link to page 2 
Updated January 24, 2022
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country
Reports on Human Rights Practices
Introduction
was language requiring that the Secretary of State transmit
The State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights
to Congress each year a report on the human rights
Practices are an annual U.S. government account of human
conditions of recipient countries; an amendment to Section
rights conditions in countries around the globe. The reports
116 in 1979 broadened the reporting requirement to cover
characterize countries on the basis of their adherence to
all other foreign countries. This language thus served as the
“internationally recognized human rights,” which generally
legislative basis for the State Department’s annual human
refer to civil, political, and worker rights set forth in the
rights reports. Despite the legislative origin of the reports in
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other
connection with U.S. foreign assistance, the role that the
international human rights agreements.
reports should play with regard to assistance decisions or in
U.S. foreign policy generally has been the subject of debate
The most recent reports cover calendar year 2020 and were
(see “Relationship to U.S. Foreign Policy” below).
issued on March 30, 2021. They provide individual
narratives on countries and territories worldwide and are
Evolution of the Reports
available on the Department of State website. As with prior
In the early reports, there was concern within the State
reports, the 2020 reports do not compare countries or rank
Department about publicly characterizing the human rights
them based on the severity of human rights abuses
conditions in other countries, particularly U.S. allies. The
documented. Although the reports describe human rights
first reports were criticized for being biased and thin on
violations in many countries, in remarks introducing the
substance. Over time, with improvements in the breadth,
reports and in a written preface, Secretary of State Antony
quality, and accuracy of the reports, many observers have
Blinken specifically noted violations in a number of
come to recognize them as authoritative (countries whose
countries, including China, Ethiopia, Russia, Syria, Uganda,
human rights conditions are criticized in the reports,
Venezuela, and Yemen, among others. Blinken described
however, often publicly defend their record and/or dismiss
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a negative factor
the reports as biased). Lawmakers, foreign governments,
affecting respect for human rights, stating, “autocratic
human rights organizations, scholars, and others cite the
governments have used [the pandemic] as a pretext to target
their critics and further repress human rights.”
modern reports.
The State Department has gradually broadened the scope of
Categories Covered in the 2020 Reports
the reports to add or expand coverage of certain topics,
Integrity of the Person
sometimes due to congressional amendments to the
Civil Liberties
statutory requirements. Topics that now receive increased
Political Participation
coverage include, for example, press and internet freedoms,
Corruption and Government Transparency
corruption and government transparency, and human rights
Governmental Attitude toward Human Rights Investigations
abuses based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In
Discrimination and Societal Abuses
addition, the reports now reference separate congressionally
Worker Rights
mandated reports on international religious freedom (IRF)
Legislative Mandate
and trafficking in persons (TIP). In introducing the 2020
reports, Secretary Blinken indicated that the State
The statutory requirement for the human rights reports is
Department would later release addenda with additional
found in Sections 116 and 502B of the Foreign Assistance
information on issues related to reproductive rights, which
Act (FAA) of 1961 (P.L. 87-195), as amended. Both of
were removed from the reports during the prior
these provisions were first enacted via congressional
Administration. In November 2021, the department added
amendments in the mid-1970s and have been broadened
information for each country “on key issues such as
and strengthened over time through additional amendments.
government policy adversely affecting access to
The 1970s was a formative period for human rights-related
contraception, access to skilled healthcare during pregnancy
legislation as Congress sought to enshrine human rights as a
and childbirth, access to emergency healthcare, and
priority in U.S. foreign policy. Section 502B of the FAA
discrimination against women in accessing sexual and
(22 U.S.C. §2304), added in 1974 and substantially
reproductive health care, including for survivors of gender-
strengthened in 1976, sought to withhold U.S. security
based violence.”
assistance from countries the governments of which engage
The joint explanatory statement for the FY2021 State
in “a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally
Department, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs
recognized human rights.” Section 116 (22 U.S.C. §2151n),
Appropriations Act (Division K of P.L. 116-260) directed
added in 1975 and also strengthened in the years following,
the Secretary of State to include within the reports
imposed similar restrictions for recipients of U.S.
“information on the intimidation of, and attacks against,”
development assistance. Contained within these provisions
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
civil society activists and journalists, as well as the response
have at times noted that the United States participates in
of the foreign government. Some bills introduced in the
mechanisms that evaluate domestic human rights
117th Congress would amend the FAA to mandate coverage
conditions, such as the United Nations Human Rights
of other specific human rights issues.
Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The United
States underwent its third and most recent review in 2020,
Drafting and Review Process
and the council adopted the United States’ UPR report in
The State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human
March 2021. According to the State Department, the U.S.
Rights, and Labor (DRL) coordinates the drafting and
government accepted “in whole or in part” approximately
issuance of the human rights reports. Embassy officers use
81% of the recommendations received during the review.
reporting guidance, issued annually by DRL, to formulate
initial drafts for each country. The reports are then edited
Relationship to U.S. Foreign Policy
by DRL staff and further refined in consultation with other
Identification as a human rights-violating nation by the U.S.
relevant State Department offices and the embassies (see
government is likely a stigma most nations seek to avoid. In
Figure 1). The Department of Labor may also contribute to
practice, the human rights reports have more often served as
and/or review the portions concerning worker rights.
an information source for U.S. policy than as an instrument
According to a May 2012 report by Government
for restricting U.S. foreign aid. Findings from the reports
Accountability Office (GAO), near the end of the editing
appear to have rarely been used to restrict aid in accordance
process, the Office of the Secretary of State and National
with Section 116 or Section 502B of the FAA, and these
Security Council (NSC) staff may review selected country
provisions do not require that the State Department
reports. Information sources for the reports are wide-
characterize in the reports which, if any, governments have
ranging and may include nongovernmental organizations,
met the statutory standard of “a consistent pattern of gross
press reports, academic and congressional studies,
violations of internationally human rights.” This differs
international organizations, governments, and alleged
somewhat from other similar annual reports that Congress
victims of human rights abuses.
mandated in later years, such as those on IRF and TIP,
Figure 1. Overview of the Report Drafting Process
which feature mechanisms to publicly designate
problematic governments for potential punitive action.
Human rights advocates have at times argued that findings
from the reports could serve a more concrete role in
influencing U.S. relations with foreign governments, with
some pointing to what they view as historically insufficient
adherence by the executive branch to the above-discussed
provisions for withholding assistance from consistent gross
violators of human rights. The State Department has
generally contended that the reports serve as a valuable tool
in informing U.S. policy on human rights as well as
decisions on foreign aid, asylum, and other matters. Some
have raised the prospect of potential tensions between more
direct policy linkages and the continued actual or perceived
objectivity of the reports.
As a general matter, some analysts and policymakers argue
that tying U.S. policy too closely to human rights can
overly constrain the U.S. government’s flexibility to
Source: Created by CRS based on GAO-12-561R (May 2012), p. 8.
address other challenges affecting U.S. interests. In
Note: Timelines are for il ustrative purposes and may vary.
contrast, supporters of robust human rights and democracy
promotion argue that doing so serves U.S. interests over the
By law, the reports are to be issued by February 25, but in
long term. In his remarks introducing the 2020 reports,
practice the issuance is often delayed until March or April.
Secretary Blinken argued that human rights-respecting
According to GAO, preparing the reports “involves a
countries are more likely to be peaceful, prosperous, stable,
significant commitment of State time and resources” within
and supportive of “the rules-based international order” built
DRL and at embassies. In an October 2018 report, the State
by the United States and U.S. allies.
Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) found that
DRL had “established generally effective processes” for
The scope and content of the reports and the role they
report production.
should serve, as well as the role of human rights in U.S.
Human Rights in the United States
foreign policy more broadly, have been contested since the
reports began in the 1970s. Congress has been a key actor
The FAA requires that the reports cover foreign countries,
in these debates, often as a source of pressure on the
and does not mandate coverage of human rights conditions
executive branch to place greater emphasis on human rights
in the United States. (The aforementioned annual report on
when formulating foreign policy.
IRF similarly covers only foreign countries, while the
annual report on TIP is required to cover U.S. domestic
Michael A. Weber, Analyst in Foreign Affairs
efforts to combat the practice.) State Department officials
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
IF10795
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 13 · UPDATED