Pakistan Re Elected To Unhrc Despite Rights Concerns Understanding The Un Human Rights Council

Pakistan's re-election to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in 2019 sparked controversy, given its widely criticized human rights record. Activist groups voiced strong opposition, questioning the appropriateness of a nation with documented rights violations holding a seat on the body responsible for promoting and protecting human rights worldwide. Established in 2006 by the UN General Assembly, the UNHRC replaced the former UN Commission on Human Rights and serves as the primary UN entity addressing human rights infringements globally.

The UNHRC comprises 47 member states elected by the UN General Assembly through a simple majority vote using a secret ballot. These members serve three-year terms, with approximately one-third of the council's membership renewed annually. Human rights, central to the UNHRC's mandate, are defined as rights inherent to all individuals, irrespective of nationality, sex, origin, religion, language, or any other status. These rights encompass fundamental entitlements, such as the right to life, and rights ensuring a decent standard of living, including access to food, education, work, and liberty. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, marked the first comprehensive codification of these rights. The UDHR, along with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), constitute the International Bill of Rights, forming the cornerstone of international human rights law. Human rights are considered universal, inalienable, interdependent, and non-discriminatory, principles that underpin the UNHRC's work and the global human rights framework.

Pakistan's Re-election to the UN Human Rights Council: A Deep Dive

The 2019 re-election of Pakistan to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) ignited a firestorm of controversy, bringing to the forefront the perennial tension between geopolitical realities and the idealistic aspirations of international human rights law. This event serves as a critical case study for examining the complexities, contradictions, and challenges inherent in the UN's human rights architecture. It underscores the difficulties in ensuring that the body tasked with upholding universal human rights standards is itself populated by states demonstrably committed to those very standards. The implications of Pakistan's election extend far beyond the immediate composition of the UNHRC, touching upon the credibility of the organization, the effectiveness of international human rights mechanisms, and the broader landscape of international relations.

The United Nations Human Rights Council: Mandate and Membership

Established in 2006, the UNHRC was conceived as a successor to the UN Commission on Human Rights, an entity widely criticized for its politicization and ineffectiveness. The Commission had faced accusations of allowing states with egregious human rights records to shield themselves from scrutiny while disproportionately targeting certain countries for criticism. The UNHRC's creation was intended to address these shortcomings by establishing a more robust, impartial, and effective mechanism for promoting and protecting human rights globally.

The UNHRC's mandate is broad, encompassing the investigation of human rights abuses, the development of international human rights standards, and the provision of technical assistance to states seeking to improve their human rights records. The Council conducts its work through various mechanisms, including:

• Special Procedures: Independent human rights experts, known as Special Rapporteurs, are appointed to investigate and report on specific human rights themes (e.g., freedom of expression, torture) or country situations. These experts conduct fact-finding missions, issue public statements, and engage in dialogue with governments and civil society.
• Universal Periodic Review (UPR): A process by which the human rights records of all UN member states are reviewed every five years. The UPR involves an interactive dialogue between the state under review and other UN member states, during which recommendations are made for improving the state's human rights situation.
• Complaint Procedure: Allows individuals and organizations to submit complaints of human rights violations to the UNHRC. These complaints are reviewed by a working group, which determines whether they warrant further investigation.
• Advisory Committee: Provides expert advice to the UNHRC on thematic human rights issues.

The UNHRC's membership consists of 47 states elected by the UN General Assembly. Seats are distributed among regional groups to ensure geographical representation:

• African States: 13 seats
• Asia-Pacific States: 13 seats
• Latin American and Caribbean States: 8 seats
• Western European and Other States: 7 seats
• Eastern European States: 6 seats

Members are elected for three-year terms and are not eligible for immediate re-election after serving two consecutive terms. The election process involves a secret ballot in the UN General Assembly, with candidates requiring a simple majority of votes to be elected.

The Re-Election of Pakistan: Context and Controversy

Pakistan's human rights record has been a subject of persistent concern for international organizations and human rights groups. Allegations of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture, restrictions on freedom of expression, discrimination against religious minorities, and violence against women have been consistently documented. The situation in Balochistan, where security forces have been accused of widespread human rights abuses in their efforts to suppress separatist movements, has been particularly troubling.

Prior to the 2019 election, several human rights organizations voiced strong opposition to Pakistan's candidacy, arguing that its poor human rights record made it unfit to serve on the UNHRC. These organizations cited concerns about:

• Restrictions on Freedom of Expression: The Pakistani government has been criticized for using blasphemy laws and other vaguely worded legislation to stifle dissent and restrict freedom of expression. Journalists, activists, and human rights defenders have faced intimidation, harassment, and even violence for criticizing the government or military.
• Treatment of Minorities: Religious minorities in Pakistan, including Christians, Hindus, and Ahmadis, face discrimination and persecution. Blasphemy laws are often used to target minorities, and there have been numerous instances of mob violence against minority communities.
• Enforced Disappearances: Security forces have been accused of abducting and disappearing thousands of individuals, particularly in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The fate of these disappeared persons remains unknown, and their families have been denied access to information about their whereabouts.
• Extrajudicial Killings: Security forces have been implicated in extrajudicial killings of suspected militants and criminals. Impunity for these killings remains a major concern.
• Violence Against Women: Violence against women, including domestic violence, honor killings, and forced marriage, remains widespread in Pakistan. The government has been criticized for failing to adequately protect women and girls from these abuses.

Despite these concerns, Pakistan secured enough votes in the UN General Assembly to be re-elected to the UNHRC. This outcome sparked outrage among human rights advocates, who argued that it undermined the credibility of the Council and sent a message that human rights violations would be tolerated.

Stakeholder Perspectives: A Complex Web of Interests

The re-election of Pakistan to the UNHRC involved a complex interplay of interests and perspectives among various stakeholders:

• Pakistan: The Pakistani government viewed its re-election as a validation of its human rights efforts and a recognition of its role in the international community. Pakistan has consistently maintained that it is committed to upholding human rights and that it is taking steps to address the challenges it faces. The government also likely saw its membership in the UNHRC as an opportunity to shape the international human rights agenda and to counter what it perceives as biased or unfair criticism.
• Activist Groups: Human rights organizations vehemently opposed Pakistan's re-election, arguing that its poor human rights record made it unfit to serve on the UNHRC. These groups lobbied against Pakistan's candidacy and sought to raise awareness of the human rights situation in the country. They argued that Pakistan's membership in the UNHRC would undermine the credibility of the Council and embolden other states with poor human rights records.
• UN Member States: UN member states held varying views on Pakistan's re-election. Some countries, particularly those with strong human rights records, likely shared the concerns of activist groups and may have voted against Pakistan. Other countries, particularly those with close political or economic ties to Pakistan, may have supported its candidacy. Geopolitical considerations, such as the need to maintain regional stability or to secure Pakistan's cooperation on counter-terrorism efforts, may have also influenced voting decisions.
• The UN System: The UN itself faced a dilemma. On the one hand, it is committed to upholding human rights and ensuring that the UNHRC is composed of states that are genuinely committed to these principles. On the other hand, it must also navigate the complexities of international relations and maintain a working relationship with all member states, regardless of their human rights records. The UN's response to Pakistan's re-election reflected this tension, with some officials expressing concern while others emphasized the importance of engaging with Pakistan to promote human rights improvements.

The Broader Implications: Credibility, Effectiveness, and Geopolitics

Pakistan's re-election to the UNHRC has significant implications for the credibility and effectiveness of the Council, as well as for the broader landscape of international relations:

• Credibility of the UNHRC: The election of states with questionable human rights records to the UNHRC raises serious questions about the Council's credibility. Critics argue that it undermines the Council's legitimacy and makes it more difficult for it to hold other states accountable for human rights violations. If the UNHRC is seen as being composed of states that are not genuinely committed to human rights, its pronouncements and recommendations will carry less weight.
• Effectiveness of International Human Rights Mechanisms: Pakistan's re-election highlights the limitations of international human rights mechanisms. Despite the existence of international human rights treaties and monitoring bodies, states are still able to evade accountability for human rights violations. The UNHRC's effectiveness depends on the willingness of member states to cooperate with its investigations and to implement its recommendations. However, states often resist scrutiny and are reluctant to cede sovereignty to international bodies.
• Geopolitical Considerations: The re-election of Pakistan underscores the influence of geopolitical considerations in international human rights decision-making. States often prioritize their political and economic interests over human rights concerns. In the case of Pakistan, its strategic importance as a regional power and its role in counter-terrorism efforts may have led some countries to overlook its human rights record.
• Impact on Human Rights Within Pakistan: Pakistan's membership in the UNHRC could have both positive and negative impacts on the human rights situation within the country. On the one hand, it could increase scrutiny of Pakistan's human rights practices and put pressure on the government to improve its record. On the other hand, it could embolden the government to resist international criticism and to continue its repressive policies.

Legal Frameworks and International Scrutiny

Pakistan, as a member of the United Nations, is bound by the UN Charter and various international human rights treaties. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), though not a treaty itself, is considered a foundational document in international human rights law and provides a moral and aspirational framework for state conduct. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), both ratified by Pakistan, are legally binding treaties that obligate the state to respect, protect, and fulfill the rights enshrined therein.

The UDHR, adopted in 1948, proclaims a wide array of fundamental human rights, including the right to life, liberty, and security of person; freedom from slavery and torture; freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; freedom of opinion and expression; and the right to education. These rights are considered universal, inalienable, and indivisible, meaning that they apply to all individuals, cannot be taken away, and are all equally important. The UDHR serves as a benchmark against which Pakistan's human rights record can be assessed.

The ICCPR, adopted in 1966, focuses on civil and political rights, such as the right to a fair trial, freedom of expression, freedom of association, the right to vote, and the right to be free from discrimination. Pakistan's adherence to the ICCPR is relevant to assessing its compliance with international standards on freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and the rule of law. Concerns about restrictions on freedom of the press, the use of blasphemy laws to stifle dissent, and the lack of accountability for human rights abuses by security forces are all relevant to Pakistan's obligations under the ICCPR.

The ICESCR, also adopted in 1966, focuses on economic, social, and cultural rights, such as the right to work, the right to education, the right to health, and the right to social security. Pakistan's adherence to the ICESCR is relevant to assessing its efforts to address poverty, inequality, and discrimination in access to education, healthcare, and other essential services. Concerns about child labor, bonded labor, and discrimination against women in the workplace are all relevant to Pakistan's obligations under the ICESCR.

In addition to these core human rights treaties, Pakistan is also a party to other international human rights instruments, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). These treaties impose specific obligations on Pakistan to protect the rights of women and children.

Pakistan's compliance with these international human rights treaties is subject to scrutiny by various UN human rights bodies, including the UNHRC, the treaty bodies (committees of experts that monitor the implementation of human rights treaties), and the Special Procedures mandate holders. These bodies conduct periodic reviews of Pakistan's human rights record, issue recommendations for improvement, and investigate allegations of human rights violations.

Historical Precedents: A Recurring Dilemma

The election of Pakistan to the UNHRC is not an isolated incident. Historically, numerous countries with questionable human rights records have been elected to the Council, sparking similar controversies and criticisms. This recurring dilemma highlights the inherent tension between the political realities of international relations and the idealistic aspirations of international human rights law.

One notable example is the election of Saudi Arabia to the UNHRC in 2013. Saudi Arabia's human rights record has been consistently criticized by international organizations, with concerns raised about restrictions on freedom of expression, discrimination against women, the use of the death penalty, and the suppression of dissent. Despite these concerns, Saudi Arabia secured enough votes in the UN General Assembly to be elected to the UNHRC.

Another example is the election of China to the UNHRC on multiple occasions. China's human rights record has been the subject of intense scrutiny, with concerns raised about the treatment of ethnic minorities in Xinjiang and Tibet, the suppression of dissent, and the lack of political freedoms. Despite these concerns, China has consistently been elected to the UNHRC, reflecting its growing political and economic influence in the international arena.

These historical precedents underscore the challenges of ensuring that the UNHRC is composed of states that are genuinely committed to human rights. The election process is often influenced by political considerations, such as the need to maintain regional stability, to secure economic cooperation, or to avoid antagonizing powerful states. As a result, states with poor human rights records are sometimes able to secure election to the UNHRC, undermining the Council's credibility and effectiveness.

The cases of Saudi Arabia, China, and Pakistan highlight the ongoing debate about the criteria for membership in the UNHRC. Some argue that membership should be based solely on a state's human rights record, while others argue that political and geopolitical considerations should also be taken into account. There is no easy answer to this question, and the debate is likely to continue as long as the UNHRC exists.

Related Ongoing Issues: A Nexus of Concerns

Pakistan's re-election to the UNHRC occurred against the backdrop of several ongoing human rights issues within the country and in the broader region:

• Human Rights Situation in Kashmir: The human rights situation in Kashmir has been a long-standing concern, particularly since the revocation of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution in August 2019, which stripped the region of its special autonomous status. Pakistan has consistently raised concerns about alleged human rights abuses by Indian security forces in Kashmir, including extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions, and restrictions on freedom of expression. The situation in Kashmir has further strained relations between India and Pakistan and has contributed to regional instability.
• Treatment of Minorities in Pakistan: As previously mentioned, religious minorities in Pakistan face discrimination and persecution. Blasphemy laws are often used to target minorities, and there have been numerous instances of mob violence against minority communities. The government has been criticized for failing to adequately protect minorities and for failing to prosecute those responsible for attacks against them.
• Freedom of Expression and Media Restrictions in Pakistan: Freedom of expression and media freedom are under increasing threat in Pakistan. Journalists, activists, and human rights defenders face intimidation, harassment, and violence for criticizing the government or military. The government has been accused of censoring the media and of restricting access to information. The use of vaguely worded legislation, such as the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), has been used to stifle dissent and to silence critics.

These related ongoing issues highlight the complexity of the human rights situation in Pakistan and the challenges that the country faces in meeting its international human rights obligations. Pakistan's membership in the UNHRC provides an opportunity for the international community to engage with the country and to encourage it to address these issues.

Future Outlook: Scrutiny and Potential Action

The future outlook for Pakistan's human rights record and its role in the UNHRC is uncertain. Increased scrutiny from the UNHRC and the international community is likely. This scrutiny could take the form of:

• Increased Monitoring and Reporting: The UNHRC and other UN human rights bodies may increase their monitoring and reporting on the human rights situation in Pakistan. This could include conducting fact-finding missions, issuing public statements, and engaging in dialogue with the Pakistani government.
• Targeted Sanctions: Some countries may consider imposing targeted sanctions on Pakistani officials who are responsible for human rights abuses. These sanctions could include travel bans and asset freezes.
• Conditioning Aid and Trade: Countries may condition aid and trade to Pakistan on improvements in its human rights record. This could provide an incentive for the Pakistani government to address human rights concerns.
• Legal Action: Victims of human rights abuses in Pakistan may seek legal redress in international courts or tribunals. This could put further pressure on the Pakistani government to address human rights concerns.

Activist groups and concerned countries are likely to continue to advocate for human rights improvements in Pakistan. This advocacy could take the form of:

• Lobbying: Activist groups may lobby governments and international organizations to take action on human rights issues in Pakistan.
• Public Awareness Campaigns: Activist groups may launch public awareness campaigns to raise awareness of human rights violations in Pakistan.
• Supporting Local Human Rights Defenders: Activist groups may provide support to local human rights defenders in Pakistan who are working to promote and protect human rights.

The Pakistani government may respond to this increased scrutiny and advocacy in a variety of ways. It could:

• Take Steps to Improve its Human Rights Record: The government could take steps to address human rights concerns, such as repealing or amending repressive laws, investigating and prosecuting human rights abusers, and protecting the rights of minorities.
• Resist International Criticism: The government could resist international criticism and defend its human rights record. It could argue that it is taking steps to address human rights concerns and that it is being unfairly targeted by the international community.
• Engage in Dialogue: The government could engage in dialogue with the UNHRC, other UN human rights bodies, and concerned countries to address human rights concerns.

The outcome will depend on a variety of factors, including the political will of the Pakistani government, the level of pressure from the international community, and the effectiveness of activist groups and human rights defenders.