Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices

Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices

link to page 2

Updated April 25, 2024
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country
Reports on Human Rights Practices
Introduction
priority in U.S. foreign policy. Section 502B of the FAA
The State Department’s Country Reports on Human Rights
(22 U.S.C. §2304), added in 1974 and substantially
Practices are an annual U.S. government account of human
strengthened in 1976, sought to withhold U.S. security
rights conditions in countries around the globe. The reports
assistance from countries the governments of which engage
characterize countries on the basis of their adherence to
in “a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally
“internationally recognized human rights,” which generally
recognized human rights.” Section 116 (22 U.S.C. §2151n),
refer to civil, political, and worker rights set forth in the
added in 1975 and also strengthened in the years following,
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and other
imposed similar restrictions for recipients of U.S.
international human rights agreements.
development assistance. Contained within these provisions
was language requiring that the Secretary of State transmit
The most recent reports cover calendar year 2023 and were
to Congress each year a report on the human rights
issued on April 22, 2024. The reports provide individual
conditions of recipient countries; an amendment to Section
narratives on countries and territories worldwide and are
116 in 1979 broadened the reporting requirement to cover
available on the Department of State website. In remarks
all other foreign countries. This language thus served as the
introducing the reports, Secretary of State Antony Blinken
legislative basis for the State Department’s annual human
stated, “We once again see human rights and the rule of law
rights reports. Despite the legislative origin of the reports in
under stress in more ways and in more places across the
globe.”
connection with U.S. foreign assistance, the role that the

reports should play with regard to assistance decisions or
As with prior reports, the 2023 reports do not compare
U.S. foreign policy more broadly has been the subject of
countries or rank them based on the severity of human
debate (see “Relationship to U.S. Foreign Policy” below).
rights abuses documented. At the same time, in his remarks
and in a preface to the 2023 reports, Secretary Blinken
Evolution of the Reports
highlighted human rights challenges in a number of
In the early reports, there was concern within the State
contexts, including Afghanistan, China, Cuba, Iran, the
Department about publicly characterizing the human rights
Israel-Hamas conflict, Russia and occupied Ukraine, Sudan,
conditions in other countries, particularly U.S. allies. The
Nicaragua, and Uganda, among others. Blinken stated that
first reports were criticized for lacking objectivity and being
China’s government “continues to carry out genocide,
thin on substance. Over time, with improvements in the
crimes against humanity, forced labor, and other human
breadth, quality, and accuracy of the reports, many
rights violations” against ethnic and religious minority
observers have come to recognize them as more
groups, and noted State Department assessments of
authoritative. At the same time, governments whose human
international crimes in additional contexts, including by
rights practices are criticized in the reports may publicly
Russian forces in Ukraine and by both the Sudanese Armed
defend their record, dismiss the reports as biased, and/or in
Forces and Rapid Support Forces in Sudan.
turn criticize human rights conditions in the United States.
The State Department has gradually broadened the scope of
Broad Topics Covered in the 2023 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 or other directives, such as those
Political Freedoms
accompanying State Department appropriations bills. In
Government Corruption
addition, the reports now reference separate congressionally
Governmental Posture toward Human Rights Investigations
mandated reports on international religious freedom (IRF)
Discrimination and Societal Abuses
and trafficking in persons (TIP). Topics that have received
Worker Rights
new or increased coverage in recent reports include
Legislative Mandate
transnational repression, threats and violence against human
The foundational statutory requirement for the human rights
rights defenders, and abuses against lesbian, gay, bisexual,
reports is found in Sections 116 and 502B of the Foreign
transgender, queer, and intersex individuals. In December
Assistance Act (FAA) of 1961 (P.L. 87-195), as amended.
2023, as part of the Department of State Authorization Act
Both of these provisions were first enacted via
contained in the National Defense Authorization Act for
congressional amendments in the mid-1970s and have been
FY2024, Congress amended the reporting requirements to
broadened and strengthened over time through additional
codify and expand State Department reporting on
amendments.
transnational repression issues, where applicable (see §6707
of P.L. 118-31; 22 U.S.C. §2151n(d)(13)).
The 1970s was a formative period for human rights-related
legislation as Congress sought to enshrine human rights as a
https://crsreports.congress.gov

link to page 2
Global Human Rights: The Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
Drafting and Review Process
officials have at times noted that the United States
The State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human
participates in mechanisms that evaluate domestic human
Rights, and Labor (DRL) coordinates the drafting and
rights conditions, such as the United Nations Human Rights
issuance of the human rights reports. Embassy officers use
Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The United
reporting guidance, issued annually by DRL, to formulate
States underwent its third and most recent review in 2020,
initial drafts for each country. The reports are then edited
and the council adopted the United States’ UPR report in
by DRL staff and further refined in consultation with other
March 2021. In his remarks introducing the 2023 reports,
relevant State Department offices and the embassies (see
Secretary of State Blinken stated, “While the report focuses
Figure 1). The Department of Labor also contributes to the
on human rights challenges abroad, we recognize that the
portions concerning worker rights. Information sources for
United States faces its own shortcomings,” and argued that
the reports are wide-ranging and may include information
“The strength of democracies like ours is that we address
gathered by U.S. embassies and consulates, foreign
those shortcomings … openly.”
government officials, nongovernmental and international
organizations, human rights defenders, and others.
Relationship to U.S. Foreign Policy
Figure 1. Overview of the Report Drafting Process
Given that most nations may seek to avoid being identified
as a human rights-violating nation by the U.S. government,
the human rights reports may help incentivize
improvements in human rights practices in some cases.
While the reports serve as an information source for U.S.
policy, findings from the reports appear to have
infrequently been used to restrict aid in accordance with
Section 116 or Section 502B of the FAA. Some human
rights advocates have argued that the executive branch has
historically insufficiently adhered to these assistance
prohibitions. The FAA does not require to be made public a
list of governments that are or have been subject to
restriction pursuant to these FAA provisions, and the State
Department does not characterize in the reports which, if
any, governments have met the aforementioned statutory
standard of “a consistent pattern of gross violations of
internationally human rights.” This differs somewhat from
other similar annual reports that Congress mandated in later
years, such as those on IRF and TIP, which require the
public designation of problematic governments for potential

sanctions.
Source: Created by CRS based on GAO-12-561R (May 2012), p. 8.
Note: Timelines are for il ustrative purposes and may vary; according
As a general matter, some analysts argue that tying U.S.
to an appendix to the 2023 reports, the State Department “provides
policy too closely to human rights can overly constrain the
guidance to U.S. diplomatic missions annual y by July for submission of
U.S. government’s flexibility to address other challenges
updated reports in September and October,” and “updates these
affecting U.S. interests. Supporters of robust human rights
texts by year’s end.”
and democracy promotion conversely argue that doing so
serves U.S. interests over the long term, noting, for
By law, the reports are to be issued by February 25 each
example, that threats to U.S. security tend to be associated
year, but in practice the issuance is often delayed until
with countries with poor human rights records (in addition
March or April. According to a 2012 report by the
to their arguments for doing so on moral grounds).
Government Accountability Office (GAO), preparing the
reports “involves a significant commitment of State time
The scope and content of the reports and the role they
and resources” within DRL and at embassies. In an October
should serve, as well as the role of human rights in U.S.
2018 report, the State Department Office of Inspector
foreign policy more broadly, have been contested since the
General (OIG) found that DRL had “established generally
reports began in the 1970s. Congress has been a key actor
effective processes” for report production.
in these debates, at times as a source of pressure on the
executive branch to place greater emphasis on human rights
Human Rights in the United States
when formulating foreign policy.
The FAA requires that the reports cover foreign countries
and does not mandate coverage of human rights conditions
See also CRS Report R47890, Democracy and Human
in the United States. (The aforementioned annual report on
Rights in U.S. Foreign Policy: Tools and Considerations
IRF similarly covers only foreign countries, while the
for Congress.
annual report on TIP is required to cover U.S. domestic
efforts to combat the practice.) An appendix to the 2023
Michael A. Weber, Analyst in Foreign Affairs
reports states that the reports “do not describe or assess the
human rights implications of actions taken by the U.S.
IF10795
Government or its representatives.” State Department

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 16 · UPDATED