The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

Changes from November 25, 2020 to January 26, 2022

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with ~~red strikethrough~~ and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.

The United Nations Human Rights Council:
~~November 25, 2020~~January 26, 2022
Background and Policy Issues
Luisa Blanchfield
Over the years, many Members of Congress have demonstrated an ongoing interest in the role Over the years, many Members of Congress have demonstrated an ongoing interest in the role
Specialist in International Specialist in International
and effectiveness of the United Nations (U.N.) Human Rights Council (Council). The Council is and effectiveness of the United Nations (U.N.) Human Rights Council (Council). The Council is
Relations Relations
the primary intergovernmental body mandated with addressing human rights on a global level. the primary intergovernmental body mandated with addressing human rights on a global level.
In
~~The United States was a member for two three-year terms during the Obama Administration, and~~
~~Michael A. Weber~~
~~a third term during the first part of the Trump Administration. In June 2018, the Trump~~
~~Analyst in Foreign Affairs~~
~~Administration withdrew from the Council, noting concerns with the Council’s focus on Israel,~~

~~overall ineffectiveness in addressing human rights issues, and lack of reform. Some Council~~
~~activities are suspended or being implemented remotely due to concerns about COVID-19.~~

October 2021, the United States was elected to serve as a Council member; its three-year term Michael A. Weber began on January 1, 2022. Analyst in Foreign Affairs Background
The U.N. General Assembly established the Human Rights Council in 2006 to replace the The U.N. General Assembly established the Human Rights Council in 2006 to replace the Commission on Human Rights, Commission on Human Rights,
which was criticized for its ineffectiveness in addressing human which was criticized for its ineffectiveness in addressing human rights violations and ~~rights~~ abuses and for the number of widely perceived human abuses and for the number of widely perceived human
rights abusers that served as its members. rights abusers that served as its members. ~~Since 2006~~Over the years, many governments and observers have expressed serious concerns , many governments and observers have expressed serious concerns
with the Council’s with the Council’s perceived disproportionate attention to Israel and apparent lack of attention to other pressing human rights situations. disproportionate attention to Israel and apparent lack of attention to other pressing human rights situations.
In particular, some criticize the inclusion of the “human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories” In particular, some criticize the inclusion of the “human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories”
~~(Israel~~(a reference to Israeli actions) as a permanent item on the Council’s agenda. Some are also concerned that countries widely perceived as human ) as a permanent item on the Council’s agenda. Some are also concerned that countries widely perceived as human
rights abusers, such as China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, have served (or are serving) as Council members. On the rights abusers, such as China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, have served (or are serving) as Council members. On the
other hand, supporters argue that the Council is an improvement over the previous commission. They contend that the other hand, supporters argue that the Council is an improvement over the previous commission. They contend that the
Council’s Universal Periodic Review process, which aims to evaluate each member state’s fulfillment of its human rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review process, which aims to evaluate each member state’s fulfillment of its human rights
obligations, is a useful means for addressing human rights issues. Many observers are encouraged by the Council’s increased obligations, is a useful means for addressing human rights issues. Many observers are encouraged by the Council’s increased
attention to human rights situations in countries such as attention to human rights situations in countries such as Burma, Iran, North Korea, and Syria. Iran, North Korea, and Syria.
U.S. Policy and Selected Issues
Over the years, U.S. policymakers have debated U.S. participation in and funding of the Council. The George W. Bush Over the years, U.S. policymakers have debated U.S. participation in and funding of the Council. The George W. Bush
Administration voted against the General Assembly resolution creating the Council and did not run for membership (as it had Administration voted against the General Assembly resolution creating the Council and did not run for membership (as it had
as a member of the previous Commission on Human Rights); it also decided to withhold U.S. funding to the organization in as a member of the previous Commission on Human Rights); it also decided to withhold U.S. funding to the organization in
FY2008 under a provision enacted by Congress. Conversely, the Obama Administration supported the overall purpose of the FY2008 under a provision enacted by Congress. Conversely, the Obama Administration supported the overall purpose of the
Council and decided that it was better to work from within as a member to improve Council effectiveness. The Obama Council and decided that it was better to work from within as a member to improve Council effectiveness. The Obama
Administration was also critical of the Council’s focus on Israel, sometimes boycotting debates on the issue. The United Administration was also critical of the Council’s focus on Israel, sometimes boycotting debates on the issue. The United
States was elected to the Council in 2009 and in 2012. In October 2016, it was elected for a third term, which began in States was elected to the Council in 2009 and in 2012. In October 2016, it was elected for a third term, which began in
January 2017. The United States remained a member during the Trump Administration until mid-2018, when it withdrew. January 2017. The United States remained a member during the Trump Administration until mid-2018, when it withdrew.
~~Presumptive President-elect Joseph Biden stated in December 2019 that under his Administration the United States “will~~
~~rejoin the U.N. Human Rights Council and work to ensure that body truly lives up to its values.” The United States currently~~
~~serves as a Council observer and may run for a seat in the next election scheduled for late 2021~~It resumed Council membership under the Biden Administration. .
Some Members of Congress maintain an ongoing interest in the credibility and effectiveness of the Council. Some are Some Members of Congress maintain an ongoing interest in the credibility and effectiveness of the Council. Some are
particularly critical of both the Council’s focus on Israel and lack of competitive Council elections. Some Members have particularly critical of both the Council’s focus on Israel and lack of competitive Council elections. Some Members have
proposed or enacted legislation calling for U.S. withdrawal; at the same time, others have introduced legislation urging the proposed or enacted legislation calling for U.S. withdrawal; at the same time, others have introduced legislation urging the
Council to address specific human rights situations. Most recently, the Council to address specific human rights situations. Most recently, the ~~Further~~ Consolidated Appropriations Act, Consolidated Appropriations Act, ~~2020~~2021 (P.L. (P.L.
116-116-94260), prohibits Council funding unless the Secretary of State determines that U.S. participation is important to the national ), prohibits Council funding unless the Secretary of State determines that U.S. participation is important to the national
interest of the United States, and that the Council is taking steps to remove Israel as a permanent agenda item and ensure the interest of the United States, and that the Council is taking steps to remove Israel as a permanent agenda item and ensure the
integrity of Council elections (a similar provision was enacted in previous fiscal years). The Trump Administration withheld integrity of Council elections (a similar provision was enacted in previous fiscal years). The Trump Administration withheld
U.S. contributions to the Council U.S. contributions to the Council under this provision from FY2018~~from FY2017 through FY2020.~~ through FY2020. The Biden Administration fully funded the Council in FY2021; its FY2022 budget request includes funding to pay U.S. arrears to the Council that accumulated during this period. Members of Congress may consider the following issues Members of Congress may consider the following issues
related to the Council: related to the Council:
 the benefits and drawbacks of U.S. membership;  the benefits and drawbacks of U.S. membership;
 how, if at all, to address the Council’s apparent disproportionate focus on Israel; and  how, if at all, to address the Council’s apparent disproportionate focus on Israel; and
 concerns that the Council’s work is increasingly influenced by countries that do not fully subscribe to  concerns that the Council’s work is increasingly influenced by countries that do not fully subscribe to
international human rights norms and mechanisms. international human rights norms and mechanisms.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

~~link to page 10~~ The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

Introduction
The United Nations (U.N.) Human Rights Council (Council) is the primary intergovernmental The United Nations (U.N.) Human Rights Council (Council) is the primary intergovernmental
body that addresses human rights worldwide. body that addresses human rights worldwide. ~~The United States is not currently a member; in~~
In June 2018, the Trump Administration announced that the United States would withdraw its June 2018, the Trump Administration announced that the United States would withdraw its
~~membership. Administration officials cited~~membership, citing concerns with the Council’s disproportionate focus on concerns with the Council’s disproportionate focus on
Israel, ineffectiveness in addressing human rights situations, impact on U.S. sovereignty, and lack Israel, ineffectiveness in addressing human rights situations, impact on U.S. sovereignty, and lack
~~of reform. Presumptive President-Elect Joseph Biden stated in December 2019 that the United~~
~~States would rejoin the Council under his Administration. The United States is currently~~
~~withholding funding to the Council under a provision in the Department of State, Foreign~~
~~Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, FY2020 (Division G of P.L. 116-94).1 As~~
~~a result of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, some Council activities in 2020 were~~
~~suspended or implemented remotely. 2 Recently, some in-person activities resumed, including the~~
~~most recent Council election held in October 2020.~~
~~Members of Congress may continue to consider the Council’s role and effectiveness, including~~
~~what impact, if any, the U.S. withdrawal might have on (1) the Council’s efforts to combat human~~
~~rights and (2) the United States’ ability to further its human rights objectives in U.N. fora.~~
~~Policymakers might also consider the following questions:~~
of reform. Under the Biden Administration, the United States reengaged with the Council as an observer and ran for membership in the October 2021 election. The United States was elected to the Council on October 14, 2021, and began its three-year term on January 1, 2022. Previously, the Trump Administration withheld funding to the Council under a provision included in Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations acts. President Biden has fully funded the Council, and his FY2022 budget request includes funds to pay remaining U.S. Council arrears.1 Members of Congress may continue to consider the Council’s role and effectiveness, including  What role, if any, should the Council play in international human rights policy  What role, if any, should the Council play in international human rights policy
and in and in addressing specific human rights situations? addressing specific human rights situations?
 Is the Council an effective mechanism for addressing human rights worldwide? If  Is the Council an effective mechanism for addressing human rights worldwide? If
not, what reform measures might improve the Council and how can they be not, what reform measures might improve the Council and how can they be
achieved? achieved?
 What role, if any, might the United States play in the Council, or in other U.N.  What role, if any, might the United States play in the Council, or in other U.N.
human rights mechanisms, moving forward? human rights mechanisms, moving forward?
~~ Should the United States rejoin the Council? If so, under what circumstances?~~
This report provides background This report provides background ~~information~~ on the Council, including on the Council, including ~~the role of the previous~~
~~U.N. Commission on Human Rights. It discusses the Council’s~~its current mandate and structure, as current mandate and structure, as
well as Administration policy and congressional actions. well as Administration policy and congressional actions. ~~Finally, it~~It also highlights policy highlights policy ~~aspects~~issues of of
possible interest to Congress, including the debate over U.S. membership, U.S. funding of the possible interest to Congress, including the debate over U.S. membership, U.S. funding of the
Council, alternatives to the Council in U.N. fora, the Council’s focus on Israel, and the possible Council, alternatives to the Council in U.N. fora, the Council’s focus on Israel, and the possible
increased influence of other countries in Council activities. increased influence of other countries in Council activities.
Background
The U.N. Commission on Human Rights was the primary intergovernmental policymaking body The U.N. Commission on Human Rights was the primary intergovernmental policymaking body
for human rights issues before it was replaced by the U.N. Human Rights Council in 2006. for human rights issues before it was replaced by the U.N. Human Rights Council in 2006.

~~1 A similar provision was included in FY2020 State-Foreign Operations and Related Programs appropriations~~
~~legislation. As of February 10, 2020, the Administration reports that it has not made a decision regarding Council~~
~~withholding for FY2020 (see Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related~~
~~Programs, FY2021, p. 42). For more information, see the “U.S. Policy” section.~~
~~2 For instance, on March 13, 2020, the Council announced the suspension of its 43rd regular session in Geneva due to~~
~~COVID-19. U.N. Secretariat staff and member states and their staff held remote meetings. For more information, see~~
~~U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Despite COVID-19, Human Rights Council carries on with~~
~~its work virtually,” April 1, 2020, and Colum Lynch, “U.N. Agencies Struggle to Carry On Remotely,” Foreign Policy,~~
~~April 3, 2020.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

1

~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~Created in 1946 as a subsidiary body of the U.N. Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the~~
~~commission’s initial mandate was to establish international human rights standards and develop~~
~~an international bill of rights.3 During its existence, the 53-member commission played a key role~~
~~in developing a comprehensive body of human rights treaties and declarations, including the~~
~~Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Over time, its work evolved to address specific human~~
~~rights violations and complaints, as well as broader human rights issues. It developed a system of~~
~~special procedures to monitor, analyze, and report on country-specific human rights violations, as~~
Created in 1946 as a subsidiary body of the U.N. Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the commission’s initial mandate was to establish international human rights standards and develop an international bill of rights.2 During its existence, the 53-member commission played a key role in developing a comprehensive body of human rights treaties and declarations, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Over time, its work evolved to address specific human rights violations and complaints, as well as broader human rights issues. It developed a system of special procedures to monitor, analyze, and report on country-specific human rights violations, as 1 For more information on congressional withholding provisions and Biden Administration policy, see the “U.S. Policy” section. 2 ECOSOC is a principal organ of the United Nations that serves as the central forum for discussing and making recommendations related to international economic and social issues. It is composed of 54 member governments. One of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights’ notable successes was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on December 10, 1948. Congressional Research Service 1 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues well as thematic cross-cutting human rights abuses such as racial discrimination, religious well as thematic cross-cutting human rights abuses such as racial discrimination, religious
intolerance, and denial of freedom of expression.intolerance, and denial of freedom of expression.43
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, controversy developed over the human rights records of some In the late 1990s and early 2000s, controversy developed over the human rights records of some
commission members that were widely perceived as systematic commission members that were widely perceived as systematic ~~abusers~~violators of human rights. of human rights.54 These These
instances significantly affected the commission’s credibility. Critics, including the United States, instances significantly affected the commission’s credibility. Critics, including the United States,
claimed that countries used their membership to deflect attention from their own human rights claimed that countries used their membership to deflect attention from their own human rights
violations by questioning the records of others. Some members were accused of bloc voting and violations by questioning the records of others. Some members were accused of bloc voting and
excessive procedural manipulation to prevent debate of their human rights excessive procedural manipulation to prevent debate of their human rights ~~abuses~~violations. In 2001, the . In 2001, the
United States was not elected to the commission, whereas widely perceived human rights United States was not elected to the commission, whereas widely perceived human rights
violators such as Pakistan, Sudan, and Uganda were elected.violators such as Pakistan, Sudan, and Uganda were elected.65 In 2005, the collective impact of In 2005, the collective impact of
these and other controversies led U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to propose the idea of a these and other controversies led U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to propose the idea of a
new and smaller 47-member Human Rights Council to replace the commission. new and smaller 47-member Human Rights Council to replace the commission.
Council Structure and Selected Policy Issues
In 2006, as part of broader U.N. reform efforts, the U.N. General Assembly approved resolution In 2006, as part of broader U.N. reform efforts, the U.N. General Assembly approved resolution
60/251, which dissolved the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and created the Human Rights 60/251, which dissolved the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and created the Human Rights
Council in its place. This section provides an overview of Council structure and selected policy Council in its place. This section provides an overview of Council structure and selected policy
issues and concerns that have emerged over the years. issues and concerns that have emerged over the years.
Mandate and Role in the U.N. System
The Council is responsible for “promoting universal respect for the protection of all human rights The Council is responsible for “promoting universal respect for the protection of all human rights
and fundamental freedoms for all.”and fundamental freedoms for all.”76 It aims to prevent and combat human rights violations, It aims to prevent and combat human rights violations,
including gross and systematic violations, and to make recommendations thereon; it also works to including gross and systematic violations, and to make recommendations thereon; it also works to
promote and coordinate the mainstreaming of human rights within the U.N. system. As a promote and coordinate the mainstreaming of human rights within the U.N. system. As a
subsidiary of the General Assembly, it reports directly to the Assembly’s 193 members. It subsidiary of the General Assembly, it reports directly to the Assembly’s 193 members. It

~~3 ECOSOC is a principal organ of the United Nations that serves as the central forum for discussing and making~~
~~recommendations related to international economic and social issues. It is composed of 54 member governments. One~~
~~of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights’ notable successes was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted~~
~~by the U.N. General Assembly on December 10, 1948.~~
4receives substantive and technical support from the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), an office within the U.N. Secretariat currently headed by Michelle Bachelet of Chile.7 The Council is a political body; each of its members has different human rights preferences, domestic considerations, and foreign policy priorities. Its decisions, 3 For more information on U.N. and other multilateral human rights issues, see CRS In Focus IF10861, For more information on U.N. and other multilateral human rights issues, see CRS In Focus IF10861, Global Human
Rights: Multilateral Bodies & U.S. Participation, by Michael A. Weber. , by Michael A. Weber.
~~5 The Commission~~4 The commission was composed of 53 members elected by members of the U.N. Economic and Social Council was composed of 53 members elected by members of the U.N. Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC). Countries served three year terms with no term limits. (ECOSOC). Countries served three year terms with no term limits.
65 The George W. Bush Administration and many in Congress were generally considered to be frustrated and The George W. Bush Administration and many in Congress were generally considered to be frustrated and
disappointed by the election outcome. The House of Representatives adopted a Foreign Relations Authorization Act disappointed by the election outcome. The House of Representatives adopted a Foreign Relations Authorization Act
amendment that linked payment of U.S. arrears to the U.N. regular budget with the United States regaining a seat on amendment that linked payment of U.S. arrears to the U.N. regular budget with the United States regaining a seat on
the commission. The Bush Administration, however, stated it would not link U.S. payment of U.N. dues and arrears to the commission. The Bush Administration, however, stated it would not link U.S. payment of U.N. dues and arrears to
the outcome of the commission electionsthe outcome of the commission elections.
76 U.N. document, A/RES/60/251, March 15, 2006. U.N. document, A/RES/60/251, March 15, 2006.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

2

~~link to page 6~~ ~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~receives substantive and technical support from the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for~~
~~Human Rights (OHCHR), an office within the U.N. Secretariat currently headed by Michelle~~
~~Bachelet of Chile.8 The Council is a political body; each of its members has different human~~
~~rights preferences, domestic considerations, and foreign policy priorities. Its decisions,~~
7 OHCHR’s mandate is to promote and protect human rights worldwide through international cooperation, and through the coordination and streamlining of human rights efforts within the U.N. system. The Office is funded by a combination of assessed contributions to the U.N. regular budget and voluntary contributions from governments and others. In mid-2018, then-National Security Adviser John Bolton stated that the United States would withhold U.S. assessed funding to OHCHR. The Administration withheld $18.9 million in FY2018, $20.25 million in FY2019; and $20.15 million in FY2020. There is no legislative authority for this withholding. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11457, United Nations Issues: U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, by Luisa Blanchfield and Michael A. Weber. Congressional Research Service 2 link to page 6 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues resolutions, and recommendations are not legally binding. At the same time, Council actions resolutions, and recommendations are not legally binding. At the same time, Council actions
sometimes hold political weight and represent the Council’s human rights perspectives and sometimes hold political weight and represent the Council’s human rights perspectives and
priorities. priorities.
Membership and Elections
The Council comprises 47 members apportioned by geographic region as follows: 13 from The Council comprises 47 members apportioned by geographic region as follows: 13 from
African states; 13 from Asian states; 6 from Eastern European states; 8 from Latin American and African states; 13 from Asian states; 6 from Eastern European states; 8 from Latin American and
Caribbean states; and 7 from Western European and other states Caribbean states; and 7 from Western European and other states (Figure 1). Members are elected . Members are elected
for a period of three years and may not hold a Council seat for more than two consecutive terms. for a period of three years and may not hold a Council seat for more than two consecutive terms.
If a Council member commits “gross and systematic violations of human rights,” the General If a Council member commits “gross and systematic violations of human rights,” the General
Assembly may suspend membership with a two-thirds vote of members present.Assembly may suspend membership with a two-thirds vote of members present.98 All U.N. All U.N.
members are eligible to run for a seat on the Council. Countries are nominated by their regional members are eligible to run for a seat on the Council. Countries are nominated by their regional
groups and elected by the General Assembly through secret ballot with an absolute majority groups and elected by the General Assembly through secret ballot with an absolute majority
required. The most recent election was held in October required. The most recent election was held in October ~~2020~~2021; the next election is scheduled for ; the next election is scheduled for
late late ~~2021~~2022. .
Figure 1. Human Rights Council Membership by Regional Group
Latin American &
Western European
Africa (13)
Asia-Pacific (13)
Eastern European (6)
Caribbean (8)
and Other (7)
~~Burkina Faso (2021)~~
~~Bahrain (2021~~Benin (2024) China (2023))
Armenia (2022) Armenia (2022)
Argentina ( Argentina (~~2021)~~
~~Austria (2021~~2024) Finland (2024))
Cameroon ( Cameroon (~~2021)~~
~~Bangladesh (2021)~~
~~Bulgaria (2021)~~
~~Bahamas (2021)~~
~~Denmark (2021~~2024) India (2024) Lithuania (2024) Bolivia (2023) France (2023))
Cote d'Ivoire (2023) Cote d'Ivoire (2023)
~~China (2023)~~
~~Czech Republic (2021)~~
~~Bolivia (2023)~~
~~France (2023)~~
~~Eritrea (2021)~~
~~Fiji (2021)~~
~~Poland (2022)~~
~~Brazil (2022)~~
~~Germany (2022)~~
~~Gabon (2023)~~
~~India (2021)~~
~~Russia (2023)~~
~~Cuba (2023)~~
~~Italy (2021)~~
~~Libya (2022)~~
~~Indonesia (2022)~~
~~Ukraine (2023)~~
~~Mexico (2023)~~
~~Netherlands (2022)~~
~~Malawi (2023)~~
~~Japan (2022)~~
~~Uruguay (2021)~~
~~United Kingdom (2023)~~
~~Mauritania (2022)~~
~~Marshal Islands (2022)~~
~~Venezuala (2022)~~
~~Namibia (2022)~~
~~Nepal (2023)~~
~~Senegal (2023)~~
~~Pakistan (2023)~~
~~Somalia (2021)~~
~~Philippines (2021)~~
~~Sudan (2022)~~
~~Republic of Korea (2022)~~
~~Togo (2021~~Indonesia (2022) Montenegro (2024) Brazil (2022) Germany (2022) Eritrea (2024) Japan (2022) Poland (2022) Cuba (2023) Luxembourg (2024) Gabon (2023) Kazakhstan (2024) Russia (2023) Honudras (2024) Netherlands (2022) Gambia (2024) Malaysia (2024) Ukraine (2023) Mexico (2023) United Kingdom (2023) Libya (2022) Marshall Islands (2022) Paraguay (2024) United States (2024) Malawi (2023) Nepal (2023) Venezuala (2022) Mauritania (2022) Pakistan (2023) Namibia (2022) Qatar (2024) Senegal (2023) Republic of Korea (2022) Somalia (2024) United Arab Emirates (2024) Sudan (2022))
Uzbekistan (2023) Uzbekistan (2023)

Source: U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Notes: Dates represent year of term end and are based on the results of the October Dates represent year of term end and are based on the results of the October ~~2020~~2021 election. ~~election.~~

~~8 OHCHR’s mandate is to promote and protect human rights worldwide through international cooperation, and through~~
~~the coordination and streamlining of human rights efforts within the U.N. system. The Office is funded by a~~
~~combination of assessed contributions to the U.N. regular budget, and voluntary contributions from governments and~~
~~others. In mid-2018, then-National Security Adviser John Bolton stated that the United States would withhold U.S.~~
~~assessed funding to OHCHR. The Administration withheld $18.9 million in FY2018, $20.25 million in FY2019; and~~
~~$20.15 million in FY2020. There is no legislative authority for this withholding. For more information, see CRS In~~
~~Focus IF11457, United Nations Issues: U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, by Luisa Blanchfield~~
~~and Michael A. Weber.~~
~~9 The General Assembly voted to reinstate Libya in November 2011.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

3

~~link to page 20 link to page 10~~ ~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

A key concern for some critics has been the composition of Council membership, which A key concern for some critics has been the composition of Council membership, which
sometimes includes countries widely perceived as human rights abusers. Many view the lack of sometimes includes countries widely perceived as human rights abusers. Many view the lack of
competitiveness in Council elections as a key reason for this dynamic. In some elections, competitiveness in Council elections as a key reason for this dynamic. In some elections,
countries have run unopposed after regional groups nominated the exact number of countries countries have run unopposed after regional groups nominated the exact number of countries
required to fill Council vacancies. For instance, in the required to fill Council vacancies. For instance, in the ~~2020~~October 2021 election members from election members from ~~four of the~~all
five regional groups ran unopposed five regional groups ran unopposed ~~(in the Asia-Pacific regional group, five countries ran for four~~
~~seats).10 Many experts contend that such~~after regional groups nominated the exact number of countries required to fill Council vacancies. (This follows a similar pattern as previous elections; in 2020, just one regional group held a competitive election.)9 Such circumstances limit the number of choices and circumstances limit the number of choices and can serve to guarantee guarantee
the election of nominated members regardless of the election of nominated members regardless of ~~their human rights records. For example, in~~
~~2020 the Eastern European regional group nominated two countries (Russia and Ukraine) for two~~
~~seats, which led to the election of Russia, a country widely criticized for its human rights record.11~~
8 The General Assembly voted to reinstate Libya in November 2011. 9 The circumstances were similar in the 2019 election, when members from two regional groups ran unopposed. In 2018, all five regional groups were unopposed. Congressional Research Service 3 link to page 18 link to page 10 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues their human rights records.10 On the other hand, supporters contend that the Council’s election process is an improvement over On the other hand, supporters contend that the Council’s election process is an improvement over
that of the commission. They emphasize that that of the commission. They emphasize that some countries widely viewed as the most egregious countries widely viewed as the most egregious
violators of human rightshuman rights ~~abusers~~, such as Belarus, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Syria, were pressured not to run , such as Belarus, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Syria, were pressured not to run
or were defeated in Council elections because of the new membership criteria and process. Many or were defeated in Council elections because of the new membership criteria and process. Many
also highlight the General Assembly’s March 2011 decision to suspend Libya’s membership as an also highlight the General Assembly’s March 2011 decision to suspend Libya’s membership as an
example of improved membership mechanisms.example of improved membership mechanisms.1211
More broadly, some Council observers have expressed concern that the Council’s closed ballot More broadly, some Council observers have expressed concern that the Council’s closed ballot
elections in the General Assembly may make it easier for countries with questionable human elections in the General Assembly may make it easier for countries with questionable human
rights records to be elected to the Council. To address this issue, some experts and policymakersrights records to be elected to the Council. To address this issue, some experts and policymakers,
~~including the Trump Administration,~~ have proposed requiring open ballots in Council elections to have proposed requiring open ballots in Council elections to
hold countries publicly accountable for their votes.hold countries publicly accountable for their votes.1312 Some have also suggested lowering the two- Some have also suggested lowering the two-
thirds vote threshold to make it easier to remove a Council member.thirds vote threshold to make it easier to remove a Council member.1413
Meetings and Leadership
The Council is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, and meets for three or more sessions per The Council is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, and meets for three or more sessions per
year for a total of 10 or more weeks. It can hold special sessions on specific human rights year for a total of 10 or more weeks. It can hold special sessions on specific human rights
situations or issues at the request of any Council member with the support of one-third of the situations or issues at the request of any Council member with the support of one-third of the
Council membership. Since 2006, the Council has held Council membership. Since 2006, the Council has held 4348 regular sessions and regular sessions and 2833 special special
sessions. sessions. ~~Eight~~Nine of its special sessions have focused on Israel of its special sessions have focused on Israel and/or the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza Strip (referred to as “Occupied Palestinian Territory”)~~or the Occupied Territories~~. (See the . (See the
Appendix for a list of special sessions.) for a list of special sessions.)
The Council president presides over the election of four vice presidents representing regional The Council president presides over the election of four vice presidents representing regional
groups in the Council. The president and vice presidents form the Council bureau, which is groups in the Council. The president and vice presidents form the Council bureau, which is
responsible for all procedural and organizational matters related to the Council. Members elect a responsible for all procedural and organizational matters related to the Council. Members elect a
president from among bureau members for a one-year term.president from among bureau members for a one-year term. ~~The current president is Elisabeth~~
~~Tichy-Fisslberger of Austria.~~

~~10 The circumstances were similar in the 2019 election, when members from two regional groups ran unopposed. In~~
~~2018, all five regional groups were unopposed.~~
~~11 Other examples of countries elected to the Council in 2020~~ Universal Periodic Review All Council members and U.N. member states are required to undergo a Universal Periodic Review (UPR) that examines a member’s fulfillment of its human rights obligations and commitments.14 The review is an intergovernmental process that facilitates an interactive dialogue between the country under review and the UPR working group, which is composed of the 47 Council members and chaired by the Council president. Observer states and stakeholders, such as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), may also attend the meetings and present information. During the first review, the UPR working group makes initial recommendations, with subsequent reviews focusing on the implementation of previous recommendations. The full Council is 10 Examples of countries elected to the Council with what many view as poor human rights records with what many view as poor human rights records
~~include China and Cuba, among others. For additional information and commentary on the most recent Council~~
~~elections~~include China, Cameroon, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, among others. Most recently, see Dulcie Leimbach, “China and Russia Win Human Rights Council Seats, but the Saudis Get Rejected,” , see Dulcie Leimbach, “China and Russia Win Human Rights Council Seats, but the Saudis Get Rejected,”
PassBlue, October 13, 2020PassBlue, October 13, 2020~~; Aaron Rhodes, “Why the U.N. Is Making a Mockery of Human Rights,”~~ ~~Wall Street~~
~~Journal, October 18, 2020.~~
12, and “UN: Noncompetitive Rights Council Election Aids Abusers,” Human Rights Watch, October 12, 2021. 11 Libya’s membership was suspended on March 1, 2011; it was reinstated on November 1 of the same year. Libya’s membership was suspended on March 1, 2011; it was reinstated on November 1 of the same year.
1312 For more information, see the For more information, see the “U.S. Policy” section. section.
1413 “The U.N. Human Rights Council’s lousy election,” The Economist, December 18, 2018. 14 Such obligations might include human rights treaties ratified by the country concerned, voluntary pledges and commitments made by the country (e.g., national human rights policies or programs), and applicable international humanitarian law. Congressional Research Service 4 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues ~~“The U.N. Human Rights Council’s lousy election,” The Economist, December 18, 2018, at https://www. economist.~~
~~com/ international/ 2018/10/17/ the-un-human-rights- councils-lousy-election.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

4

~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~Universal Periodic Review~~
~~All Council members and U.N. member states are required to undergo a Universal Periodic~~
~~Review (UPR) that examines a member’s fulfillment of its human rights obligations and~~
~~commitments.15 The review is an intergovernmental process that facilitates an interactive dialogue~~
~~between the country under review and the UPR working group, which is composed of the 47~~
~~Council members and chaired by the Council president. Observer states and stakeholders, such as~~
~~nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), may also attend the meetings and present information.~~
~~During the first review, the UPR working group makes initial recommendations, with subsequent~~
~~reviews focusing on the implementation of previous recommendations. The full Council is~~
responsible for addressing any cases of consistent noncooperation with the review. The United responsible for addressing any cases of consistent noncooperation with the review. The United
States underwent its first UPR in November 2010 and its second in May 2015; during both States underwent its first UPR in November 2010 and its second in May 2015; during both
sessions, the United States presented its human rights record and countries both praised and sessions, the United States presented its human rights record and countries both praised and
criticized U.S. human rights activities.criticized U.S. human rights activities.1615 The most recent U.S. UPR was held on November 9, The most recent U.S. UPR was held on November 9,
2020.2020.17 The U.S. delegation, which included representatives from the Departments of State, The U.S. delegation, which included representatives from the Departments of State,
Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services, expressed support for the UPR process and Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services, expressed support for the UPR process and
presented a report outlining human rights situations in the United States.presented a report outlining human rights situations in the United States.1816 Many countries praised Many countries praised
the United States’ human rights record, while countries also raised concerns about several issues, the United States’ human rights record, while countries also raised concerns about several issues,
including U.S. nonratification of human rights agreements and incidents of police brutality and including U.S. nonratification of human rights agreements and incidents of police brutality and
racial injustice.racial injustice.1917
Perspectives on the effectiveness of the UPR are mixed. Overall, many governments, observers, Perspectives on the effectiveness of the UPR are mixed. Overall, many governments, observers,
and policymakers support the Council’s UPR process. They maintain that it provides an important and policymakers support the Council’s UPR process. They maintain that it provides an important
forum for governments, NGOs, and others to discuss and bring attention to human rights forum for governments, NGOs, and others to discuss and bring attention to human rights
situations in specific countries that may not otherwise receive international attention. Some situations in specific countries that may not otherwise receive international attention. Some
countries have countries have also reportedly made commitments based on the outcome of the UPR process.reportedly made commitments based on the outcome of the UPR process.20 18 Many Many
NGOs and human rights groups operating in various countries also reportedly use UPR NGOs and human rights groups operating in various countries also reportedly use UPR

~~15 Such obligations might include human rights treaties ratified by the country concerned, voluntary pledges and~~
~~commitments made by the country (e.g., national human rights policies or programs), and applicable international~~
~~humanitarian law.~~
~~16 During both review processes, a number of governments and NGOs asked questions and made statements on the~~
recommendations as a political and diplomatic tool for strengthening human rights. At the same time, some human rights experts have been critical of UPR. Many are concerned that the submissions and statements of governments perceived to be human rights abusers are taken at face value rather than being challenged by other governments. Some also contend that the process gives these same countries a platform to criticize countries that may have generally positive human rights records. Many experts have also expressed concern regarding some member states’ rejection of UPR recommendations and nonparticipation in the UPR process.19 15 During U.S. UPRs, a number of governments and NGOs spoke on the human rights situation in the United States. They also made recommendations to the U.S. delegation regarding specific human rights situation in the United States. They also made recommendations to the U.S. delegation regarding specific
aspects of the U.S. UPR reports and other related issues. In the United States’ initial response to the first review, then-aspects of the U.S. UPR reports and other related issues. In the United States’ initial response to the first review, then-
State Department Legal Adviser Harold Koh acknowledged that many of the recommendations “fit well” with the State Department Legal Adviser Harold Koh acknowledged that many of the recommendations “fit well” with the
Obama Administration’s policy and could be implemented “in due course.” He stated that other recommendations, Obama Administration’s policy and could be implemented “in due course.” He stated that other recommendations,
however, were purely political and could not be taken seriously. Still others warranted “fuller discussions” within the however, were purely political and could not be taken seriously. Still others warranted “fuller discussions” within the
U.S. government and among civil society. For the 2015 review, governments focused on the implementation of the U.S. government and among civil society. For the 2015 review, governments focused on the implementation of the
accepted recommendations and the development of accepted recommendations and the development of human rights situations in the United States. 16~~human rights situations in the United States. The final outcome of~~
~~the 2015 review was adopted by the Council at its 30th regular session in September and October of 2015. For more~~
~~information, see https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/USIndex.aspx.~~
~~17 The review was originally scheduled to undergo its review on May 11, 2020; however, the session was postponed~~
~~until November due to COVID-19.~~
18 Department of State, “The United States Presents its Universal Periodic Review National Report,” November 9, Department of State, “The United States Presents its Universal Periodic Review National Report,” November 9,
2020, and “Remarks at the United States’ Third Universal Periodic Review,” by Robert A. Destro, Bureau of 2020, and “Remarks at the United States’ Third Universal Periodic Review,” by Robert A. Destro, Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Assistant Secretary Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Assistant Secretary ~~and U.S. Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues,~~ November November
9, 2020. 9, 2020.
~~19 Other documents~~17 Documents related the review, including the U.S. national report, a preliminary list of questions, and reports related the review, including the U.S. national report, a preliminary list of questions, and reports
from stakeholders are available at “U.N. Human Rights Council - Universal Periodic Review - United States of from stakeholders are available at “U.N. Human Rights Council - Universal Periodic Review - United States of
America,” at America,” at https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/USindex.aspx. 18 For example, a 2014 study found that “48 percent of recommendations were either fully or partially implemented, while only half of the implementation period had already passed. In other words, almost 48 percent of [UPR] recommendations ‘triggered’ an action at mid-term, suggesting that the commitments made at the UPR are not simply lip-service to human rights, but that they do result in action on the ground.” (For further discussion, see “Beyond Promises: UPR Impact on the Ground,” UPR Info, April 2014.) 19 For example, North Korea’s rejection of the recommendations made by the UPR Working Group in 2009 alarmed many governments and human rights advocates. Some experts also disagreed with Israel’s 2012 decision to disengage from the Council and not participate in the 2013 UPR process. More recently, some observers have expressed concern regarding China’s efforts to influence its UPR and related events (see “UN: China Responds to Rights Review with Threats,” Human Rights Watch, April 1, 2019). Congressional Research Service 5 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues ~~https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/USindex.aspx..~~
~~20 Egypt, for example, stated that it would reform its criminal code to include a definition of torture. Jordan agreed to~~
~~undertake a comprehensive review of the conditions of its prison system. It is unclear whether these commitments have~~
~~been or will be met.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

5

~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~recommendations as a political and diplomatic tool for strengthening human rights. At the same~~
~~time, some human rights experts have been critical of UPR. Many are concerned that the~~
~~submissions and statements of governments perceived to be human rights abusers are taken at~~
~~face value rather than being challenged by other governments. Some also contend that the process~~
~~gives these same countries a platform to criticize countries that may have generally positive~~
~~human rights records. Many experts have also expressed concern regarding some member states’~~
~~rejection of UPR recommendations and nonparticipation in the UPR process.21~~
Special Procedures
The Council maintains a system of special procedures that are created and renewed by members. The Council maintains a system of special procedures that are created and renewed by members.
Country mandates allow for special rapporteurs to examine and advise on human rights situations Country mandates allow for special rapporteurs to examine and advise on human rights situations
in specific countries, including Cambodia, North Korea, and Sudan.in specific countries, including Cambodia, North Korea, and Sudan.2220 Under thematic mandates, Under thematic mandates,
special rapporteurs analyze major global human rights issues, such as arbitrary detention, the special rapporteurs analyze major global human rights issues, such as arbitrary detention, the
right to food, and the rights of persons with disabilities. The Council also maintains a complaint right to food, and the rights of persons with disabilities. The Council also maintains a complaint
procedure for individuals or groups to report human rights abuses in a confidential setting.procedure for individuals or groups to report human rights abuses in a confidential setting.23
Israel as a Permanent Agenda Item
Israel is the only country to Israel is the only country to ~~be included~~have its actions scrutinized as part of the Council’s permanent agenda. In June 2007, as part of the Council’s permanent agenda. In June 2007,
Council members adopted a resolution to address the Council’s working methods. In the Council members adopted a resolution to address the Council’s working methods. In the
resolution, Council members included the “human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied resolution, Council members included the “human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied
Arab territories” as a permanent part of the Council’s agenda.Arab territories” as a permanent part of the Council’s agenda.2421 At the time the agenda item was At the time the agenda item was
adopted, many U.N. member states and Council observers, including the United States, strongly adopted, many U.N. member states and Council observers, including the United States, strongly
objected to the Council focusing objected to the Council focusing ~~primarily~~so closely on human rights violations by Israel. on human rights violations by Israel.25 22 A U.N. A U.N.
spokesperson subsequently noted then-U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s “disappointment” spokesperson subsequently noted then-U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s “disappointment”
with the Council’s decision to “single out only one specific regional item, given the range and with the Council’s decision to “single out only one specific regional item, given the range and
scope of allegations of human rights violations throughout the world.”scope of allegations of human rights violations throughout the world.”2623 Over the years, the Over the years, the
United States and other like-minded Council members have made unsuccessful efforts to reverse United States and other like-minded Council members have made unsuccessful efforts to reverse
the Council’s decision, particularly during the Council’s five-year review in 2011.the Council’s decision, particularly during the Council’s five-year review in 2011.~~27 The Trump~~

~~21 For example, North Korea’s rejection of the recommendations made by the UPR Working Group in 2009 alarmed~~
~~many governments and human rights advocates. Some experts also disagreed with Israel’s 2012 decision to disengage~~
~~from the Council and not participate in the 2013 UPR process. More recently, some observers have expressed concern~~
~~regarding China’s efforts to influence its UPR and related events (see “UN: China Responds to Rights Review with~~
~~Threats,” Human Rights Watch, April 1, 2019).~~
~~22 There are over 40 thematic mandates and 12~~24 Budget The Human Rights Council is funded primarily through the U.N. regular budget, of which the United States is assessed 22%. Approved Council funding for the 2021 regular budget calendar year was $22.31 million, which was similar to the 2020 funding level of $22.22 million. The Council also receives extrabudgetary (voluntary) funding to help cover the costs of some of its activities, including staff postings and Council trust funds and mechanisms. For 2021, such 20 There are over 40 thematic mandates and 13 country mandates. A list of each is available at http://www.ohchr.org/ country mandates. A list of each is available at http://www.ohchr.org/
EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Welcomepage.aspx. EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Welcomepage.aspx.
~~23 More information on the complaint procedure is available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/~~
~~ComplaintProcedure/Pages/HRCComplaintProcedureIndex.aspx.~~
2421 See Item 7 under “C. Framework for the programme of work,” in Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, June 18. See Item 7 under “C. Framework for the programme of work,” in Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, June 18.
2007. Also listed under Item 7 are “Human rights violations and implications of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and 2007. Also listed under Item 7 are “Human rights violations and implications of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and
other occupied Arab territories,” and “Right to self-determination of the Palestinian people.” The Institution building other occupied Arab territories,” and “Right to self-determination of the Palestinian people.” The Institution building
resolution was subsequently adopted by the U.N. General Assembly. Examples of other permanent agenda items resolution was subsequently adopted by the U.N. General Assembly. Examples of other permanent agenda items
include Organizational and Procedural Matters (Item 1); Human Rights Situations that Require the Council’s Attention include Organizational and Procedural Matters (Item 1); Human Rights Situations that Require the Council’s Attention
(Item 4); Universal Periodic Review (Item 6); and Technical Assistance and Capacity Building (Item 10). (Item 4); Universal Periodic Review (Item 6); and Technical Assistance and Capacity Building (Item 10).
2522 For a summary of U.N. member state views at the time, see U.N. press release, “Human Rights Council Hears Praise For a summary of U.N. member state views at the time, see U.N. press release, “Human Rights Council Hears Praise
and Criticism About Adopted Text on Institution Building of Council,” June 19, 2007. and Criticism About Adopted Text on Institution Building of Council,” June 19, 2007.
26 23 Daily Press Briefing by the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General, June 21, 2007. Daily Press Briefing by the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General, June 21, 2007.
2724 In June 2011, the General Assembly adopted resolution 65/281, which was the result of a review on the work and In June 2011, the General Assembly adopted resolution 65/281, which was the result of a review on the work and
functioning of the Council after five years, by a vote of 154 in favor, 4 against (including the United States). The functioning of the Council after five years, by a vote of 154 in favor, 4 against (including the United States). The
~~Congressional Research Service~~

6

~~link to page 10 link to page 10~~ ~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~Administration has cited Israel’s removal from the Council’s permanent agenda as a condition for~~
~~the United States rejoining the Council.28~~
~~Budget~~
~~The Human Rights Council is funded primarily through the U.N. regular budget, of which the~~
~~United States is assessed 22%. Approved Council funding for the 2020 regular budget calendar~~
~~year is $22.22 million, which was similar to the 2019 funding level of $21.7 million. For 2021,~~
~~the estimated budget is $22.31 million. The Council also receives extrabudgetary (voluntary)~~
~~funding to help cover the costs of some of its activities, including staff postings and Council trust~~
~~funds and mechanisms. For 2020, such contributions are estimated at $14.27 million, compared~~
~~with $13.5 million in 2019. Estimated voluntary contributions in 2021 are $14.52 million.29 The~~
~~United States is currently withholding a proportionate share (22%) of Council funding. (For more~~
~~information~~resolution included procedural changes to the Council’s work, such as moving the start of its yearly membership cycle, creating an office of the Council President, modifying UPR speaking procedures, and establishing future review mechanisms. The outcome of the five-year review was criticized by the United States and others for not sufficiently addressing the Council’s lack of effectiveness. The United States stated that the review did not yield “even minimally positive results,” which forced it to “disassociate” itself from the outcome. U.S. representatives expressed concern about (1) the Council’s focus on Israel, particularly the continued inclusion of a permanent item on the Council’s agenda, and (2) the Council’s inability to address the “critical problem” of Council membership. Congressional Research Service 6 link to page 10 link to page 11 link to page 11 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues contributions was estimated at $14.52 million, similar to the 2020 level of $14.27 million.25 (For more information on U.S. funding to the Council, see the , see the “U.S. Policy” section below.) section below.)
U.S. Policy
Most U.S. policymakers have generally supported the Council’s overall purpose and mandate; Most U.S. policymakers have generally supported the Council’s overall purpose and mandate;
however, many have also expressed concern regarding its effectiveness in addressing human however, many have also expressed concern regarding its effectiveness in addressing human
rights issues—leading to ongoing disagreements as to whether or not the United States should be rights issues—leading to ongoing disagreements as to whether or not the United States should be
a member of or provide funding for the Council. For examplea member of or provide funding for the Council. For example~~, under~~ :  Under President George W. BushPresident George W. Bush, ,
the United States voted against the Assembly the United States voted against the Assembly resolution creating the Council and did not run for a resolution creating the Council and did not run for a
seat, arguing that the Council lacked mechanisms for maintaining credible membership. (The seat, arguing that the Council lacked mechanisms for maintaining credible membership. (The
~~George W. Bush~~ Administration also withheld Council funding in FY2008 under a provision Administration also withheld Council funding in FY2008 under a provision
enacted by Congress in 2007.)enacted by Congress in 2007.) ~~On the other hand, the Obama Administration~~  Conversely, President Obama supported U.S. supported U.S.
membership and Council funding, membership and Council funding, maintaining that it was better to work from within to improve maintaining that it was better to work from within to improve
the body; the United States was elected as a Council member in 2009, 2012, and 2016.the body; the United States was elected as a Council member in 2009, 2012, and 2016.3026 Under Under
President Obama, the United States consistently opposed the Council actions related to Israel and President Obama, the United States consistently opposed the Council actions related to Israel and
sought to adopt specific reforms during the Council’s five-year review in 2011.sought to adopt specific reforms during the Council’s five-year review in 2011.31

~~resolution included procedural changes to the Council’s work, such as moving the start of its yearly membership cycle,~~
~~creating an office of the Council President, modifying UPR speaking procedures, and establishing future review~~
~~mechanisms. The outcome of the five-year review was criticized by the United States and others for not sufficiently~~
~~addressing the Council’s lack of effectiveness. The United States stated that the review did not yield “even minimally~~
~~positive results,” which forced it to “disassociate” itself from the outcome. U.S. representatives expressed concern~~
~~about (1) the Council’s focus on Israel, particularly the continued inclusion of a permanent item on the Council’s~~
~~agenda, and (2) the Council’s inability to address the “critical problem” of Council membership.~~
~~28 For more information, see the “U.S. Policy” section.~~
2927  In 2018, President Trump withdrew the United States from Council membership, citing concerns about the Council’s impact on U.S. sovereignty and its disproportionate focus on Israel. The Trump Administration also withheld funding from the Council as authorized by annual appropriations laws.  Under President Biden, the United States resumed Council funding and was elected to a Council seat in 2021 (see the “Biden Administration Policy” section for more information). Congressional perspectives on the issue have been mixed, with some Members advocating continued U.S. participation and others opposing it. A key concern among many Members of Congress is the Council’s focus on Israel. During the past several fiscal years, Congress has enacted a provision in annual State-Foreign Operations and Related Programs (SFOPS) legislation that prohibits Council funding unless the Secretary of State determines that U.S. participation is important to the national interest of the United States and that the Council is taking steps to remove Israel as a permanent agenda item. (For more information, see the “Congressional Actions” section.) 25 A detailed explanation of the Human Rights Council budget can be found in Part VI, Section 24 of the proposed A detailed explanation of the Human Rights Council budget can be found in Part VI, Section 24 of the proposed
program budget for 2021 (U.N. document, A/75/6 program budget for 2021 (U.N. document, A/75/6 ([§24§24)] under component subprogram (4) Support for the Human under component subprogram (4) Support for the Human
Rights Council, its subsidiary bodies and mechanismsRights Council, its subsidiary bodies and mechanisms.). ).
3026 The United States did not run for election in 2014 due to term limits. The United States did not run for election in 2014 due to term limits.
3127 In June 2011, the General Assembly adopted resolution 65/281, which was the result of a review on the work and In June 2011, the General Assembly adopted resolution 65/281, which was the result of a review on the work and
functioning of the Council after five years, by a vote of 154 in favor, 4 against (including the United States). The functioning of the Council after five years, by a vote of 154 in favor, 4 against (including the United States). The
resolution included procedural changes to the Council’s work, such as moving the start of its yearly membership cycle, resolution included procedural changes to the Council’s work, such as moving the start of its yearly membership cycle,
creating an office of the Council President, modifying UPR speaking procedures, and establishing future review creating an office of the Council President, modifying UPR speaking procedures, and establishing future review
mechanisms. The outcome of the five-year review was criticized by the United States and others for not sufficiently mechanisms. The outcome of the five-year review was criticized by the United States and others for not sufficiently
addressing the Council’s lack of effectiveness. The United States stated that the review did not yield “even minimally addressing the Council’s lack of effectiveness. The United States stated that the review did not yield “even minimally
positive results,” which forced it to “disassociate” itself from the outcome. U.S. representatives expressed concern positive results,” which forced it to “disassociate” itself from the outcome. U.S. representatives expressed concern
about (1) the Council’s focus on Israel, particularly the continued inclusion of a permanent item on the Council’s about (1) the Council’s focus on Israel, particularly the continued inclusion of a permanent item on the Council’s
agenda, and (2) the Council’s inability to address the “critical problem” of Council membership. agenda, and (2) the Council’s inability to address the “critical problem” of Council membership.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

7 7

~~link to page 13~~ The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

~~Congressional perspectives on the issue have been mixed, with some Members advocating~~
~~continued U.S. participation and others opposing it. A key concern among many Members of~~
~~Congress is the Council’s focus on Israel. During the past several fiscal years, Congress has~~
~~enacted a provision in annual State-Foreign Operations and Related Programs (SFOPS)~~
~~legislation that prohibits Council funding unless the Secretary of State determines that U.S.~~
~~participation is important to the national interest of the~~Biden Administration Policy The Biden Administration announced in February 2021 that the United States would reengage with the Human Rights Council as an observer and run for a seat in the 2021 election. The United United States was elected to a Council seat on October 14, 2021, and began its three-year term on January 1, 2022. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has acknowledged that the Council is a “flawed body in need of reform,” while arguing that it is better to work from within to encourage meaningful change.28 He has stated that the United States would work to address the Council’s flaws, including its “disproportionate attention on Israel and the membership of several states with egregious human rights records.”29 The Biden Administration fully funded the Council in FY2021, and its FY2022 budget request includes funds to pay U.S. arrears to the Council that accumulated from FY2018 to FY2020.30 Congress has yet to enact final FY2022 appropriations. The United States will participate as a full Council member at the Council’s 49th regular session, which will be held from February 22 to April 1, 2022. Prior to its election, the United States during the Biden Administration was a Council observer, working to advance country-specific and thematic actions to promote human rights for women and girls, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) persons, indigenous persons, members of ethnic and religious minority groups, older persons, and other vulnerable and marginalized groups.31 ~~States and that the Council is~~
~~taking steps to remove Israel as a permanent agenda item.~~
~~Trump Administration Actions~~
~~On June 18, 2018, then-U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Nikki Haley and~~
~~Secretary of State Michael Pompeo announced that the United States would withdraw from the~~
~~Human Rights Council, citing concerns about U.S. sovereignty and the Council’s~~
~~disproportionate focus on Israel.32 In a September 2018 speech to the U.N. General Assembly, the~~
~~President further stated that the United States “will not return [to the Council] until real reform is~~
~~enacted.”33 Although Administration officials stated that the United States would fully withdraw~~
~~from the Council, the United States has continued to participate in some Council activities,~~
~~including the UPR process.34 Administration officials have also commented on Council elections~~
~~and expressed support for continued reform of the organization.35 Since FY2017, the Trump~~
~~Administration has withheld Council funding under aforementioned legislation enacted by~~
~~Congress, most recently withholding $7.85 million for FY2020.36 The Administration also~~
~~continued to criticize the Council after withdrawing, focusing its comments on the composition of~~
~~membership, noting that it includes counties with “abhorrent” human rights records such as~~
~~China, Russia, Cuba, and Venezuela.37~~
~~Prior to withdrawing from the Council, the Trump Administration had expressed strong~~
~~reservations regarding U.S. membership.38 It was particularly concerned with the Council’s focus~~
~~on Israel and lack of attention to other human rights abuses. Ambassador Haley called the Council~~
~~“corrupt” and noted that “bad actors” are among its members; at the same time, she also stated~~
~~that the United States wanted to find “value and success” in the body.39 In June 2017, Haley~~
~~announced that if the Council failed to change, then the United States “must pursue the~~

~~32 Department of State, “Remarks on the U.N. Human Rights Council,” June 19, 2018.~~
~~33 “Remarks by President Trump to the 73rd Session of the U.N. General Assembly,” White House, September 25,~~
~~2018.~~
~~34 A collection of U.S. statements at UPRs for countries such as China, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kuwait,~~
~~and Saudi Arabia, among others, is available at https://geneva.usmission.gov/human-rights/.~~
~~35 See, for example, “Remarks by the United States on the Report of the Human Rights Council,” John Giordano,~~
~~Public Delegate, U.S. Mission to the United Nations (USUN), November 1, 2019, and “Statement by U.S.~~
~~Representative to the United Nations Ambassador Kelly Craft” (on the 2019 Human Rights Council Elections), USUN,~~
~~October 17, 2019. Also see, then-Ambassador Nikki Haley, “Statement on the 2018 Human Rights Council Elections,”~~
~~USUN, October 12, 2018, and Courtney Nemroff, “Explanation of Vote on a Third Committee Resolution on the~~
~~Report of the Human Rights Council,” November 13, 2018.~~
~~36 The United States also withheld $7.53 million in FY2019 and $7.67 million in FY2018. For more information on~~
~~these withholdings, see the “Selected Policy Issues” section.~~
~~37 Statements by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Department of State, “On the UN Human Rights Council’s Embrace~~
~~of Authoritarian Regimes,” October 13, 2020, and “On the Hypocrisy of UN Human Rights Council,” June 20, 2020.~~
~~38 Colum Lynch, John Hudson, “Tillerson to U.N. Rights Council: Reform or We’re Leaving,” Foreign Policy, March~~
~~14, 2017.~~
~~39 Council on Foreign Relations, “A Conversation with Nikki Haley,” March 29, 2017.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

8

~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~advancement of human rights outside of the Council.”40 Haley outlined two key U.S. reform~~
~~priorities: (1) changing the voting process in the General Assembly from a closed to open ballot~~
~~so that countries can be held publicly accountable for their votes and (2) removing Israel as a~~
~~permanent agenda item.~~
~~Conversely, presumptive President-elect Biden has stated that his Administration will rejoin the~~
~~Human Rights Council and “and work to ensure that body truly lives up to its values.”41 He has~~
~~not indicated whether the United States would resume U.S. funding to the Council. If the United~~
~~States were to seek to rejoin the Council, the United States would be eligible to run in the next~~
~~election held in late 2021.42~~
Congressional Actions
Congress maintains an ongoing interest in the credibility and effectiveness of the Council in the Congress maintains an ongoing interest in the credibility and effectiveness of the Council in the
context of human rights promotion, U.N. reform, and concerns about the Council’s focus on context of human rights promotion, U.N. reform, and concerns about the Council’s focus on
Israel. Over the years, some Members have proposed or enacted legislation expressing support for Israel. Over the years, some Members have proposed or enacted legislation expressing support for
or opposition to the Council, prohibiting U.S. Council funding, or supporting Council actions or opposition to the Council, prohibiting U.S. Council funding, or supporting Council actions
related to specific human rights situations. Most recently, related to specific human rights situations. Most recently, ~~Members of the 116th Congress enacted~~
~~a provision in the Further~~ Section 7048(c) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, Consolidated Appropriations Act, ~~2020~~2021 (P.L. 116- (P.L. 116-~~94), which~~ 260), requires requires
~~that none of the~~that no funds appropriated by the act be made available for the Council unless the funds appropriated by the act be made available for the Council unless the
Secretary of State determines and reports to the committees on appropriations that participation in Secretary of State determines and reports to the committees on appropriations that participation in
the Council is in the national interest of the United States, and that the Council is taking the Council is in the national interest of the United States, and that the Council is taking
significant steps to remove Israel as a permanent agenda item and ensure integrity in the election significant steps to remove Israel as a permanent agenda item and ensure integrity in the election
of Council members. (Similar language was included in previous fiscal years’ appropriations of Council members. (Similar language was included in previous fiscal years’ appropriations
laws.)laws.)43 In addition, Congress has enacted In addition, Congress has enacted some Council-related provisions in the context of country-Council-related provisions in the context of country-
specific human rights situations.specific human rights situations.44
~~In previous Congresses, proposed stand-alone bills have called for U.S. withdrawal from the~~
~~Council or required that the United States withhold assessed contributions to the Council through~~
~~the U.N. regular budget and any voluntary contributions.45 Specifically, some Members of the~~
~~115th Congress introduced legislation expressing concern with the Council’s focus on Israel,~~

~~40 Remarks by Ambassador Nikki Haley at the Graduate Institute of Geneva on “A Place for Conscience: the Future of~~
~~the United States in the Human Rights Council” June 6, 2017.~~
~~41 “Statement from Vice President Joe Biden on Human Rights Day,” December 10, 2019, at~~
~~https://medium.com/@JoeBiden/statement-from-vice-president-joe-biden-on-human-rights-day-e742d20231fd.~~
~~42 For more information on Council observer status, see the “Selected Policy Issues” section.~~
~~43 The act states that the report shall include a description of the national interest served and the steps taken to remove~~
~~Israel as a permanent agenda item and ensure integrity in the election of members to such Council. See also Section~~
~~7048(a) of Division F, the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2019,~~
~~of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2019 (P.L. 116-6), February 15, 2019.~~
4432 Selected Policy Issues Congressional debate regarding the Human Rights Council has generally focused on a recurring set of policy issues. 28 Department of State, “U.S. Decision To Reengage with the UN Human Rights Council,” February 8, 2021. 29 Department of State, “Election of the United States to the UN Human Rights Council,” October 14, 2021. 30 The budget also includes a request to pay arrears to OHCHR, as well as an additional $3 million for five new overseas Foreign Service positions to support the State Department’s reassertion of U.S. engagement on human rights issues. (Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix I, Department of State, FY2022, p. 133.) 31 See, for example, “Key Outcomes at the 48th Session of the UN Human Rights Council,” Fact Sheet, Department of State Office of the Spokesperson, October 12, 2021. 32 For instance, Division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 116-6), states that funds may be made For instance, Division F of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 116-6), states that funds may be made
available to the Sri Lankan government only if the Secretary of State certifies to Congress that the Sri Lankan available to the Sri Lankan government only if the Secretary of State certifies to Congress that the Sri Lankan
government is, among other things, supporting a credible justice mechanism in compliance with Human Rights Council government is, among other things, supporting a credible justice mechanism in compliance with Human Rights Council
resolution 30/1 (October 2015). resolution 30/1 (October 2015).
~~45 See, for example, H.R. 3667 [114th], the United Nations Transparency, Accountability, and Reform Act; and S. 1313~~
~~(also H.R. 3155) [113th], the United Nations Transparency, Accountability and Reform Act of 2013. The bills were~~
~~referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, respectively, but the~~
~~committees did not act on these bills.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

9

~~link to page 17~~ ~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~seeking to defund or withdraw from the Council, and calling on the Council to take action on~~
~~specific human rights situations.46~~
~~Selected Policy Issues~~
~~Congressional debate regarding the Human Rights Council has generally focused on a recurring~~
~~set of policy issues.~~
~~U.S. Membership~~
~~In general, U.S. policymakers are divided as to~~
~~whether the United States should serve as a~~
~~Council Observer Status~~
~~member of the Council. Supporters of U.S.~~
~~When considering U.S. membership,~~
~~participation contend that the United States~~
~~Members of Congress may take into account~~
~~should work from within the Council to build~~
~~the role of Council observer, a status that the~~
~~coalitions with like-minded countries and steer~~
~~United States could hold as a non-Council~~
~~the Council toward a more balanced approach to~~
~~member. Observer states are not eligible to~~
~~vote in the Council, but they may participate~~
~~addressing human rights situations. Council~~
~~in the UPR process and attend and participate~~
~~membership, they argue, places the United~~
~~in regular and special sessions of the Council.~~
~~States in a position to advocate for its human~~
~~The ability of the United States to promote~~
~~rights policies and priorities. Supporters also~~
~~its human rights agenda within the U.N.~~
~~framework may be significantly affected by~~
~~maintain that U.S. leadership in the Council has~~
~~changing to an observer status. Many Council~~
~~led to several promising Council developments,~~
~~members might be interested in U.S.~~
~~including increased attention to human rights~~
~~statements and policies, but the United~~
~~situations in countries such as Iran, Mali, North~~
~~States’ inability to vote may diminish its~~
~~Korea, and Sudan, among others. Some have~~
~~influence on the work of the Council.~~
~~also noted that the number of special sessions~~
~~addressing Israel has decreased during periods when the United States was on the Council. In~~
~~addition, some supporters are concerned that U.S. withdrawal might lead to a possible leadership~~
~~gap and countries such as China and Russia could gain increased influence in the Council.47~~
~~Opponents contend that U.S. membership provides the Council with undeserved legitimacy. The~~
~~United States, they suggest, should not be a part of a body that focuses disproportionately on one~~
~~country (Israel) while ignoring countries that are widely believed to violate human rights.48~~
~~Critics further maintain that the United States should not serve on a body that would allow human~~
~~rights abusers to serve as members. Many also suggest that U.S. membership on the Council~~

~~46 See for instance, S. 169 [115th], Countering Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israel Activities at the United Nations Act of~~
~~2017, introduced on January 1, 2017; H.R. 2232 [115th], Promoting Equality and Accountability at the United Nations~~
~~Act of 2017, introduced on April 28, 2017; H.Res. 728 [115th] Reaffirming United States support for Israel and~~
~~condemning the United Nations Human Rights Council for certain wasteful and abusive actions, introduced on~~
~~February 7, 2018; and S.Res. 360 [115th], A resolution calling for international accountability for the crimes~~
~~against humanity committed by the Burmese military against the Rohingya, introduced on December 13, 2017.~~
~~47 See the “Rising Influence of Other U.N. Member States” section for information on this issue.~~
48Congressional Research Service 8 link to page 14 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues U.S. Membership In general, U.S. policymakers are divided as to whether the United States should serve as a member of the Council. Supporters of U.S. participation contend that the United States should work from within the Council to build coalitions with like-minded countries and steer the Council toward a more balanced approach to addressing human rights situations. Council membership, they argue, places the United States in a position to advocate for its human rights policies and priorities. Supporters also maintain that U.S. leadership in the Council has led to several promising Council developments, including increased attention to human rights situations in countries such as Iran, Mali, North Korea, and Sudan, among others. Some have also noted that the number of special sessions addressing Israel has decreased during periods when the United Council Observer Status States was on the Council. In addition, some supporters are concerned that U.S. withdrawal When considering U.S. membership, Members of Congress may take into account might lead to a possible leadership gap and the role of Council observer, a status that the countries such as China and Russia could gain United States could hold as a non-Council increased influence in the Council.33 member. Observer states are not eligible to vote in the Council, but they may participate Opponents contend that U.S. membership in the UPR process and attend and participate provides the Council with undeserved in regular and special sessions of the Council. legitimacy. The United States, they suggest, The ability of the United States to promote its human rights agenda within the U.N. should not be a part of a body that focuses framework may be significantly affected by disproportionately on one country (Israel) while changing to an observer status. Many Council ignoring countries that are widely believed to members might be interested in U.S. violate human rights.34 Critics further maintain statements and policies, but the United that the United States should not serve on a States’ inability to vote may diminish its influence on the work of the Council. body that would allow human rights abusers to serve as members. Many also suggest that U.S. membership on the Council provides countries with a forum to criticize the United States, particularly during the UPR process.35 U.S. Funding Over the years, policymakers have debated to what extent, if any, the United States should fund the Council. Some Members have supported fully funding the Council, while others have proposed that the United States withhold a proportionate share of its assessed contributions (22%) from the U.N. regular budget, which is used to fund the Council. Most recently, FY2017 through FY2021 State-Foreign Operations acts have placed conditions on U.S. funding to the Council, and the Trump Administration subsequently withheld about $7.5 million from U.S. contributions to the U.N. regular budget from FY2018 through FY2020. The Biden Administration’s FY2022 33 See the “Rising Influence of Other U.N. Member States” section for information on this issue. 34 See, for instance, Brett Schaefer, Heritage Foundation, “The U.N. Human Rights Council Does Not Merit U.S. See, for instance, Brett Schaefer, Heritage Foundation, “The U.N. Human Rights Council Does Not Merit U.S.
Membership,” March 12, 2017; Michael Oren, “Why the United States Should Withdraw from the U.N. Human Rights Membership,” March 12, 2017; Michael Oren, “Why the United States Should Withdraw from the U.N. Human Rights
Council,” Council,” Newsweek, March 10, 2017; Ambassador Nikki Haley, “Why We’re Leaving the So-Called Human Rights , March 10, 2017; Ambassador Nikki Haley, “Why We’re Leaving the So-Called Human Rights
Council,” Council,” Wall Street Journal, June 19, 2018. June 19, 2018.
~~Congressional Research Service~~

10

~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~provides countries with a forum to criticize the United States, particularly during the UPR~~
~~process.49~~
~~U.S. Funding~~
~~Over the years, policymakers have debated to what extent, if any, the United States should fund~~
~~the Council. Some Members have supported fully funding the Council, while others have~~
~~proposed that the United States withhold a proportionate share of its assessed contributions (22%)~~
~~from the U.N. regular budget, which is used to fund the Council.50 Most recently, FY2017~~
~~through FY2020 State-Foreign Operations acts have placed conditions on U.S. funding to the~~
~~Council, and the Trump Administration subsequently withheld about $7.5 million from U.S.~~
~~contributions to the U.N. regular budget from FY2017 through FY2020.~~ 35 Some were particularly concerned with the Obama Administration’s mention of Arizona immigration law S.B. 1070 in the United States UPR report. See, for instance, Brett D. Schaefer, “U.S. Targeted by Human Rights Abusers at Its Universal Periodic Review,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3050, November 5, 2010. Congressional Research Service 9 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues budget request includes funding to pay U.S. arrears to the Council that accumulated from FY2018 to FY2020.36 Legislating to withhold Legislating to withhold
Council funds in this manner is a largely symbolic policy action because assessed contributions Council funds in this manner is a largely symbolic policy action because assessed contributions
finance the entire U.N. regular budget and not specific parts of it. The United States had finance the entire U.N. regular budget and not specific parts of it. The United States had
previously withheld funding from the Council in 2008, when the George W. Bush Administration previously withheld funding from the Council in 2008, when the George W. Bush Administration
withheld a proportionate share of U.S. Council funding from the regular budget under a law that withheld a proportionate share of U.S. Council funding from the regular budget under a law that
required the Secretary of State to certify to Congress that funding the Council was in the best required the Secretary of State to certify to Congress that funding the Council was in the best
national interest of the United States.national interest of the United States.5137
Alternatives to the Council
Some observers and policymakers have argued that the United States can pursue its human rights Some observers and policymakers have argued that the United States can pursue its human rights
objectives in multilateral fora other than the Human Rights Council.objectives in multilateral fora other than the Human Rights Council.52 Specifically, Specifically, ~~they suggest~~
some have suggested that the United States focus on the activities of the General Assembly’s Third Committee, which that the United States focus on the activities of the General Assembly’s Third Committee, which
addresses social, humanitarian, and cultural issues, including human rights.addresses social, humanitarian, and cultural issues, including human rights.53 38 Others recommend Others recommend
that the United States increase its support for that the United States increase its support for ~~the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for~~
~~Human Rights~~OHCHR, as well as the Council’s independent experts who address country-specific and , as well as the Council’s independent experts who address country-specific and
functional human rights issues. Other U.S. policymakers have proposed addressing human rights functional human rights issues. Other U.S. policymakers have proposed addressing human rights
in the U.N. Security Council, which has sometimes engaged on issues that involve grave in the U.N. Security Council, which has sometimes engaged on issues that involve grave
violations of human rights, violations of human rights, particularly in conflict areas.39 Supporters of the Council argue that some proposed alternatives do not carry the same level of influence or attention on human rights as the Human Rights Council, particularly since bodies such as the General Assembly and Security Council do not focus exclusively on human rights issues. Opponents of U.S. withdrawal have also pointed to the Council’s track record of marshaling country-specific investigations and commissions of inquiry, and contend that unlike the proposed alternatives, the Council includes unique mechanisms to address human rights issues, such the complaint procedure and UPR process.40 36 The withholdings included $7.85 million in FY2020, $7.53 million in FY2019, and $7.67 in FY2018. The Administration also withheld funding from OHCHR during the same time period. 37~~particularly in conflict areas. In April 2017, then-U.S. Permanent~~
~~Representative Haley held the Security Council’s first ever thematic debate on human rights~~
~~issues, where she stated the following:~~

~~49 Some were particularly concerned with the Obama Administration’s mention of Arizona immigration law S.B. 1070~~
~~in the United States UPR report. See, for instance, Brett D. Schaefer, “U.S. Targeted by Human Rights Abusers at Its~~
~~Universal Periodic Review,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3050, November 5, 2010.~~
~~50 U.S. assessed contributions to the U.N. regular budget are funded by annual State/Foreign Operations appropriations~~
~~bills through the Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) account. For FY2018, the U.S. contribution to the~~
~~U.N. regular budget is estimated at $610 million. For more information on U.N. funding, see CRS Report R45206,~~ ~~U.S.~~
~~Funding to the United Nations System: Overview and Selected Policy Issues, by Luisa Blanchfield.~~
51 Similar to current provisions, in FY2008 and FY2009 foreign operations appropriations bills, Congress specified that Similar to current provisions, in FY2008 and FY2009 foreign operations appropriations bills, Congress specified that
none of the funds appropriated in either bill would be made available for U.S. contributions to the Council unless (1) none of the funds appropriated in either bill would be made available for U.S. contributions to the Council unless (1)
the Secretary of State certified to the appropriations committees that funding the Council was “in the national interest the Secretary of State certified to the appropriations committees that funding the Council was “in the national interest
of the United States” or (2) the United States was a member of the Council. The Bush Administration did not provide of the United States” or (2) the United States was a member of the Council. The Bush Administration did not provide
certification in FY2008 and the United States withheld Council funding. certification in FY2008 and the United States withheld Council funding.
~~52 See, for instance, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, “Money talks for UN reforms to happen,” Miami Herald, March 21,~~
~~2011; and Brett Schafer, “The U.S. Should Pursue an Alternative to the U.N. Human Rights Council,” June 23, 2011.~~
~~53 The~~38 During the Trump Administration, the State Department State Department ~~reports that in October 2018~~ reported that it began to “engage with the United Nations General Assembly’s it began to “engage with the United Nations General Assembly’s
Third Committee to address serious human rights violations, abuses, and crises around the world.”Third Committee to address serious human rights violations, abuses, and crises around the world.” (“U.S. Engagement (“U.S. Engagement
in the U.N. General Assembly Third Committee, Fact Sheet,” Department of State, December 7, in the U.N. General Assembly Third Committee, Fact Sheet,” Department of State, December 7, 2018.) 39 For example, in April 2017, then-U.S. Permanent Representative Nikki Haley held the Security Council’s first ever thematic debate on human rights issues, where she stated: “The traditional view has been that the Security Council is for maintaining ~~2018.)~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

11

~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~The traditional view has been that the Security Council is for maintaining~~ international international
peace and security, not for human rights. I am here today asserting that the protection of peace and security, not for human rights. I am here today asserting that the protection of
humanhuman ~~rights is often deeply intertwined with peace and security. The two things~~ rights is often deeply intertwined with peace and security. The two things often often
cannot be separated.cannot be separated.54
~~In January 2018, the Security Council met for an emergency session focused on the deaths and~~
~~detainment of protestors in Iran in the context of widespread demonstrations there. The United~~
~~States used the occasion to approach the issue from a human rights perspective, while~~
~~representatives of some other countries on the Security Council questioned whether the meeting~~
~~fell within the scope of the Security Council’s mandate.55 In the context of the Trump~~
~~Administration’s decision to withdraw from the Council, the State Department pointed also to~~
~~continued U.S. engagement on human rights in non-U.N. fora, including regional membership~~
~~bodies such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and Organization of~~
~~American States, and other multilateral institutions such as the Community of Democracies.56 In~~
~~an October 2020 statement criticizing the Council, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo reiterated~~
~~a desire to promote human rights through other venues and pointed to a September 2020 United~~
~~States-hosted U.N. General Assembly side event focused on the Universal Declaration of Human~~
~~Rights.57~~
~~Critics of the withdrawal argue that some proposed alternatives do not carry the same level of~~
~~influence or attention on human rights as the Human Rights Council, particularly since bodies~~
~~such as the General Assembly and Security Council do not focus exclusively on human rights~~
~~issues. Opponents of U.S. withdrawal have also pointed to the Council’s track record of~~
~~marshaling country-specific investigations and commissions of inquiry, and contend that unlike~~
~~the proposed alternatives, the Council includes unique mechanisms to address human rights~~
~~issues, such the complaint procedure and UPR process.58~~
” 40 See, for instance, Kenneth Roth, “Nikki Haley Should Help Fix the U.N. Human Rights Council, Not Abandon It,” Foreign Policy, June 5, 2017; and Testimony of Ted Piccone, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy, Assessing the United Nations Human Rights Council, 115th Cong., 1st session, May 25, 2017. Congressional Research Service 10 link to page 5 link to page 5 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues Focus on Israel
The Council’s ongoing focus on Israel has continued to concern some Members of Congress. In The Council’s ongoing focus on Israel has continued to concern some Members of Congress. In
addition to singling out Israel addition to singling out Israel ~~as a permanent part of~~for scrutiny on the Council’s the Council’s permanent agenda, other Council agenda, other Council
actions—including resolutions, reports, and statements by some Council experts—have generated actions—including resolutions, reports, and statements by some Council experts—have generated
significant congressional interest for what many view as an apparent bias against Israel.significant congressional interest for what many view as an apparent bias against Israel.~~59 Some~~

~~54 “Remarks at a UN Security Council Thematic Debate on Human Rights,” USUN, April 18, 2017.~~
~~55 United Nations, “Security Council Discusses Deadly Protests across Iran amid Accusations of Abusing Entity’s~~
~~Platform in States’ Internal Affairs,” SC/13152, January 5, 2018. More recently, in July 2020, the Security Council~~
~~held a videoconference meeting on the topic of integrating human rights into peace operations. See United Nations,~~
~~“Integrating Human Rights into Peace Operations Brings Missions Closer to People, Advances Inclusive Development,~~
~~High Commissioner Tells Security Council,” SC/14242, July 7, 2020.~~
~~56 See remarks by Michael Kozak at the Heritage Foundation, “U.S. Withdrawal from the U.N. Human Rights Council:~~
~~Impact and Next Steps,” July 18, 2018.~~
~~57 Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, Department of State, “On the UN Human Rights Council’s Embrace of~~
~~Authoritarian Regimes,” October 13, 2020. For information about the event, see U.S. State Department, “U.S. to Host~~
~~Virtual Side Event at United Nations General Assembly on Promoting and Protecting Human Rights: A Re-Dedication~~
~~to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” media note, September 21, 2020. For Secretary Pompeo’s remarks at~~
~~the event, see Department of State, “Promoting and Protecting Human Rights: A Re-Dedication to the Universal~~
~~Declaration of Human Rights,” video remarks, September 23, 2020.~~
~~58 See, for instance, Kenneth Roth, “Nikki Haley Should Help Fix the U.N. Human Rights Council, Not Abandon It,”~~
Foreign Policy, June 5, 2017; and Testimony of Ted Piccone, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on
~~Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and~~
~~Environmental Policy, Assessing the United Nations Human Rights Council, 115th Cong., 1st session, May 25, 2017.~~
~~59 Council experts are independent human rights experts with mandates to report and advise on human rights from a~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

12

~~link to page 5 link to page 5~~ ~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

41 Some Members of Congress expressed alarm regarding a March 2016 Council resolution that requested Members of Congress expressed alarm regarding a March 2016 Council resolution that requested
OHCHR OHCHR to produce a database of all business enterprises that have “directly and indirectly, produce a database of all business enterprises that have “directly and indirectly,
enabled, facilitated and profited from the construction and growth of the (Israeli) settlements.”enabled, facilitated and profited from the construction and growth of the (Israeli) settlements.”60
42 The United States strongly opposed the resolution and voted against it.The United States strongly opposed the resolution and voted against it.6143 On February 12, 2020, On February 12, 2020,
OHCHR published the database. OHCHR published the database. Then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo expressed “outrage” that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo expressed “outrage” that
OHCHR would publish the document and called on other U.N. members to reject it.OHCHR would publish the document and called on other U.N. members to reject it.6244 Some Some
Members of Congress Members of Congress ~~have also opposed the database; for example, H.R. 5595, the Israel Anti-~~
~~Boycott Act, seeks to prohibit some businesses from cooperating with information collection~~
~~efforts connected to the database.63 Previously, some Members of Congress demonstrated~~
~~considerable concern with a September 2009 Council report (often referred to as the “Goldstone~~
~~Report” after the main author, Richard Goldstone, an independent expert from South Africa), that~~
~~found “evidence of serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law,”~~
~~including possible war crimes, by Israel. The report received further attention in April 2011, when~~
~~Goldstone stated that the report’s conclusion that Israel committed possible war crimes may have~~
~~been incorrect.64~~
also opposed the publication of the database.45 In May 2021, the Council established an open-ended commission of inquiry in the wake of that month’s Israel-Gaza conflict.46 The Biden Administration stated that it “deeply regrets” the establishment of the commission, noting that such actions “do not contribute to peace.”47 Some experts suggest that the Council’s focus on Israel is at least partially the result of its Some experts suggest that the Council’s focus on Israel is at least partially the result of its
~~membership composition.65 After the first elections, members of the Organization of Islamic~~
~~Cooperation (OIC) held 17 seats on the Council, accounting for about one-third of the votes~~
~~needed to call a special session (13 OIC members currently serve on the Council). Some experts~~
~~contend that blocs such as the African Group and Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), who may at~~
~~times account for the majority of Council seats, tend to view economic and security issues as~~
~~more important than human rights violations.~~

membership composition.48 Rising Influence of Other U.N. Member States Many experts have raised concerns that the Human Rights Council’s work is increasingly influenced by countries that do not fully subscribe to international human rights norms and mechanisms. Some maintain that authoritarian governments use the Council as a platform to 41 Council experts are independent human rights experts with mandates to report and advise on human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective. They are often referred to as special rapporteurs, heads of fact-finding thematic or country-specific perspective. They are often referred to as special rapporteurs, heads of fact-finding
missions, or heads of commissions of inquiry, among other titles. missions, or heads of commissions of inquiry, among other titles.
6042 See U.N. Human Rights Council resolution 31/36, March 22, 2016, paragraph 17; and paragraphs 96 and 117 of See U.N. Human Rights Council resolution 31/36, March 22, 2016, paragraph 17; and paragraphs 96 and 117 of
Human Rights Council Document, A/HRC/22/63, Report of the independent international fact-finding mission to Human Rights Council Document, A/HRC/22/63, Report of the independent international fact-finding mission to
investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the
Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, February 7, 2013. Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, February 7, 2013.
6143 The Trump Administration The Trump Administration ~~has~~ stated its firm opposition to the creation of a database and stated its firm opposition to the creation of a database and ~~will~~would not provide any not provide any
information to it. It information to it. It ~~maintains~~maintained that the database falls far outside the scope of the Human Rights Council’s mandate and that the database falls far outside the scope of the Human Rights Council’s mandate and
drains “precious resources that could be used to promote and protect human rights around the world.” (“U.S. drains “precious resources that could be used to promote and protect human rights around the world.” (“U.S.
Explanation of Votes on Item 7 Resolutions,” Statement by William J. Mozdzierz, Head of the U.S. Delegation, Human Explanation of Votes on Item 7 Resolutions,” Statement by William J. Mozdzierz, Head of the U.S. Delegation, Human
Rights Council 34th Session, March 24, 2017.) In October 2017, the United States stated it was “deeply disturbed” by Rights Council 34th Session, March 24, 2017.) In October 2017, the United States stated it was “deeply disturbed” by
comments from current U.N. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory, Michael comments from current U.N. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory, Michael
Lynk, who called for economic boycotts against Israel. Lynk, who called for economic boycotts against Israel.
6244 See, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, “U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Database Report See, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, “U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Database Report
Release” Department of State, February 12, 2020, and “Department of State Guidance to U.S. Companies Regarding Release” Department of State, February 12, 2020, and “Department of State Guidance to U.S. Companies Regarding
the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Database Report Release,” March 2, 2020. the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Database Report Release,” March 2, 2020.
~~63 For more information, see CRS Report R44281, Israel and the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement,~~
~~coordinated by Jim Zanotti.~~
~~64 See U.N. document A/HRC/12/48, Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories, Report of the~~
~~United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, September 25, 2009; and Richard Goldstone,~~
~~“Reconsidering the Goldstone Report on Israel and War Crimes,” The Washington Post, April 1, 2011. In addition, the~~
~~statements and findings of Richard Falk, the Council’s previous Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights~~
~~on Palestinian Territories Occupied since 1967, have drawn considerable criticism from many U.S. policymakers for~~
~~apparent bias against Israel. In October 2012, then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice rejected one of~~
~~Falk’s reports to the Council due to bias, and stated that his continued service in the role of a U.N. Special Rapporteur~~
~~is “deeply regrettable and only damages the credibility of the U.N.”~~
6545 For example, in the 116th Congress, H.R. 5595, the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, sought to prohibit some businesses from cooperating with information collection efforts connected to the database. 46 U.N. document, A/HRC/RES/S-30/1, May 27, 2021. The Council mandated the commission “to investigate in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in Israel all alleged violations of international humanitarian law and all alleged violations and abuses of international human rights law leading up to and since 13 April 2021, and all underlying root causes of recurrent tensions, instability and protraction of conflict, including systematic discrimination and repression based on national, ethnic, racial or religious identity.” 47 U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Geneva, “Press Statement: UN Human Rights Council Session on the Israeli-Palestinian Situation,” May 27, 2021. 48 For a discussion on the apparent lack of competitiveness in Council elections, see the For a discussion on the apparent lack of competitiveness in Council elections, see the “Council Structure and
Selected Policy Issues” section. section.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1311

The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

~~Rising Influence of Other U.N. Member States~~
~~Many experts have raised concerns that the Human Rights Council’s work is increasingly~~
~~influenced by countries that do not fully subscribe to international human rights norms and~~
~~mechanisms. Some maintain that authoritarian governments use the Council as a platform to~~
garner support for novel interpretations of these norms that in effect privilege principles of garner support for novel interpretations of these norms that in effect privilege principles of
“noninterference” and strong conceptions of state sovereignty, as a means of shielding themselves “noninterference” and strong conceptions of state sovereignty, as a means of shielding themselves
from international scrutiny.from international scrutiny.6649 These efforts may also aim to undermine the idea that human rights These efforts may also aim to undermine the idea that human rights
are universal and indivisible, suggesting instead that they are context-dependent, or that some are universal and indivisible, suggesting instead that they are context-dependent, or that some
rights are subordinate to others. rights are subordinate to others.
Analysts view Analysts view ~~China~~the People’s Republic of China (PRC, or China) under Xi Jinping, in particular, as having taken a more proactive role in under Xi Jinping, in particular, as having taken a more proactive role in
attempting to shape global human rights norms and institutions in recent years, including in the attempting to shape global human rights norms and institutions in recent years, including in the
Human Rights Council.Human Rights Council.6750 China’s normative agenda with regard to human rights has been China’s normative agenda with regard to human rights has been
described as “statist” and “development-first” in that it prioritizes the role of governments as described as “statist” and “development-first” in that it prioritizes the role of governments as
opposed to civil society and individual rights-holders, and privileges opposed to civil society and individual rights-holders, and privileges ~~development rights~~the right to development in in
particular.particular.6851 In 2017, China’s first ever solo-sponsored Human Rights Council resolution, for In 2017, China’s first ever solo-sponsored Human Rights Council resolution, for
instance, was entitled “The contribution of development to the enjoyment of instance, was entitled “The contribution of development to the enjoyment of all human rights” and human rights” and
was viewed by some observers as suggesting that respect for human rights is predicated on was viewed by some observers as suggesting that respect for human rights is predicated on
development conditions.development conditions.6952 China has supported a number of other resolutions since 2016 that China has supported a number of other resolutions since 2016 that
critics argue were intended to undermine the legitimacy of civil society organizations and human critics argue were intended to undermine the legitimacy of civil society organizations and human
rights defenders and discourage the practice of publicly criticizing and pushing for investigations rights defenders and discourage the practice of publicly criticizing and pushing for investigations
of rights abuses by individual countries—which China views as constituting interference in of rights abuses by individual countries—which China views as constituting interference in
internal affairs—and instead promote state-led “mutually beneficial cooperation.”internal affairs—and instead promote state-led “mutually beneficial cooperation.”7053 Consistent Consistent
with these efforts, the Council in June 2020with these efforts, the Council in June 2020 , for instance, adopted a China-sponsored resolution on “mutually adopted a China-sponsored resolution on “mutually
beneficial cooperation” that was criticized by human rights advocates.beneficial cooperation” that was criticized by human rights advocates.~~71 Some have also~~

66 The resolution included language that governments have the “inalienable right” to develop their own political, social, and other systems “without interference from any other State or non-State actor,” and featured PRC-favored phraseology on “mutually beneficial cooperation” and “building a community of shared future for human beings.”54 Beyond this normative work, analysts contend that China has used a variety of tactics to undermine the participation of independent human rights organizations and blunt criticism of human rights in China and other countries, both at Council and within the U.N. human rights 49 Authoritarian governments may view universal human rights norms as inherently threatening to their hold on power. Authoritarian governments may view universal human rights norms as inherently threatening to their hold on power.
For example, a document allegedly circulated internally within the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) in 2013 criticized For example, a document allegedly circulated internally within the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) in 2013 criticized
the promotion of “universal values” as an attempt to weaken the CPC’s leadership, alongside six other perceived the promotion of “universal values” as an attempt to weaken the CPC’s leadership, alongside six other perceived
ideological threats, including “Western constitutional democracy” and civil society. ChinaFile, “Document 9: A ideological threats, including “Western constitutional democracy” and civil society. ChinaFile, “Document 9: A
ChinaFile Translation,” November 8, 2013. ChinaFile Translation,” November 8, 2013.
6750 Ted Piccone, “China’s Long Game on Human Rights at the United Nations,” Ted Piccone, “China’s Long Game on Human Rights at the United Nations,” Brookings Institution, September 2018; September 2018;
Yu-Jie Chen, “China’s Challenge to the International Human Rights Regime,” Yu-Jie Chen, “China’s Challenge to the International Human Rights Regime,” NYU Journal of International Law and
Politics, vol. 51 (January 2019), pp. 1179-1222. , vol. 51 (January 2019), pp. 1179-1222.
6851 Yu-Jie Chen, “China’s Challenge to the International Human Rights Regime.” See also Yu-Jie Chen, “China’s Challenge to the International Human Rights Regime.” See also ~~discussion in Andrea~~
~~Worden, “The CCP at the UN: Redefining development and rights,” Sinopsis, March 17, 2019.~~
69Andréa Worden, China at the UN Human Rights Council: Conjuring a “Community of Shared Future for Humankind”? National Bureau of Asian Research Special Report #87, August 2020. 52 See U.N. Document A/HRC/RES/35/21. The resolution, which was adopted, was opposed by the United States for suggesting “that development goals could The resolution, which was adopted, was opposed by the United States for suggesting “that development goals could
permit countries to deviate from their human rights obligations and permit countries to deviate from their human rights obligations and commitments.” See~~commitments.” A similar resolution of the same~~
~~name was adopted in July 2019. Ted Piccone, “China’s Long Game on Human Rights at the United Nations”; U.N.~~
~~Document A/HRC/RES/35/21, July 7, 2017; U.N. Document A/HRC/RES/41/19, July 17, 2019;~~ U.S. Mission to U.S. Mission to
International Organizations in Geneva, “Explanation of Position on Resolution on the Contribution of Development to International Organizations in Geneva, “Explanation of Position on Resolution on the Contribution of Development to
~~the Enjoyment of all Human Rights,” June 22, 2017.~~
~~70 Ted Piccone, “China’s Long Game on Human Rights at the United Nations.” China has also sought to prevent~~
~~genuine civil society participation during UPR processes concerning China and, more broadly, has reportedly pressured~~
~~governments to blunt criticism of human rights conditions in China. See Human Rights Watch,~~ ~~The Costs of~~
~~International Advocacy: China’s Interference in United Nations Human Rights Mechanisms, September 5, 2017, and~~
~~Human Rights Watch, “UN: China Responds to Rights Review with Threats,” April 1, 2019.~~
71the Enjoyment of all Human Rights,” June 22, 2017. China has sponsored similar resolutions in subsequent years. 53 Ted Piccone, “China’s Long Game on Human Rights at the United Nations.” 54 U.N. Document A/HRC/RES/43/21. The resolution passed with a vote of 23 to 16, with 8 abstentions U.N. Document A/HRC/RES/43/21. The resolution passed with a vote of 23 to 16, with 8 abstentions. China, as a then-Council observer, did not participate in the vote. In the words . In the words
of one human rights advocate, the resolution “seeks to reposition international human rights law as a matter of state-to-of one human rights advocate, the resolution “seeks to reposition international human rights law as a matter of state-to-
state relations, ignores the responsibility of states to protect the rights of the individual, treats fundamental human state relations, ignores the responsibility of states to protect the rights of the individual, treats fundamental human
rights as subject to negotiation and compromise, and foresees no meaningful role for civil society.” Sophie Richardson, rights as subject to negotiation and compromise, and foresees no meaningful role for civil society.” Sophie Richardson,
“China’s Influence on the Global Human Rights System,” “China’s Influence on the Global Human Rights System,” Brookings Institution, September 2020., September 2020.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1412

The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

system more broadly.55 Some have expressed worry regarding China’s April 2020 appointment to the Council’s Consultative Panel, expressed worry regarding China’s April 2020 appointment to the Council’s Consultative Panel,
which plays a key role in the selection of independent experts to lead country and thematic human which plays a key role in the selection of independent experts to lead country and thematic human
~~rights mandates.72 Reflecting concern over these and related activities, the Congressional-~~
~~Executive Commission on China (CECC) recommended that the executive branch provide~~
~~Congress with a “multilateral human rights diplomacy strategy … to coordinate responses when~~
~~the Chinese government uses multilateral institutions to undermine human rights norms” and~~
~~prevent international discussion of its own human rights failings.73 The State Department has~~
~~reportedly created a new “Special Envoy for U.N. Integrity” position aimed at broadly combating~~
~~the perceived malign influence of China and other actors within the United Nations.74~~
rights mandates.56 Other governments are also viewed as having taken action within the Council to undermine Other governments are also viewed as having taken action within the Council to undermine
human rights norms. Russia, which was elected to rejoin the Council in October 2020 after human rights norms. Russia, which was elected to rejoin the Council in October 2020 after
having last been a member in 2016, has having last been a member in 2016, has in the past arguably sought to undermine the universality of these arguably sought to undermine the universality of these
norms by promoting respect for subjective and context-specific “traditional values.”norms by promoting respect for subjective and context-specific “traditional values.” ~~A 2012~~
~~Russia-sponsored resolution that pushed this concept was adopted despite opposition from the~~
~~United States.75 Resolutions of these types have also been consistently supported by like-minded~~
57 Resolutions considered problematic by some human rights experts have consistently been supported by other authoritarian governments such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Cubagovernments such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Cuba.
~~In the past, many resolutions considered problematic by human rights experts have ultimately~~
~~failed to pass, but they have nonetheless~~, and have often also garnered also garnered ~~frequent~~ support across a broad range of support across a broad range of
other countries, including democracies such as India and Indonesia. Supporting countries may other countries, including democracies such as India and Indonesia. Supporting countries may
share ideological common ground on these matters, may vote as they do in the interest of share ideological common ground on these matters, may vote as they do in the interest of
ensuring positive bilateral ties with the sponsoring government(s), or may act on the basis of a ensuring positive bilateral ties with the sponsoring government(s), or may act on the basis of a
~~combination of these motivations.76~~
~~These efforts were uniformly opposed by the United States when it was a Council member. In~~
~~March 2018, prior to the U.S. withdrawal from the Council, the State Department stated that the~~
~~United States had defended the integrity of U.N. human rights mechanisms by opposing China’s~~
~~resolution on “mutually beneficial cooperation.”77 Some analysts and human rights advocates~~
~~have argued that the U.S. withdrawal undermines the ability of the United States to defend~~

~~72 See, for example, Eleanor Albert, “China Appointed to Influential UN Human Rights Council Panel,” The Diplomat,~~
~~April 8, 2020. The Consultative Group, composed of five members nominated by regional groups, makes~~
~~recommendations to the Council President through its public report. For more information, see~~
~~https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies /HRC/SP/Pages/Basic InformationSelectionIndependent Experts.aspx.~~
~~73 Congressional-Executive Commission on China, Annual Report 2019, January 8, 2020.~~
~~74 Colum Lynch, “U.S. State Department Appoints Envoy to Counter Chinese Influence at the U.N.,” Foreign Policy,~~
~~January 22, 2020; Reuters, “U.S. Tasks official to counter China’s ‘malign influence’ at U.N., January 23, 2020.~~
~~75 U.N. Document A/HRC/RES/21/3, October 9, 2012; Alexander Cooley, “Countering Democratic Norms,”~~ ~~Journal of~~
~~Democracy, vol. 26, no. 3 (July 2015), pp. 49-63; Graeme Reid, “’Traditional Values’ code for human rights abuse?”~~
~~Human Rights Watch, October 17, 2012. The European Union (EU) argued in a subsequent submission to the Office of~~
~~the High Commissioner for Human Rights that “Traditional values are inherently subjective to a certain time and place~~
~~… to introduce [this] concept into [human rights] discourse can result in a misleading interpretation of human rights~~
~~norms, and undermine their universality.” See EU submission to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human~~
~~Rights, February 15, 2013, at https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/TraditionalValues.aspx.~~
76combination of these motivations.58 The United States opposed resolutions perceived as undermining international human rights norms during previous periods as a Council member,59 and U.S. policymakers have taken some other steps in recent years to address these concerns. In early 2020, the Trump Administration created a Special Envoy for U.N. Integrity within the State Department to broadly address the influence of China, Russia, and other actors within the United Nations. More recently, President Biden’s FY2022 budget requested $9.4 million for a new Office of Multilateral Strategy and Personnel within the Bureau of International Organization Affairs (IO) to support the State Department’s efforts to, in part, develop and implement a strategic approach to competition across the U.N. system, including through cooperation with allies and partners.60 The Council and U.S. Human Rights Situations Some Members of Congress have demonstrated an ongoing interest in Council activities related to human rights situations in the United States. Over the years, Council (and previous Commission) members have examined various U.S. human rights issues, including use of the death penalty (1997), the situation of detainees in Guantanamo Bay (2006), human rights and U.S. counterterrorism practices (2007), and the human rights of migrants (2007). The two most recent Council special rapporteurs to visit the United States focused on the human rights of 55 Andréa Worden, China at the UN Human Rights Council: Conjuring a “Community of Shared Future for Humankind”?; Rana Siu Inboden, “China at the UN: Choking Civil Society,” Journal of Democracy, vol. 32, no. 3 (July 2021), pp. 1254-135. 56 See, for example, Eleanor Albert, “China Appointed to Influential UN Human Rights Council Panel,” The Diplomat, April 8, 2020. The Consultative Group, composed of five members nominated by regional groups, makes recommendations to the Council President through its public report. For more information, see https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/SP/Pages/BasicInformationSelectionIndependentExperts.aspx. 57 Alexander Cooley, “Countering Democratic Norms,” Journal of Democracy, vol. 26, no. 3 (July 2015), pp. 49-63. 58 Countries that have frequently voted in favor of the discussed China-supported resolutions include Bangladesh, Countries that have frequently voted in favor of the discussed China-supported resolutions include Bangladesh,
Bolivia, Burundi, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Bolivia, Burundi, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates,
Venezuela, Vietnam, Ethiopia, El Salvador, Iraq, Nigeria, and the Philippines. Ted Piccone, “China’s Long Game on Venezuela, Vietnam, Ethiopia, El Salvador, Iraq, Nigeria, and the Philippines. Ted Piccone, “China’s Long Game on
Human Rights at the United Nations.” Human Rights at the United Nations.”
~~77 U.S. State Department, “Key Outcomes of U.S. Priorities at the UN Human Rights Council’s 37th Session,” March~~
~~23, 2018.~~
~~Congressional Research Service~~

15

~~The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues~~

~~against these actions and effectively cedes space to governments such as China and Russia;78~~
~~others contend that the United States can push back on these efforts in other fora.79~~
~~The Council and U.S. Human Rights Situations~~
~~Some Members of Congress have demonstrated an ongoing interest in Council activities related~~
~~to human rights situations in the United States. Over the years, Council (and previous~~
~~Commission) members have examined various U.S. human rights issues, including use of the~~
~~death penalty (1997), the situation of detainees in Guantanamo Bay (2006), human rights and~~
~~U.S. counterterrorism practices (2007), and the human rights of migrants (2007). The two most~~
~~recent Council special rapporteurs to visit the United States focused on the human rights of~~
59 For instance, in March 2018, prior to the Trump Administration’s withdrawal from the Council, the State Department stated that the United States had defended the integrity of U.N. human rights mechanisms by opposing China’s resolution on “mutually beneficial cooperation.” See U.S. State Department, “Key Outcomes of U.S. Priorities at the UN Human Rights Council’s 37th Session,” March 23, 2018. 60 Congressional Budget Justification, Appendix 1: Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, FY2022, p. 134. See also the description of the office at https://www.state.gov/key-topics-bureau-of-international-organization-affairs/. Congressional Research Service 13 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues indigenous people and human rights and extreme poverty (both in 2017). With few exceptions, indigenous people and human rights and extreme poverty (both in 2017). With few exceptions,
the United States has generally cooperated with such activities, even if it did not agree with the the United States has generally cooperated with such activities, even if it did not agree with the
outcome of the findings.outcome of the findings.~~80 Since 2017, several special rapporteurs have requested visits to the~~
~~United States to examine human right issues related to migrants, freedom of assembly, and~~
~~counterterrorism, among other issues, and are awaiting a U.S. response.81~~ 61 In a departure from previous U.S. policy, the Biden Administration announced in July 2021 that the United States would issue “a formal, standing invitation to all U.N. experts who report and advise on thematic human rights issues.”62 (Standing invitations indicate that countries will always accept requests to visit from all Council special procedures.) In addition to In addition to
facilitating visits from special rapporteurs, the Council has adopted resolutions addressing human facilitating visits from special rapporteurs, the Council has adopted resolutions addressing human
rights issues in the United States, including a June 2020 resolution on “violent practices rights issues in the United States, including a June 2020 resolution on “violent practices
perpetrated by law enforcement agencies,” in response to the May 2020 death of George Floyd in perpetrated by law enforcement agencies,” in response to the May 2020 death of George Floyd in
police custody.police custody.82 63 In general, congressional responses to Council involvement in domestic human In general, congressional responses to Council involvement in domestic human
rights issues are mixed. Some policymakers have been critical of Council activities regarding rights issues are mixed. Some policymakers have been critical of Council activities regarding
U.S. human rights situations, arguing that members should focus on the actions of widely U.S. human rights situations, arguing that members should focus on the actions of widely
perceived human rights abusers instead of those with comparatively strong human rights records. perceived human rights abusers instead of those with comparatively strong human rights records.
Others contend that U.S. cooperation with Council mechanisms sets an example for other Others contend that U.S. cooperation with Council mechanisms sets an example for other
countries, improves U.S. credibility worldwide, and can be an effective accountability countries, improves U.S. credibility worldwide, and can be an effective accountability
mechanism. mechanism.

~~78 Suzanne Nossel, “Beware the Ides of Leaving the Human Rights Council,” Foreign Policy, March 14, 2017; Frances~~
~~Eve, “The US withdrawal from the UNHRC is perfect for Xi Jinping and China,” June 21, 2018; Kenneth Roth,~~
~~“China’s Global Threat to Human Rights,” Human Rights Watch, January 15, 2020.~~
~~79 See “Alternatives to the Council.”~~
8061 For example, the United States disagreed the findings of Council experts on Guantanamo Bay, counter-terrorism, and For example, the United States disagreed the findings of Council experts on Guantanamo Bay, counter-terrorism, and
the human rights of migrants. More recently, in 2018 a Council expert published a report on extreme poverty in the the human rights of migrants. More recently, in 2018 a Council expert published a report on extreme poverty in the
United States and recommended that the government “decriminalize being poor,” “acknowledge the plight of the United States and recommended that the government “decriminalize being poor,” “acknowledge the plight of the
middle class,” and “acknowledge the damaging consequences of extreme inequality” (U.N. document, middle class,” and “acknowledge the damaging consequences of extreme inequality” (U.N. document,
A/HRC/38/33/Add.1.)A/HRC/38/33/Add.1.) Then-U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley expressed disappointment with the report and said that it Then-U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley expressed disappointment with the report and said that it
“categorically misstated the progress the United States has made in addressing poverty,” (Letter from Ambassador “categorically misstated the progress the United States has made in addressing poverty,” (Letter from Ambassador
Nikki Haley to Senator Bernard Sanders, June 21, 2018). Nikki Haley to Senator Bernard Sanders, June 21, 2018).
~~81 The United States does not offer a standing invitation to Council special procedures, therefore any Council experts~~
~~must be formally invited by U.S. officials. For an overview of recent Council activities related to the United States, see~~
~~“Country visits of Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council since 1998 - United States of America,” at~~
~~https://spinternet.ohchr.org/ViewCountry Visits.aspx? visitType=all&country= USA&Lang=en.~~
8262 Statement by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, “U.S. Leadership on Human Rights and Ending Systemic Racism,” July 13, 2021. According to OHCHR, the invitation was formalized on October 19, 2021. 63 In June 2020, the Council adopted resolution 43/1, which, among other things, “condemns the continuing racially In June 2020, the Council adopted resolution 43/1, which, among other things, “condemns the continuing racially
discriminatory and violent practices perpetrated by law enforcement agencies against Africans and people of African discriminatory and violent practices perpetrated by law enforcement agencies against Africans and people of African
descent, in particular which led to the death of George Floyd on 25 May 2020 in Minnesota ... and condemns the descent, in particular which led to the death of George Floyd on 25 May 2020 in Minnesota ... and condemns the
structural racism in the criminal justice system.”structural racism in the criminal justice system.” The resolution, also requests that U.N. High Commissioner for The resolution, also requests that U.N. High Commissioner for
Human Rights prepare a report on “systemic racism, violations of international human rights law against Africans and Human Rights prepare a report on “systemic racism, violations of international human rights law against Africans and
people of African descent by law enforcement agencies, especially those incidents that resulted in the death of George people of African descent by law enforcement agencies, especially those incidents that resulted in the death of George
Floyd and other Africans and people of African descent, to contribute to accountability and redress for victims.”Floyd and other Africans and people of African descent, to contribute to accountability and redress for victims.” (U.N. (U.N.
document, A/HRC/RES/43/1, June 19, 2020, adopted without a vote). document, A/HRC/RES/43/1, June 19, 2020, adopted without a vote).
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1614

The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

Appendix. Special Sessions of the Human
Rights Council
Figure A-1. Human Rights Council Special Sessions
Session
Subject
Dates
1st 1st
Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
July 5-6, 2006 July 5-6, 2006
2nd 2nd
Grave situation of Human Rights in Lebanon caused by Israeli Military Grave situation of Human Rights in Lebanon caused by Israeli Military
Aug. 10-11, 2006 Aug. 10-11, 2006
Operations Operations
3rd 3rd
Israeli Military Incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories Israeli Military Incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
Nov. 15, 2006 Nov. 15, 2006
4th 4th
Human Rights Situation in Darfur Human Rights Situation in Darfur
Dec. 12-13, 2006 Dec. 12-13, 2006
5th 5th
Human Rights Situation in Myanmar (Burma) Human Rights Situation in Myanmar (Burma)
Oct. 2, 2007 Oct. 2, 2007
6th 6th
Violations Stemming from Israeli Incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Violations Stemming from Israeli Incursions in the Occupied Palestinian
Jan. 24, 2008 Jan. 24, 2008
Territory Territory
7th 7th
Negative Impact on the Realization of the Rights to Food of the Worsening of Negative Impact on the Realization of the Rights to Food of the Worsening of
May 22, 2008 May 22, 2008
the World Food Crisis, Caused inter alia by the Soaring Food Prices the World Food Crisis, Caused inter alia by the Soaring Food Prices
8th 8th
Situation of the Human Rights in the East of the DRC Situation of the Human Rights in the East of the DRC
Nov. 28, 2008 Nov. 28, 2008
9th 9th
The Grave Violations of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory The Grave Violations of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
Jan. 9, 2009 Jan. 9, 2009
including the recent aggression in the occupied Gaza Strip including the recent aggression in the occupied Gaza Strip
10th 10th
The Impact of the Global Economic and Financial Crises on the Universal The Impact of the Global Economic and Financial Crises on the Universal
Feb. 20, 2009 Feb. 20, 2009
Realization and Effective Enjoyment of Human Rights Realization and Effective Enjoyment of Human Rights
11th 11th
The human rights situation in Sri Lanka The human rights situation in Sri Lanka
May 26, 2009 May 26, 2009
12th 12th
The human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and East The human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and East
Oct. 15-16, 2009 Oct. 15-16, 2009
Jerusalem Jerusalem
13th 13th
Support to the recovery process in Haiti: A Human Rights approach Support to the recovery process in Haiti: A Human Rights approach
Jan. 27, 2010 Jan. 27, 2010
14th 14th
The situation of human rights in Cote d'Ivoire since the elections on 28 The situation of human rights in Cote d'Ivoire since the elections on 28
Dec. 23, 2010 Dec. 23, 2010
November 2010 November 2010
15th 15th
The situation of human rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya The situation of human rights in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
Feb. 25, 2011 Feb. 25, 2011
16th 16th
The situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic The situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic
Apr. 29, 2011 Apr. 29, 2011
17th 17th
The situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic The situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic
Aug. 22, 2011 Aug. 22, 2011
18th 18th
The human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic The human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic
Dec. 2, 2011 Dec. 2, 2011
19th 19th
The deteriorating human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic and the The deteriorating human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic and the
June 1, 2012 June 1, 2012
recent kil ings in El-Houleh recent kil ings in El-Houleh
20th 20th
Situation of human rights in the Central African Republic and technical Situation of human rights in the Central African Republic and technical
Jan. 20, 2013 Jan. 20, 2013
assistance in the field of human rights assistance in the field of human rights
21st 21st
The human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including The human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including
July 23, 2014 July 23, 2014
East Jerusalem East Jerusalem
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

1715

The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

Session Subject Dates 22nd 22nd
The human rights situation in Iraq in light of abuses committed by the Islamic The human rights situation in Iraq in light of abuses committed by the Islamic
~~Sept. 1, 2014~~
State in Iraq and the Levant and associated groups State in Iraq and the Levant and associated groups
Sept. 1, 2014 23rd 23rd
The terrorist attacks and human rights abuses and violations committed by The terrorist attacks and human rights abuses and violations committed by
~~April 1, 2015~~
the terrorist group Boko Haram the terrorist group Boko Haram
April 1, 2015 24th 24th
Preventing further deterioration of the human rights situation in Burundi Preventing further deterioration of the human rights situation in Burundi
Dec. 17. 2015 Dec. 17. 2015
25th 25th
The deteriorating situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, and The deteriorating situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, and
~~Oct. 21, 2016~~
the recent situation in Aleppo the recent situation in Aleppo
Oct. 21, 2016 26th 26th
The human rights situation in South Sudan The human rights situation in South Sudan
Dec. 14, 2016 Dec. 14, 2016
27th 27th
Human rights situation of the minority Rohingya Muslim population and other Human rights situation of the minority Rohingya Muslim population and other
~~Dec. 5, 2017~~
minorities in the Rakhine Sate of Myanmar minorities in the Rakhine Sate of Myanmar
Dec. 5, 2017 28th 28th
The deteriorating situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian The deteriorating situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian
~~May 18, 2018~~
~~territory, including East Jerusalem~~territory, including East Jerusalem May 18, 2018 29th The human rights implications of the crisis in Myanmar Feb. 12, 2021 The grave human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 30th including East Jerusalem May 27, 2021 31st The serious human rights concerns and situation in Afghanistan Aug. 24, 2021 32nd The human rights implications of the ongoing situation in the Sudan Nov. 5, 2021 33rd The grave human rights situation in Ethiopia Dec. 17, 2021
Source: U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Author Information

Luisa Blanchfield Luisa Blanchfield
Michael A. Weber Michael A. Weber
Specialist in International Relations Specialist in International Relations
Analyst in Foreign Affairs Analyst in Foreign Affairs

Congressional Research Service 16 The United Nations Human Rights Council: Background and Policy Issues

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
RL33608 RL33608 · VERSION 5760 · UPDATED
1817