The Human Rights Council this morning adopted the Universal Periodic Review outcomes of Brazil, Poland, and the Netherlands. The Council then began the general debate under agenda item six on the Universal Periodic Review mechanism.
The Council adopted the Universal Periodic Review outcome of Brazil. The Vice President said that out of the 306 recommendations received, 304 enjoyed the support of Brazil, and two were noted.
Speaking on Brazil were Gambia, India, Libya, Maldives, Namibia, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Portugal, South Africa, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, United Nations Women, United Nations Population Fund, and Tanzania.
Also speaking were International Planned Parenthood Federation, Swedish Association for Sexuality Education, Bischöfliches Hilfswerk Misereor e.V., Right Livelihood Award Foundation, Instituto de Desenvolvimento e Direitos Humanos, Action Canada for Population and Development, Conselho Indigenista Missionário, Franciscans International, Sociedade Maranhense de Direitos Humanos, and Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice delle Salesiane di Don Bosco.
The Council adopted the Universal Periodic Review outcome of Poland. The Vice-President said that of the 233 recommendations received, 89 enjoyed the support of Poland, and 142 were noted. Additional clarification
was provided on another two recommendations, indicating which parts of the recommendations were supported and which parts were noted.
Speaking on Poland were Gambia, Kazakhstan, Libya, Lithuania, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tunisia, Ukraine, Tanzania, Venezuela, Burkina Faso, China, and Cuba.
Also speaking were Federation for Women and Family Planning, Human Rights House Foundation, Lawyers for Lawyers, International Lesbian and Gay Association, Humanists International, CIVICUS – World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Human Rights Watch, Advocates for Human Rights, Amnesty International, and Rencontre Africaine pour la defense des droits de l’homme.
The Council adopted the Universal Periodic Review of the Netherlands. The Vice President noted that of the 255 recommendations received, 165 enjoyed the support of the Netherlands, and 89 were noted. Additional clarification was provided on one recommendation, indicating which part of the recommendation was supported and which part was noted.
Speaking on the Netherlands were Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Sierra Leone, Syria, Tunisia, Ukraine, Tanzania, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Botswana, Burkina Faso, China, Cuba, and Gambia.
Also speaking were Defence for Children International, Action Canada for Population and Development, Federatie van Nederlandse Verenigingen tot Integratie Van Homoseksualiteit – COC Nederland, Institute for NGO Research, Partners for Transparency, Amnesty International, Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, Asociacion HazteOir.org, and International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
The Council then began the general debate under agenda item six on the Universal Periodic Review mechanism.
In the general debate, some speakers underlined the crucial role played by the Universal Periodic Review process to strengthen human rights around the world. They reiterated their strong support for the mechanism, which was an impactful instrument to promote human rights as part of development efforts. More needed to be heard from States, national human rights institutions and civil society on the impact the Universal Periodic Review was having on translating international human rights standards into consistent laws and practices, and the general debate presented this opportunity. Some speakers said the Universal Periodic Review had the principle of universality at its core and was a well-functioning tool to address human rights situations in all countries. It should not be used as a tool to interfere in States.
The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Human Rights Council’s fifty-second regular session can be found here.
The Council will reconvene this afternoon at 3 p.m. to consider the outcome document of South Africa, examined during the forty-first session of the Universal Periodic Review Working Group. It will then continue and conclude the general debate under agenda item six on the Universal Periodic Review.
Consideration of Outcome of Universal Periodic Review of Brazil
Report
The Council has before it the Universal Periodic Review outcome report of Brazil.
Presentation
Brazil said the promotion and protection of human rights were not only obligations enshrined in the Federal Constitution of Brazil, but also utmost objectives deeply rooted in the spirit of the Brazilian democracy. Since the new Government took office in January of this year, Brazil had reassessed its position with regard to the recommendations received during its Universal Periodic Review and had sought to align the new national human rights policies with the commitments and obligations the country had taken at the international level. Out of 306 recommendations made by Member States at its review last November, Brazil was pleased to inform that it fully supported 301 recommendations and supported with additional clarification three recommendations. Brazil took note of two recommendations given their narrow definition of the family, which conflicted with the Brazilian legislation and the decisions taken by the judiciary branch. Brazil’s national public policies were addressed to all forms of family, without discrimination of any kind.
Brazil’s public policies and legal frameworks were guided by empowering the political participation and the protection of all persons, with particular attention being paid to enhance the voices of all those most often unheard and left behind. In this regard, Brazil was proud to have taken numerous actions towards increasing the visibility and protection of women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, asexual, intersex plus persons, indigenous peoples, Afro-descendent communities, and persons with disabilities. Brazil’s human rights priorities had been translated into concrete actions, with a view to promoting the well-being of all persons, without discrimination based on any grounds. Several recommendations made had already been implemented since January 2023. In keeping with its longstanding tradition and support for the promotion and protection of human rights, Brazil had launched its candidacy for the Human Rights Council for the term 2024-2026.
Discussion
Some speakers commended Brazil for demonstrating a constructive approach and for accepting 304 out of the 306 recommendations given to them, which reflected the country’s commitment to the Universal Periodic Review process and its efforts to uphold and safeguard human rights. Speakers recognised Brazil’s commitment to the implementation of national legislation regulating the rights of persons with disabilities, including to reserve them seats on public transportation. Speakers noted with satisfaction the steps taken by Brazil to ensure social protection for society’s most vulnerable groups, including children, women, persons with disabilities, and the elderly, as well as their efforts to continue to strengthen the Brazilian universal health care system. The purposeful activities of the Brazilian authorities to improve the standard of living of citizens and eliminate poverty were also very positive.
Some speakers recognised Brazil’s commitment to enhance efforts, in cooperation with the international community, to stop deforestation, halt the extraction of national resources on lands of indigenous peoples without their consent, as well as the invasion of indigenous territories; and to strengthen measures aimed at suppressing the use of child labour, including through aligning the minimum age of employment with that of the end of compulsory education. Some speakers noted that Brazil should ensure all crimes against indigenous people were brought to justice and that these peoples were able to actively participate in all decision-making processes which concerned them. Brazil should also prioritise a systematic strengthening of policies to protect human rights defenders. Many speakers recommended that the Council adopt the Universal Periodic Review outcome report of Brazil by consensus, and wished the Government of Brazil success in the implementation of the accepted recommendations.
The Vice-President noted that out of the 306 recommendations received, 304 enjoyed the support of Brazil and two were noted.
Concluding Remarks
Brazil thanked the Member States and civil society organizations that took the floor, in particular young human rights activists. Brazil’s commitment to furthering human rights had been strengthened by the high number and range of recommendations received. Brazil had not been able to support only two recommendations, and this was because these two were non-inclusive with regard to the definition of the family. Brazil had launched its candidacy for the Human Rights Council for the term 2024-2026, which reaffirmed its commitment to achieving the highest standard of human rights and building a more inclusive Council.
Consideration of Outcome of Universal Periodic Review of Poland
Report
The Council has before it the Universal Periodic Review outcome report of Poland.
Presentation
Poland said the commitment of the international community to promote fundamental rights and freedoms should be stronger than ever. As a result of the Russian military invasion against Ukraine, fundamental human rights were being violated. Poland pledged to protect human rights internationally and internally, especially of those people in the most vulnerable situations. Poland would not cease its endeavours to support Ukraine’s efforts in every possible way. Poland had received 233 recommendations and each was carefully analysed. On some occasions, the legal obligations of the Government prevented the recommendations from being implemented. Poland did not support recommendations which were related to specific human rights that were already sufficiently protected in the country.
Recommendations which did not enjoy support included ratifying certain treaties, including the Convention on Migrant Workers, the Convention on Enforced Disappearances, and the Statelessness Conventions, among others. Although the Government did not ratify these treaties, Poland remained committed to protecting the human rights of all, and Polish law also enshrined some of these elements. Recommendations had been received to strengthen the freedom of the media, which was of utmost importance to Poland. Constitutional principles in this area were supplemented by Poland’s press law, which meant the press enjoyed freedom of expression. According to the Polish Constitution, no one should be discriminated against in any form of life, and this was supplemented by an equal plan for equal treatment.
Discussion
Some speakers commended Poland for accepting many of the recommendations made by delegations, saying that this affirmed Poland’s continued commitment to the Universal Periodic Review process to further promote and protect human rights at the national level. The country’s attention to issues such as improving policies to combat hate crimes in communities and promoting intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding between the majority and the different minority groups, as well as the efforts to address domestic violence, was welcomed. The efforts made to curb hate speech and to make it a priority were also commended. The significant steps made towards addressing the needs of persons with disabilities, including children with disabilities, were welcomed, and Poland was encouraged to submit a mid-term report on progress made in implementing the recommendations.
In the context of a steady rise in anti-Semitism and neo-Nazi thinking in the country, a speaker said, Poland had not accepted recommendations on reducing intolerance and combatting glorification of Nazism, attempts to destroy or defile monuments, and defilation of Soviet burial grounds. Poland should ensure decent treatment for refugees, including legal and medical assistance. Further efforts should be made to support the freedom of expression, and to reduce violence against women, remove restrictions on minority rights, and take further measures to effectively protect human rights. Access to reproductive health and abortion services was also considered vital to preserve life, and Poland was urged to remove the barriers posed to accessing these services, reform the law criminalising abortion and provide access to it at least until 12 weeks after conception, ensure access to contraception and emergency contraception, and ensure sexual education was provided in schools.
The Vice-President said that of the 233 recommendations received, 89 enjoyed the support of Poland, and 142 were noted. Additional clarification was provided on another two recommendations, indicating which parts of the recommendations were supported and which parts were noted.
Concluding Remarks
Poland reiterated the Government’s commitment to promote and protect human rights internally and internationally. One of the main principles of the Universal Periodic Review mechanism was its constructive, non-confrontational agenda. All comments would be taken under consideration. Poland wished to maintain good cooperation with the Human Rights Council and its Special Procedures, which were strong and universal safeguards of fundamental freedoms. Poland had issued a standing invitation to all Special Procedure mandate holders since 2021, and would continue this good practice.
Consideration of Outcome of Universal Periodic Review of the Netherlands
Report
The Council has before it the Universal Periodic Review outcome report of the Netherlands.
Presentation of Report
Netherlands said it received 255 recommendations in total, and supported 165, partially supported one, and took note of 89 recommendations. To some, the number of noted recommendations could seem high – it was due to the importance the Kingdom gave to the Universal Periodic Review, as it only supported the recommendations that it knew it could follow up on. The noted recommendations were not, however, without impact. Due and careful consideration was given to recommendations during the decision-making process. Since the review, on the fight against discrimination against racism, which was an important topic, the Kingdom had apologised for its participation in slavery in the past and up to the present day, and would make a fund available to raise awareness of the consequences of slavery, with the participation of those affected.
Equal treatment legislation would be extended to the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom, and efforts would be made to raise awareness of this, with provisions made for free legal aid. The Netherlands National Coordinator for Discrimination and Racism was stepping up his engagement with citizens through events throughout the country, and this would feed into the National Action Plan against Discrimination and Racism. The Minister of Education, Culture and Science had also recently presented a plan outlining the Government’s policy measures in the areas of gender and lesbian, gay, transgender and queer issues in six different areas, and dealt with the wage gap and discrimination against women. On migration, the Netherlands had been confronted by an increase in persons seeking asylum, resulting in difficulties for local authorities to house those benefiting from asylum in accordance with the Netherlands’ own standards, and the Government had been working on a bill on sustainable and acceptable reception facilities, aiming at ensuring a stable and adequate system for asylum seekers.
Netherlands Institute for Human Rights said since the last Universal Periodic Review, the ‘Dutch Childcare Allowance Scandal’ had come to light, revealing a strong tendency towards structural inequality and discrimination, as parents were singled out for tax-fraud based on their nationality or immigration background. After the scandal came to light, the Government had recognised the prevalence of institutional racism in the Dutch Tax Authority. The Government needed to make haste with a structural approach to assess the discriminatory effects of new and existing legislation. A robust standing, monitoring and follow-up system for the recommendations made by treaty bodies and the Universal Periodic Review was still lacking. The Government should ensure that the system for follow-up and implementation of the recommendations was adequately strengthened.
Discussion
Some speakers welcomed the Netherlands and thanked the State for its continued cooperation and constructive engagement with the Universal Periodic Review process. The many constructive recommendations supported by the Netherlands, which stood to make a positive impact on the lives of refugees, asylum seekers and stateless persons, were welcomed. These included important commitments on re-engineering the system for asylum reception to make it sustainable for the long-term and addressing the backlogs in the asylum and family reunification procedures. It was welcomed that the Dutch Government had made efforts to combat ethnic profiling by developing an operating framework for professional stop-and-search procedures defining the professional standard of objectivity that the police needed to meet. Speakers appreciated that the Netherlands had accepted most recommendations, including those relating to combatting the sale of children online for sexual exploitation and abuse, as well as discrimination against certain groups, including people of African descent and migrants.
The Netherlands was encouraged to intensify its efforts to implement the reforms undertaken, particularly in the area of combatting racism and hate speech. Some speakers noted the Netherland’s support for programmes in Sint Maarten aimed at eradicating domestic and gender-based violence, however, the Netherlands had yet to implement the Istanbul Convention; it was hoped the State would give due consideration to this recommendation. Some speakers said it was concerning that many of the recommendations concerning refugees, asylum seekers and stateless persons in the constituent countries of the Netherlands had not been supported. Some speakers expressed concerns about the aggravation of racial and ethnic profiling practices in the Netherlands, numerous facts of discrimination on national and ethnic grounds, and cases of anti-Semitism. Many speakers wished the Kingdom of the Netherlands every success in implementing the recommendations accepted and recommended to the Human Rights Council the adoption of the report of the Working Group on its Universal Periodic Review.
The Vice President said that of the 255 recommendations received, 165 enjoyed the support of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and 89 were noted. Additional clarification was provided on one recommendation, indicating which part of the recommendation was supported and which part was noted.
Concluding Remarks
Netherlands said it appreciated all the constructive comments and genuine concerns. The concerns on the noted recommendations were clearly heard. There had been a number of recommendations on the ratification of Protocols and other instruments – these were part of an ongoing deliberative political process, and commenting on this subject would prejudge the outcome of the process. No country was perfect – this was why the Kingdom valued the Universal Periodic Review – it helped all to look at themselves critically, and be open to feedback from other States and civil society. Human rights were a priority for the Netherlands, as they formed the basis of a free and fair society around the world, underpinning the multilateral system, and bringing States together in the Council day after day after day. The Universal Periodic Review was a key instrument in this regard, and the Netherlands reaffirmed its continuing and unwavering commitment to the mechanism.
General Debate on the Universal Periodic Review
Some speakers underlined the crucial role played by the Universal Periodic Review process to strengthen human rights around the world. They reiterated their strong support for the mechanism, which was an impactful instrument to promote human rights as part of development efforts. The Universal Periodic Review was more than just a dialogue mechanism as States took commitments on human rights, and the discussions allowed progress and shortcomings to be expressed. The Universal Periodic Review process also facilitated a good exchange between States and civil society, and civil society played a crucial role in several phases of the process. Many speakers reiterated their commitment to the Universal Periodic Review process, which was based on constructive dialogue, free from politicisation.
Some speakers said the States under review should receive specific recommendations which took into account the specific cultures and practices of States. The Universal Periodic Review was a mechanism all States were committed to and were using when implementing human rights recommendations at the country level. More needed to be heard from States, national human rights institutions and civil society, on the impact the Universal Periodic Review was having on translating international human rights standards into consistent laws and practices, and the general debate presented this opportunity. The Universal Periodic Review had the principle of universality at its core and was a well-functioning tool to address human rights situations in all countries. It should not be used as a tool to interfere in States.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media; not an official record.
English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
