination. He argued that measures

should be taken to strengthen prevention by protecting social, cultural and economic rights.

Mr. Mezmur stressed that unless laws were participatory, took public opinion into account

or there were resources for their implementation, they would not be effective.

V. Conclusions

51. Participants in the panel discussion agreed that, while there were mechanisms

and tools for prevention at the national and international levels, their implementation

was patchy and needed to be improved. They acknowledged that the discussions held

by the Human Rights Council, the sessions of the universal periodic review, the work

of the special procedures and the treaty bodies and the technical assistance provided

by OHCHR all advanced the prevention objective. There was general support for the

idea to further develop the concept of prevention through evidence-based research.

52. Participants stressed that the promotion and protection of human rights and,

by extension, the prevention of human rights violations were the primarily

responsibilities of States, while other actors too played an important role in

prevention efforts. They acknowledged the important role of civil society, national

human rights institutions, researchers and the media in preventing human rights

violations by monitoring, advocacy, human rights education and awareness-raising.

International and regional systems had an important role in assisting States with

domestic implementation. United Nations human rights mechanisms and bodies were

essential in helping States to prevent violations. The prevention of human rights

violations was at the heart of the United Nations system, and early warnings were

critical to successful prevention efforts. Human rights education was also a key factor

in prevention.

53. The importance of accountability and action to combat impunity and to

implement the rule of law and thus prevent violations, including the importance of

criminalization and prosecution and the preventive role of the International Criminal

Court, was acknowledged. The other conditions necessary for the effective prevention

of human rights violations highlighted by participants included tackling risk factors,

including inequality, poverty, marginalization, lack of awareness and education, and

providing good governance, a democratic system and the rule of law.