Ensuring Accountability for Progress on Women's Rights

As activists around the world gather to celebrate International Women's Day, we are also approaching the one year anniversary of the newest mechanism introduced by the UN to protect and promote human rights. Universal Periodic Review (UPR) was created to review the human rights records of every UN Member States once every four years under the auspices of the UN Human Rights Council. Only three hours are dedicated to each of the sixteen countries reviewed each session, during which time, other States have the opportunity to pose questions about human rights concerns in the country being considered. Having started the process last April 2008, all 192 Members States will be reviewed by 2011.

International Women's Day is an opportune moment to reflect on whether the process has had any positive impact on the reproductive and sexual health of women in countries that have been reviewed. Has the process created a space for high-level discussions on key issues like abortion and maternal health that particularly matter to women? 

Following the introduction of UPR, the Sexual Rights Initiative (SRI) moved to promote sexual and reproductive rights before the Human Rights Council. Formed in 2005 and originally known as "Reframing Sexual Rights", the aim of SRI is to broaden the concept of sexual rights. Whilst initially addressing only LGBT concerns, it has become a tool for advocacy on issues such as sexual violence, abortion, transgender issues, and sex worker rights. It therefore brings together feminist, LGBT and southern and northern organizations fighting for political space and has played a pivotal role in lobbying Members States to heighten the attention given to sexual and reproductive health in the UPR process. 

UPR has "great potential to shed light in the darkest corners of the globe," claimed the President of the Human Rights Council, Martin Ihoeghian Uhomoibhi, at the end of the 4th UPR session in February of this year. The President also expressed his view that several of the States which have already been reviewed have started to implement recommendations, including "adopting new polices, programs and measures aimed at improving the human rights". Yet Sunita Kujur, from CREA in India, who attended India's review during the 1st Session, holds a different view: "The potential of the UPR can only be realized if States view UPR as an opportunity to check ground realities and review human rights standards in their countries, instead of being defensive of their "failures". Kujur adds, "For India, the bridge between the Human Rights Council and domestic laws and policies is very wide. Until the Government of India can consistently be held accountable for the promises it makes at the international level, domestic laws and policies will not reflect a human rights framework." 

Reflecting on the 1st year of UPR, Ximena Andión Ibañez, International Advocacy Director at the Center for Reproductive Rights, also expresses disappointment at how reproductive rights have largely been ignored in the process. "Until now reproductive rights have not gained enough attention during the sessions of the UPR." In Andión's opinion, not only does this suggest that these issues are not a priority for many States but also that "they do not even consider these human rights issues". Like Kujur, she reflects on the disappointing review of India last April: "It was shocking that during the review of India, no State inquired from the government to explain the dire state of maternal health, despite the fact that India has the highest number of maternal deaths in the world." 

Both Kujur and Andión also reflect on whether the UPR process remains as politicized as its predecessor. Andión believes that instead of "being a good accountability mechanism, the process has the danger of being just a meeting for political concessions and trade offs". She does, however, note the surprising level of attention given to what would otherwise be considered too controversial an issue, sexual orientation, though credits this attention to the great advocacy efforts of the NGOs working in this area. Whilst the February review of Malaysia was considered "extremely disappointing" by the co-secretariat of COMANGO (the Coalition of Malaysian Non-Governmental Organizations in the UPR Process), issues such as sexual orientation were raised, with a recommendation made to amend the Penal Code to decriminalize sexual acts associated with a person's sexual orientation. Malaysia was also asked to specify time frames for removing reservations to the CEDAW Convention and ratifying its Optional Protocol, which establishes an individual complaints mechanism for CEDAW. If implemented, this would indeed be a good starting point for individuals or groups to claim their rights under CEDAW have been violated. 

On the need for civil society to get more involved, Andión believes that "it is important for the women's rights organizations at the national level to get more involved in their States review." As UPR is a mechanism designed to facilitate discussions on the human rights situation at the local level, Andión advocates for more input from more groups involved in this work. "Furthermore, the only way to ensure accountability for the commitments made by the States under review is for women rights and other civil society organizations to get involved and follow-up on the recommendations made." 

In the words of Andión, "The HRC is really a thermometer to measure how serious States take their human rights obligations and the collective obligation to ensure that human rights are respected, protected and fulfilled." We therefore have an opportunity for States to have an honest dialogue on the situation of women's rights. With some optimism, Andión reflects on the progress that has been made since the 1st session last April: "We are seeing a very slow but important evolution on the quality of the dialogue between States and also in the quality of the recommendations." 

UPR could give women from all continents, regardless of ethnic, linguistic, cultural, economic and political differences, an equal platform to advocate for issues that matter to them. For the United Nations to be a body that truly promotes and protects the equal rights of women, it is essential that UPR becomes a less politicized process and a space for discussing issues such as reproductive and sexual health, regardless of how controversial they are deemed to be by Member States.