US Prepares To Be Criticized By Other Countries On Human Rights
WASHINGTON, DC February 7 (C-Fam) Last week, the United States Department of State hosted a meeting for representatives of civil society before the United States' third appearance at the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), at during which other countries examine its human rights records at the UN in Geneva.The meeting was an informal listening session organized by representatives from several US government agencies. Topics covered included immigration, the death penalty, the Guantanamo Bay detention center, as well as social issues, including abortion,
prostitution and the rights of people identifying as LGBTI.
In the UPR, the 193 member states of the United Nations are reviewed for compliance with human rights obligations over a five-year cycle. It is one of the major projects of the Geneva-based Human Rights Council. The United States withdrew from the council in 2018 to protest its disproportionate criticism of Israel and the inclusion of notable human rights abusers among its members. Nevertheless, the United States remains actively engaged in the UPR process, providing statements and recommendations to each country under review.
In the months leading up to the U.S. review, civil society organizations have submitted statements, United Nations agencies will report on the U.S. assessments by their own experts, and the U.S. will also present their own official report. On 11 May, after examining these contributions, the other Member States will present their own recommendations.
In its two previous reviews, the United States was criticized by a handful of European countries for their pro-life laws: in particular, the Helms amendment to the Foreign Aid Act which prohibits US funding of abortions abroad. The US State Department, then headed by the Obama administration, responded that it could not support these recommendations because they were inconsistent with applicable law.
Pro-life organizations hope the Trump administration will make a full defense of both current law and life-saving policy i
n global health care, both of which are open to criticism during UPE.
Although the UPR is apparently intended to encourage nations to fulfill their obligations with regard to the human rights treaties they have ratified, countries frequently use the mechanism to advance issues that do not are not yet universally accepted as human rights, such as the right to abortion or the inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity as international categories of non-discrimination.
During the UPR, the United States is likely to be called upon to ratify more United Nations human rights treaties, another type of recommendation that is difficult to qualify as an obligation. The United States is reluctant to ratify these binding instruments, having ratified only three of
the nine main United Nations human rights conventions.
US officials have repeatedly denounced the concept of an international right to abortion and called for the removal of the language of "reproductive health" from the UN negotiations because of its association with abortion. However, the United States has also used the UPR to promote the decriminalization of homosexuality, which has led some to wonder what human rights obligation is involved in this campaign.
During the last UPR session, which ended last week, the United States called on four of the fourteen countries reviewed to revise
their laws against homosexual relations.
Upon completion of the United States review, the State Department will review the recommendations received and respond
to them individually by "supporting" or "noting" them.
prostitution and the rights of people identifying as LGBTI.
In the UPR, the 193 member states of the United Nations are reviewed for compliance with human rights obligations over a five-year cycle. It is one of the major projects of the Geneva-based Human Rights Council. The United States withdrew from the council in 2018 to protest its disproportionate criticism of Israel and the inclusion of notable human rights abusers among its members. Nevertheless, the United States remains actively engaged in the UPR process, providing statements and recommendations to each country under review.
In the months leading up to the U.S. review, civil society organizations have submitted statements, United Nations agencies will report on the U.S. assessments by their own experts, and the U.S. will also present their own official report. On 11 May, after examining these contributions, the other Member States will present their own recommendations.
In its two previous reviews, the United States was criticized by a handful of European countries for their pro-life laws: in particular, the Helms amendment to the Foreign Aid Act which prohibits US funding of abortions abroad. The US State Department, then headed by the Obama administration, responded that it could not support these recommendations because they were inconsistent with applicable law.
Pro-life organizations hope the Trump administration will make a full defense of both current law and life-saving policy i
n global health care, both of which are open to criticism during UPE.
Although the UPR is apparently intended to encourage nations to fulfill their obligations with regard to the human rights treaties they have ratified, countries frequently use the mechanism to advance issues that do not are not yet universally accepted as human rights, such as the right to abortion or the inclusion of sexual orientation and gender identity as international categories of non-discrimination.
During the UPR, the United States is likely to be called upon to ratify more United Nations human rights treaties, another type of recommendation that is difficult to qualify as an obligation. The United States is reluctant to ratify these binding instruments, having ratified only three of
the nine main United Nations human rights conventions.
US officials have repeatedly denounced the concept of an international right to abortion and called for the removal of the language of "reproductive health" from the UN negotiations because of its association with abortion. However, the United States has also used the UPR to promote the decriminalization of homosexuality, which has led some to wonder what human rights obligation is involved in this campaign.
During the last UPR session, which ended last week, the United States called on four of the fourteen countries reviewed to revise
their laws against homosexual relations.
Upon completion of the United States review, the State Department will review the recommendations received and respond
to them individually by "supporting" or "noting" them.
