scholarly journals Nigeria's Engagement with the Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review: Potential for Acculturation or Risk of Regression?

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-297
Author(s):  
Damian Etone
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
The Third ◽  
Universal Periodic Review ◽  
Review Mechanism ◽  
The Impact

This article examines the effectiveness of Nigeria's engagement with the Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review Mechanism (UPR). Now into the third cycle of the UPR, questions on the impact of the UPR process on the ground are gaining increasing attention and there is now a growing focus on state implementation of UPR recommendations. This article analyses the extent of Nigeria's engagement with the UPR mechanism with a focus on UPR I and II. It considers the potential for acculturation and the extent to which the government's fight against terrorism has affected its engagement with the UPR mechanism.

Conclusion

2021 ◽  
pp. 341-346
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Universal Periodic Review ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Treaty Law ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Review Mechanism ◽  
The Right

Custom poses challenges for its identification but at the same time it offers a potential for dynamism that may often be superior to that of treaty law. Recent developments, most importantly the near-universal ratification of major human rights treaties and the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council, greatly facilitate the identification of customary law. It is clear that most of the rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are unquestionably part of customary international law. Doubts may persist about a few rights, such as the right to property. Customary law also extends to ‘solidarity rights’ or ‘peoples’ rights’, whose reflection in treaty law is not so universal. Recognition of rights does not ensure that there are effective mechanisms for their enforcement and implementation.

The Role and Influence of Non-governmental Organisations in the Universal Periodic Review—International Context and Australian Case Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona McGaughey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
International Context ◽  
Universal Periodic Review ◽  
Monitoring Mechanism ◽  
Australian Case ◽  
Review Mechanism ◽  
United Nation

Abstract Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) play an important, albeit limited, role in the United Nations most recent human rights monitoring mechanism, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Drawing on empirical data from an Australian case study and interviews with international stakeholders, the study explores the NGO role and influence in this state-centric, peer review mechanism. Case study findings indicate that recommendations made by NGOs, in particular a coalition of domestic NGOs, correlate closely with many UPR recommendations but that United Nations sources are more influential. This suggests that other United Nation human rights mechanisms complement the UPR, so that NGOs should continue to engage with both these and the UPR.

scholarly journals Leaving the Doors Open or Keeping Them Closed? The Impact of Transparency on the Authority of Peer Reviews in International Organizations

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 615-635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Carraro ◽  
Hortense Jongen
Keyword(s):  
International Organizations ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Mutual Learning ◽  
Universal Periodic Review ◽  
Review Mechanism ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Legitimacy Beliefs

Abstract Although transparency is frequently employed to enhance the legitimacy of public organizations, several scholars point to its potentially negative implications. This study analyzes the impact of transparency on the authority of peer reviews in international organizations. Authority, here conceived as rooted in legitimacy beliefs, is crucial for peer reviews to produce effects. This research is based on results from an online survey and forty-three interviews with actors involved in two United Nations peer reviews: the Universal Periodic Review in human rights and the Implementation Review Mechanism in the fight against corruption. The article shows that transparency positively affects the perceived development of pressure, yet negatively influences mutual learning and appears to be unable to ensure equal treatment of states.

Italy and the Universal Periodic Review of the United Nations Human Rights Council. Playing the two-level game

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Cofelice
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Role Theory ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Universal Periodic Review ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Impact

The aim of this article is to assess Italy’s behaviour in the framework of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the United Nations Human Rights Council, both as a recommending state and as a state under review. The UPR is a peer review mechanism launched in 2008, through which all UN member states can make recommendations to each other regarding human rights practices. Drawing on role theory, liberal and constructivist institutionalism, and the two-level game approach, the analysis reveals that Italian decision-makers played parallel games at the domestic and international tables of the UPR, and managed to adapt country’s human rights foreign policy goals according to the different social contexts where they operated. Indeed, while in the review phase in Geneva, Italy sought legitimacy for both its policies and its status as an international ‘human rights friendly’ actor, at domestic level a policy of inactivity was chosen, in order to minimize the impact of the most costly UPR recommendations, and protect the dynamics of domestic politics. The time-span of the analysis covers the first 19 UPR sessions (2008–14), broadly coinciding with Italy’s first two membership terms at the Human Rights Council.

Comparing Peer Reviews: The Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council and the African Peer Review Mechanism

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 266-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward R. McMahon ◽  
Kojo Busia ◽  
Marta Ascherio
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Evolutionary Process ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Universal Periodic Review ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
State Governance ◽  
Review Mechanism ◽  
Consensus Decision Making

Abstract The Universal Periodic Review Mechanism (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council and the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) reflect a growing trend in international organizations to utilize peer review processes to assess and improve member state governance and human rights performance. The two mechanisms are distinct in many ways. For example, the APRM undertakes a more in-depth and rigorous examination of a broader range of issues. Both review mechanisms, however, also have similarities e.g. they emphasize follow-up and actions to be taken as a result of the reviews and are products of a consensus decision-making process based on voluntary engagement. They represent an evolutionary process by which international norms can be integrated in a national context.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document