WG on the universal periodic review, 24.04.07 (afternoon), report by J.M.

Discussion on the revised non-paper on the UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW mechanism (UPR).
Facilitator : H.E. Mr. Mohammed Loulichki

Issues that were discussed in the afternoon :
- State rapporteurs
- Participation of States under review

The main issue with respect to rapporteurs was to determine wether there should be a group composed of several rapporteurs from different regional groups or if there should be one raporteur from a specific country. Other concern was to decide wether a rapporteur should be dedicated to make a report about all reviewed States or if there should be one rapporteur reporting each country. The point here is to avoid a politicization of the process.

Some States like USA stressed the importance not to overburden the rapporteurs. In order to optimize the process, USA proposed to have maybe 10 rapporteurs. They insisted on the fact that UPR should be totally open to medias, and that there should not be resolutions in all cases (too heavy process). Finally, they emphasized on the importance of the being of a consensual basis.

Regarding the second issue, it seemed that a strong consensus was found about a total implication of the reviewed State during the decision process.

An hypothetical veto is mainly rejected by all participants.

The facilitator ended by stressing that a politicization of the report process is not likely to happen, mainly because the work of the rapporteurs does not imply a judgement of any kind, but only consists in gathering pieces of information.

According to the revised non-paper, the documents on which the review would be based are:
• A report prepared by the State concerned on the basis of General Guidelines to be adopted by the Council, and any other information considered relevant by the State concerned. States are encouraged to prepare their report through a broad consultation process at the national level with all relevant stakeholders;
• Compilation by OHCHR (information contained in the reports of treaty bodies, special procedures, including observations and comments by the State concerned, and other relevant official United Nations documents);
- In the review, the Council could also take into consideration additional credible and reliable information provided by other relevant stakeholders (revised compromise proposal by the Facilitator);
- The modalities of the review shall be as follows: (proposal by the Facilitator – refer to the annex)
- The review will be conducted in one Working Group, chaired by the President of the Council and composed of the 47 member States of the Council. Each member State will decide on the composition of its delegation;
- Observer States can participate in the review, including in the interactive dialogue;
- Other relevant stakeholders can attend the conduct of the review in the Working Group;
- Interactive dialogue between the country under review and the Council will take
place in the Working Group (see annex);
− The duration of the review will be three hours for each country. Additional time of up to one hour will be allocated for the consideration of the outcome by the Council plenary;
- A rapporteur(s) will be selected, respecting geographical representation, from among the members of the Council to prepare the review outcome (compromise proposal by the Facilitator);∗
- The final outcome will be adopted by the plenary of the Council.

Several points still to be debated during following WG's - not scheduled for now.