THE UPR – UN UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW OF COUNTRIES, IS AN IMPORTANT ADVOCACY MECHANISM & OPPORTUNITY FOR NGO'S TO REVIEW GENDER COMPONENTS OF INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY UPR DOCUMENTATION. There is value in studying the report given by the country, compilation of UN information, the shadow reports of stakeholders as NGO’s, and the Final Report – The Entire Process. See UPR Review example for Greece:http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/GRSession25.aspx
UPR – UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW – FACTS - http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/BasicFacts.aspx
The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a unique process which involves a periodic review of the human rights records of all 193 UN Member States. The UPR is a significant innovation of the Human Rights Council which is based on equal treatment for all countries. It provides an opportunity for all States to declare what actions they have taken to improve the human rights situations in their countries and to overcome challenges to the enjoyment of human rights. The UPR also includes a sharing of best human rights practices around the globe. Currently, no other mechanism of this kind exists.
UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW – ENSURING SUSTAINABLE UPR IMPLEMENTATION
Link to Full 8-Page Document: http://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/general-document/pdf/upr_info_third_cycle_ensuring_sustainable_implementation_2016.pdf
Calendar of reviews for the 2nd cycle (2012-2016)
Third Cycle Chart of the Universal Periodic Review: http://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/general-document/pdf/calendar_third_cycle.pdf
For an effective third cycle, two elements of the UPR process must be prioritised by States: implementation, and reporting. Firstly, implementation of recommendations is the ultimate aim of the UPR process; to improve human rights in all countries.1 The area of implementation has to be strengthened and sustained. Secondly, reporting comprehensively on human rights developments is the only way States can be held to account. It is through effective reporting that assessments can be carried out and that new, specific, and tailored recommendations can be made.
This paper focuses on each of these priority areas from the perspective of both the State under Review and that of the recommending States at the UPR.
Извор: WUNRN – 14.09.2016
