link to page 2 
Updated May 20, 2019
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country
Reports on Human Rights Practices
Introduction
security assistance from governments that engage in “a
The State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights
consistent pattern of gross violations of international human
Practices are an annual U.S. government account of human
rights.” The following year, Section 116 (22 U.S.C. 2151n)
rights conditions in countries around the globe. The reports
was added, introducing similar restrictions for recipients of
characterize countries on the basis of their adherence to
U.S. development assistance. Accompanying these
“internationally recognized human rights,” which generally
provisions was language requiring that the Secretary of
refer to the civil, political, and worker rights set forth in the
State transmit to Congress each year a “full and complete
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted by the
report” concerning the human rights conditions of recipient
United Nations General Assembly in 1948) and other
countries; this language thus served as the legislative basis
international human rights agreements.
for the annual human rights reports. An amendment in 1979
further broadened the reporting requirement to cover all
The most recent reports cover calendar year 2018 and were
U.N. member states.
issued on March 13, 2019. They provide individual
narratives for nearly 200 countries and are available on the
Despite their legislative origin in connection with U.S.
Department of State website. As with prior reports, the
foreign assistance, the reports have generally served as an
2018 reports do not compare countries or rank them based
information source for U.S. policy rather than as a direct
on the severity of human rights abuses documented. In his
instrument for restricting aid. The precise role that the
remarks introducing the reports, Secretary of State Michael
reports should play in U.S. policy has been the subject of
Pompeo specifically noted human rights violations in Iran,
continued debate (see “Relationship to U.S. Foreign Policy”
South Sudan, Nicaragua, and China, and stated that China
below).
in particular “is in a league of its own when it comes to
human rights violations.” Pompeo also noted that the report
Evolution of the Reports
documents human rights violations in U.S. allied and
In the early reports, there was concern within the State
partner countries as well, but did not name any of these
Department about publicly characterizing the human rights
specifically. Similar to prior years, some countries whose
conditions in other countries, particularly U.S. allies. The
human rights practices were criticized in the reports
first reports were criticized for being biased and thin on
publicly defended their record and accused the United
substance. Over time, with improvements in the breadth,
States of human rights challenges of its own. Some changes
quality, and accuracy of the reports, experts have generally
in emphasis and terminology in the 2018 reports were also
come to recognize them as authoritative. The modern
noted in U.S. and international media coverage.
reports are cited by lawmakers, foreign governments,
human rights organizations, scholars, and others. The scope
of the reports has also broadened as Congress has amended
Human Rights Categories Covered in the 2018
legislation to add or expand human rights topics in response
Reports
to evolving situations and contexts. Topics that now receive
Integrity of the Person
increased coverage include worker rights, the rights of
Civil Liberties
sexual minorities and persons with disabilities, and
Political Participation
corruption, among others. In addition, the reports now
Corruption and Government Transparency
reference separate congressionally mandated reports on
Governmental Attitude toward Human Rights Investigations
international religious freedom (IRF) and trafficking in
Discrimination and Societal Abuses
persons (TIP).
Worker Rights
Relevant Legislation in the 116th Congress
Legislative Mandate
S. 707 and H.R. 1581, introduced in March 2019,
The statutory requirement for the human rights reports is
would amend the FAA to require that the human
found in Sections 116 and 502B of the Foreign Assistance
rights reports cover respect for reproductive rights in
Act (FAA) of 1961 (P.L. 87-195), as amended. Both of
each country, including issues such as access to
these provisions were first enacted via congressional
maternal health services, statistics on maternal deaths,
amendments in the mid-1970s and have been broadened
and discrimination against women and girls in health
and strengthened over time through additional amendments.
care settings. The bills would also require that State
Department officials consult organizations with
The 1970s was a formative period for human rights-related
expertise and experience in sexual and reproductive
legislation as Congress sought to enshrine human rights as a
health and rights in preparing the annual report.
priority in U.S. foreign policy. In 1974, Section 502B of the
FAA (22 U.S.C. 2304) was enacted to withhold U.S.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
Relationship to U.S. Foreign Policy
Drafting and Review Process
Findings from the human rights reports have rarely been
The State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human
used to restrict U.S. foreign aid in accordance with Section
Rights, and Labor (DRL) coordinates the drafting and
502B or Section 116 of the FAA. The reports differ from
issuance of the human rights reports. Embassy officers use
other similar congressionally required annual reports, such
reporting guidance, issued annually by DRL, to formulate
as those on IRF and TIP, which feature mechanisms to
initial drafts for each country; the reports are then reviewed
identify and potentially penalize problematic governments.
and edited by DRL staff, cleared by relevant bureaus within
The IRF report, for example, is the basis for the President’s
the State Department, and further refined in consultation
annual designation of countries with particularly severe
with the embassies and regional bureaus. Near the end of
violations of religious freedom, while the TIP report
the process, country reports of particular public interest or
categorizes countries based on their effort to curb human
scrutiny may be reviewed by the Secretary of State’s office
trafficking; the worst-ranked are subject to potential foreign
and the National Security Council staff. Information
assistance restrictions.
sources for the reports are wide-ranging and include press
reports, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
The State Department’s
intergovernmental and international organizations,
view is that the reports are not
academics, and activists.
policy documents, but are a valuable tool in informing U.S.
Figure 1. Overview of the Report Drafting Process
policy on human rights as well as decisions on foreign aid,
asylum, and other matters. Proponents of this approach
argue that, beyond their role as an information source, the
reports also have indirect impacts on policy. The report
drafting process itself, for example, may help educate and
inculcate concern for human rights within the U.S. Foreign
Service. Furthermore, being identified as a human rights-
abusing nation by the U.S. government is likely a stigma
most nations seek to avoid. Some NGOs have argued that
the reports should have a more concrete role in influencing
U.S. relations with foreign governments that the reports
demonstrate as having failed to protect the rights of their
citizens. State Department officials have contended that
directly linking the reports to policy may politicize the
reports and thereby lead to an erosion in their objectivity.
More generally, some analysts argue that tying U.S. policy
too closely to human rights could overly constrain the U.S.
government’s flexibility to address other challenges
Source: Created by CRS based on GAO-12-561R (May 2012), p. 8.
affecting U.S. interests; others contend that human rights
Note: Timelines are for il ustrative purposes and may vary.
promotion serves U.S. interests over the long term. In the
preface to the most recent reports, Secretary Pompeo stated
By law, the reports are to be issued by February 25, but in
that the Trump Administration’s policy is to “engage with
practice this issuance is often delayed until March or April.
other governments, regardless of their record, if doing so
In October 2010, the State Department’s Office of the
will further U.S. interests,” but also that U.S. interests in
Inspector General (OIG) identified the reports as among the
“enduring stability, prosperity, and security … will only be
most personnel-resource intensive of the department’s
served if governments respect human rights and
congressionally mandated reports. According to the OIG,
fundamental freedoms.” The Administration’s December
the breadth of the reports and the extensive consultative
2017 National Security Strategy described a desire to
drafting and review process has contributed to the State
“champion American values” such as religious freedom and
Department failing to meet the annual statutory deadline for
the rule of law, but did not articulate an overarching policy
issuing the reports. State Department officials have
of active human rights promotion as a national security
described the extensive review process as aimed at ensuring
priority.
the reports are both comprehensive and objective.
Human Rights in the United States
What role the reports should serve, and the role of human
rights in U.S. foreign policy more broadly, have been
The State Department human rights reports do not cover
contested since the reports began in the 1970s. Congress
human rights conditions in the United States, a fact that has
has played a key role in these debates, often as a source of
sometimes been a point of criticism. State Department
pressure on the executive branch to place greater emphasis
officials have pointed out that the United States actively
participates in other mechanisms that evaluate domestic
on human rights when formulating foreign policy.
human rights conditions, such as the U.N. Human Rights
Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The U.S.
Michael A. Weber, Analyst in Foreign Affairs
government submitted its most recent report on human
rights conditions in the United States through the UPR
IF10795
process in 2015.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
Disclaimer
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 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 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 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 copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10795 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED