This October, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) will elect new member states under the recent cloud of scrutiny and . The diversity of UNHRC membership gives its decisions legitimacy that is irreplaceable in the international human rights field. In order to avoid following in the footsteps of its predecessor — the UN Commission on Human Rights — the UNHRC must take immediate action to increase transparency and hold individual member states accountable when they fail to uphold the council’s principles. The UN as a whole must fight to preserve the UNHRC, as no other entity in the world has the same credibility when condemning human rights abuses.

The former UN Commission on Human Rights became a world-class symbol of UN inefficiency until its end in 2005. The UNHRC was established a year later in order to create an international human rights mechanism that would work effectively. There were three that the council wanted to address in its founding.

First, the election system, under which the commission relied on secret deals, became an open system where states competed for a majority of votes to hold one of the 47 member seats.

Second, all 193 UN states must undergo a periodic review of their human rights record in order to abolish the notion of bias between members.

Finally, the council must meet throughout the year, rather than only within a six-week time period that hindered the former commission’s productivity. While these were respectable steps taken in order to create a UNHRC that would be ethical and transparent, there are several key processes that are still at the core of the moral corruption within the council and need to change in order for it to maintain its credibility and influence.

Two Types of Corruption

With only a majority vote needed from the UN General Assembly to gain membership to the council, two types of corruption have become common practice. First, backdoor negotiations circumvent the competitive election process, such as when the prior to the 2013 election so that both countries could secure seats. Second, regional blocs put forward only the exact number of candidates to fill the number of open seats, therefore, giving the General Assembly no real alternatives.

Earlier this year, the facade of open elections within the UNHRC recently resurfaced after , leaving Spain and Australia unopposed for the two open seats in their regional bloc. Australia has been widely condemned in the past year over its abusive and , but even in the face of clear human rights abuses it will likely claim a seat. These loose rules and secret voting has eliminated the need for debate or the ability to such as China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Burundi, Egypt and Venezuela .

However, when states have been competitive, the UN General Assembly has voted to deny seats to some of the world’s worst human rights abusers. In November 2016, even . Other states have been defeated or chosen to withdraw in the face of likely defeat, including . Moving forward, countries that have upheld human rights need to lead by example by recruiting others to compete for membership seats, thereby supporting the competitive membership process. These member states must also push to end and institutionalize public ballots for UNHRC membership, holding states accountable for their votes.

However, even with voting reform, it is unlikely that elected states will always cooperate with the council’s mechanisms. Once elected, members are charged with “the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights” and “shall fully cooperate with the Council.” Yet the were found to violate the human rights of their own people. At the beginning of this year, 26 of the 47 member states were on record for having violated human rights, yet most go without any pressure from the UNHRC to address those violations.

In September 2016, the UNHRC adopted a resolution to to determine whether they may be considered international crimes. Although human rights abuses have been Burundian officials have so far refused to work with the commission. In early August 2017, the weighed in on the non-implementation of the resolutions, and yet neither the UNHRC nor the General Assembly suspended or denied Burundi’s membership on the council. This is a huge failing on behalf of the UNHRC that undermines the credibility of the entire UN system.

Past Success

The UN General Assembly must learn from its past success, most notably in February 2011, when the UNHRC held a in the wake of on anti-government protesters. The UNHRC unanimously called on the assembly to suspend Libya’s membership to the council, resulting in an official .

The world is watching how the UNHRC is handling human rights crises, especially in places like and Burundi. The UNHRC has the ability to take immediate action, but despite the extreme violence in both countries, the council has not once condemned the countries holding member seats on the UNHRC. Membership for states abusing human rights must be suspended immediately in order to ensure they do not use their membership to obstruct independent scrutiny and accountability, thereby threatening the credibility of the entire council.

The UN Human Rights Council is needed more today than ever before and must undergo internal reforms before it is able to take effective measures around the world. No country has a perfect human rights record, and the UNHRC will never be perfect as it is made up of imperfect actors. But the council should be expected to hold itself to the highest standard possible. It can no longer survive by simply going through the motions of its roles, such as hosting periodic reviews without criticism, but must take a strong stand against powerful countries.

This is up to the council itself, because while it is only one instrument in the international toolbox for advancement and protection of human rights, it remains the only global human rights body with the legitimacy and universality to extend fundamental principles of human dignity to every corner of the world.

*[This article was updated on October 2, 2017.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:����/

The post Is the UN Human Rights Council Poised to Repeat Fatal Past? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Even before President Donald Trump took the oath of office in January 2017,��, citing his US presidential campaign as a “vivid illustration of politics of intolerance.” Despite widespread hope that Trump would pivot to a more moderate stance upon his transition from campaigning to governing that was not the case, and HRW’s warning rings chillingly true today. Looking back on the past five months of Trump’s policies reveals a dangerous pattern of de-prioritizing��human rights, allowing his administration to have detrimental effects around the world and fundamentally change how the United States interacts with other countries.

January: The Fight Against Women’s Rights

The day after his inauguration, President Trump signed an executive order reinstating the����— also known as the global gag rule — which blocks all federal funding for international nongovernmental organizations that provide, or even speak about, abortion services. Studies have shown the policy, which has been implemented several times before by Republican presidents, increases the need for . The estimated $600 million gap in family planning services will put millions of women in life-threatening��situations. Trump’s iteration of the Mexico City Policy will punish women in already challenging circumstances by taking away life-saving services.

The erosion of women’s health initiatives at the hands of the administration continued when it announced it would pull all funding for the (UNFPA), a decision which will result in another�� over 150 countries. In 2002, when the Bush administration cut funding for UNFPA, the organization����the US funding would have “allowed the agency to prevent 2 million unwanted pregnancies and more than 77,000 infant and child deaths.” In an ever-escalating manner, the Trump administration introduced the����policy, in which $8.8 billion will be given to organizations as an incentive to restrict family panning services. The Trump administration is knowingly pushing a pro-life agenda that will reverse decades of progress on reproductive, maternal and child health, putting millions of women’s and children’s lives at risk.

February: Refugees and Travel Ban

On��February 3, a federal judge blocked President Trump’s infamous��. The executive order prevented��anyone��from seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States. Despite the president moving quickly to sign a revised version just��three weeks later, a federal appeals court again����the executive order, citing the ban was “��because it was deeply imbued with bias against Muslims.”

The president has also placed a ban on refugees while in office,��, implementing an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees and introducing an annual refugee cap of 50,000-60,000 less than initially proposed by President Obama. President Trump’s xenophobic negligence to refugees and his intolerant immigration policies show a complete lack of human rights values and set a threatening precedent for discriminatory policies based on ethnicity, nationality and religion.

March: Disrespecting International Norms and Protections����

Beyond enacting troubling policies, the Trump administration has shown a blatant disrespect for human rights norms, protections and organizations. In March of this year, for the first time since 1948, the ��— the only regional human rights mechanism with jurisdiction over the US. On the schedule were three hearings that were expected to be deeply critical of the Trump administration, including the immigration travel ban, US immigration enforcement and the approval of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Not two weeks after the no-show, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson threatened to withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council unless it undergoes “considerable reform.” Tillerson’s threat would mean the United States could give up its only power to influence human rights conversation across all UN members. The disrespect by the administration shows the world that the United States is not interested in working alongside others to strengthen organizations which are unified under human rights values but would rather move independently on issues that��are solely in the United States’ best interests.

April:��Arms Sales to Human Rights Violators

The Trump administration has taken a much more aggressive position on arms deals with countries around the world than previous administrations, even prioritizing sales to countries with documented human rights violations. Most concerning is the new��, which was solidified during President Trump’s first overseas trip. Previously, President Obama blocked an arms deal with Saudi Arabia because of the kingdom’s��.

With tensions continuing to rise, Trump’s arms sale could exponentially ignite tensions between the two countries. President Trump has also been working on a major sale of arms and F-16 fighter jets to����and has stated his willingness to make deals in the future to expand US military support to Egypt, Israel and the United Arab Emirates.��Trump hopes an increase in US military engagement in the Middle East will deliver positive political outcomes, but a large influx of arms will instead increase the already high number of human rights abuses.

May: Canceling Human Rights��

Since the Clinton administration, every White House staff has included a member focused on coordinating, developing and implementing government policy related to human rights and humanitarian relief. In May, the role of the special assistant to the president for multilateral affairs and human rights under President Obama was��, very clearly removing specific human rights language from the job title. The new hire, Garry Hall, has no background in human rights policy and little knowledge of how to handle the position’s previous obligations to��issue reports and determinations related to human rights.��With his announcement of removing a human rights position in his administration, President Trump is sending a clear sign that human rights are not a priority.

Within the first five months in the White House,��the Trump administration has begun to degrade the US stance on human rights around the world. These policies and decisions will have long-lasting repercussions for decades to come as they not only defund programs, but also remove fundamental��human rights structures. President Trump is a threat to human rights around the world, and, at the pace he has been going, things will get a lot worse before the United States and the world can begin to rebuild.

*[Young Professionals in Foreign Policy is a partner institution of 51�Թ�.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:

The post Donald Trump is Abandoning Human Rights appeared first on 51�Թ�.