THE UN TREATY BODIES
The United Nations (UN), founded in 1945, is a diplomatic institution binding the government of various nations together to encourage international cooperation. The word ‘human rights’ appeared in the UN's founding Charter seven times, making it the core objective and functioning of the United Nations. These objectives are guided by the aims and ideologies mentioned in its founding Charter. One of the main goals of the United Nations is to endorse and increase regard for human rights and seeks freedom for all, irrespective of race, sex, language, or religion. It encourages the member states to pledge combined as well as distinct actions to guard these rights. (Un.org, 2017) The UN treaty bodies are boards of autonomous authorities that supervise the implementation of the main international human rights treaties. This paper intends to study the UN treaty bodies, and state the functions, power as well limitations of each of the treaty bodies.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) introduced human rights into the branch of international law in 1948. The UDHR elaborated upon a host of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights that were categorised into two main obligatory treaties – the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Apart from these two, many other international human rights conventions were incorporated which emphasized specific issues and vulnerable groups. Thus, since its inception, the United Nations has relentlessly protected human rights by means of legal instruments as well as field activities.
The treaty bodies are international committees of autonomous experts of reputed proficiency in human rights, who are voted on and designated for a certain renewable period of four years by State members. At present, there exist ten human rights treaty bodies monitoring the implementation of the nine-core international human rights treaties and one optional protocol. These treaty bodies observe and persuade States to maintain as well as execute the core international human rights treaties. (Ohchr.org, 2017) Each State party to a treaty has a legal responsibility to safeguard as well to ensure that everyone in the State has the privilege of human rights as mentioned in the treaty. If a country accepts a treaty by ratification, accession, or succession, it is legally obliged to implement the rights stated in it. However, this is just the first step, since recognizing rights on paper is no assurance of it being put into practice. During the adoption of the first treaty, it was understood that State parties needed support in adhering to their international obligations in implementing the measures required for the enjoyment of the rights bestowed by the treaty on all under its domain. (Ramcharan, 2013) Hence each treaty forms an international committee of autonomous experts to observe and oversee its provisions being executed.
Functions and Powers of the Treaty Bodies
The treaty bodies are responsible for carrying out a set of functions that are targeted at regulating the way the treaties are being executed by the State members.
Examination of State parties’ reports - All the treaty bodies apart from the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture are obligatory to accept and study the reports submitted from time to time by State members mentioning the way they are implementing the treaty requirement at the national level. These treaty bodies generate procedures to help the States with the formulation of their reports, write normal comments understanding the treaty provisions and arrange negotiations on themes associated with the treaties. (Smith, 2017)
Review of individual grievances - Few of the treaty bodies also execute some other functions to bolster the execution of the treaties by their State parties. Barring the SPT, the treaty bodies listed in section A could, in certain cases could examine grievances from individuals regarding the violation of human rights by a State party, if that State had opted for such a procedure. (Smith, 2017)
Inquiries - Five treaty bodies—the CAT, CEDAW, CRPD, CED, CESCR, and the CRC could initiate inquiries on receipt of reliable information / clinching evidence of severe or regular violations of the conventions in a State party. (Rodley, 2013) They could conduct inquiries as well as examine inter-State grievances. They give their observations/suggestions/recommendations in order to help States in the execution of their obligations.
Though the ten treaty bodies are a part of a coordinated treaty monitoring system, each treaty body is formed by an autonomous committee of experts having a mandate for a specific treaty. The treaty bodies however strive to coordinate their activities in spite of their varying procedures and practices. (United Nations Human Rights - Office of the High Commission, 2012) A brief overview of their functions and power are mentioned below:
The Human Rights Committee (HRC) closely observes the enactment of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and is assigned to receive complaints under the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (ICCPR-OP1). It was established in 1976 and comprises 18 members who meet three times a year and for a period of four weeks. The Committee presently has its sessions in Geneva. (The International Service for Human Rights, 2015)
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
CERD, the first treaty body established in 1970, administers the implementation of the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). Provisions were made for the establishment of a committee to oversee the implementation of the Convention under ICERD owing to the conviction of States in the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly that the treaty wouldn’t be effective unless adequate emphasis was laid on enactment. This paved way for the formation of other treaty bodies. CERD comprises 18 experts who meet twice a year for a period of three weeks. (The International Service for Human Rights, 2015)
Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
CESCR oversees the implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Unlike other treaties, ICESCR did not create a committee for overseeing its implementation. It was the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the chief organ of the UN that dealt with economic and social issues, which was bestowed with the mandate to monitor the enactment of the Covenant by State parties by examining the periodic reports. ECOSOC set up a working group in 1985 for assisting in the examination of State reports, which eventually went on to become the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 1987. The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (OP-ICESCR) permitted CESCR to accept and examine grievances from individuals under the jurisdiction of a State party, regarding violation of rights protected by the Covenant. It has been empowered to initiate an inquiry procedure that it did not enjoy earlier. (The International Service for Human Rights, 2015)
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)
CEDAW set up in 1982, oversees the enactment of the International Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and is assigned to accept and examine grievances under its Optional Protocol (OP-CEDAW). The Committee comprises 23 members who meet for three weeks, thrice a year in Geneva. (The International Service for Human Rights, 2015)
The committee against Torture (CAT) was set up in 1987 to oversee the enactment of the International Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). CAT comprises of ten experts who meet twice a year for a period of four weeks. It is mandated to receive individual complaints and can initiate confidential inquiries into severe or regular violations of CAT. (The International Service for Human Rights, 2015)
The Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT) was set up as a distinct treaty body by the Optional Protocol to CAT (OPCAT) with the objective of complementing the goal of CAT to prevent torture. It is assigned to conduct visits to the locations of detention in the jurisdiction of State parties to the OP-CAT. Post the visit it would submit its recommendations to the State party. The SPT is expected to advise and support the setting up of as well as operations of National Preventive Mechanisms in all State parties. It comprises 25 experts from the diverse arenas appropriate for the supervision of justice or detention and involves legal professionals and forensic experts.
The committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), formed in 1990, oversees the execution of the International Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The Committee comprises 18 members. They meet thrice a year for a four weeks period – three weeks dedicated to the Committee session and an additional week for the ‘pre-session working group’ to enable them to list issues and questions for the subsequent sessions.
The committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (CMW) oversees the execution of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICRMW). Its first session was held in March 2004 and currently holds two sessions per year and comprises 14 experts. (The International Service for Human Rights, 2015)
The committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was assigned to oversee the enactment of human rights obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It examines the periodic reports submitted by State parties. The Optional Protocol to the Convention permits the Committee to accept and examine grievances from individuals as well as groups, and initiate classified investigations of serious or regular violations of the Convention which could be done by country visits with the approval of the State. (The International Service for Human Rights, 2015)
The committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) was established by the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPED), which comprised ten members. It was assigned to examine periodic reports, and individual grievances, as well as conduct field inquiries to highlight instances of extensive and regular enforced disappearance to the notice of the General Assembly.
Limitations
The UN treaty bodies are responsible for a host of human rights issues but are also faced with a series of problems that seriously pose challenges to their effective operation. Though the extraordinary development of the UN treaty bodies resulted in supreme accomplishment and shows the huge capabilities of the treaty bodies, the system is also a victim of its own growth. The escalated growth of the treaty bodies has burdened them with a lot of work causing an adverse impact on their smooth functioning.
There are a few limitations linked to the development of new treaties as well as the formation of new treaty bodies which leads to the escalation in the number of ratifications done. The growth of the human rights treaty bodies resulted in the surge of the workload for all treaty bodies and adversely impacted the capability of the committee to take on new work. With the rise in the quantity of international instruments and the development of new regulating bodies has exposed the human rights treaty bodies to new risks of failure in executing their tasks competently and productively. This can lead to an adverse impact on human rights protection at the national level. (Pillay, 2012) Thus, the lack of competency of the treaty bodies poses a challenge to the functioning of the human rights system.
Another challenge foreseen is the inadequacy of States in dealing with the exceptional growth of the system as the upsurge in the reporting obligations of States would impact their ability to execute these obligations. Due to a significant increase in the treaty bodies’ workload, there has been a massive backlog in the examination of reports and individual grievances. The non-compliance levels by States with respect to their reporting obligations are exceptionally high. The problems are magnified by the inadequate resources, inconsistency, lack of awareness, and prominence of the system along with plaguing issues of independence and proficiency of the treaty body members. The analysis validated that the systemic hurdles challenging all treaty bodies are deeply interlinked. (Oberleitner, 2007) Thus, in order to strengthen the human rights treaty body system, an all-inclusive solution for the challenges faced needs to be found which would address each problem in the most coherent manner.
Conclusion
To conclude, the UN human rights treaty bodies, as the name suggests, are responsible for a host of functions that work towards the enhancement of the basic human rights of the people in the member States. The 10 international human rights treaty bodies assist the member States to accomplish the objectives of the treaty bodies and the respective international human rights treaties. The human rights treaty bodies ensure that the member states efficiently execute the core international human rights treaties and that everyone in the member state has the access to human rights as mentioned in the core treaties. To facilitate these objectives, the international human rights treaty body is given certain responsibilities and power to function. The treaty bodies are mandated to study the report generated by the States on the implementation of the core human rights at the national level. They also have the power to examine and inquire about any grievances and complaints received by individuals upon any sort of violation of the core human rights by the State members. The UN treaty bodies have got immense success in the field of human rights but have suffered because of the expansion of the system. The increase in the workload that came with the advent of new treaty bodies, has created new challenges to the international human rights system. The surge in the workload is affecting the efficient functioning of the treaty bodies. It is adversely impacting the competency and productivity of the system, as backlogs are being created for the magnanimous amount of work piling on. There is also a surge in cases of reports and grievances to be examined, which creates further pressure upon the UN treaty bodies to resolve the issue and strengthen the human rights treaty body system.
References
Oberleitner, G. (2007). Global Human Rights Institutions. 1st ed. Cambridge: Polity.
Ohchr.org. (2017). Human Rights Treaty Bodies. [online]
Pillay, N., 2012. Strengthening the United Nations human rights treaty body system, s.l.: United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Ramcharan, B. G., 2013. The Law-Making Process: From Declaration to Treaty to Custom to Prevention. In: Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law. s.l.:Oxford University Press, pp. 499-526.
Rodley, S. N., 2013. The Role and Impact of Treaty Bodies. In: The Oxford Handbook of International Human Rights Law. s.l.:Oxford University Press, pp. 621-648.
Smith, R. (2017). The United Nations Human Rights System. In: M. Baderin and M. Ssenyonjo, ed., International Human Rights Law, 1st ed. Ashgate, pp.215-234.
The International Service for Human Rights, 2015. Simple Guide to the UN Treaty Bodies. s.l.:International Service for Human Rights.
United Nations Human Rights - Office of the High Commission, 2012. The United Nations Human Rights Treaty System. New York and Geneva: United Nations.
Un.org. (2017). About the UN | United Nations. [online]
