1. ICCPR and the Human Rights Committee Helen Keller Professor, University of Zurich Oslo, August 18 th 2009

2. Content I. Historical Development II. Work of the Human Rights Committee III. Main Problems IV. Conclusion and Personal Experience 1

3. Historical Development 1948Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1966Adoption of the ICCPR and the First Optional Protocol (individual complaints) 1976ICCPR entered into force 1989Adoption of the Second Optional Protocol (entered into force in 1991) 2

4. Ratification ICCPR:164 States First Protocol:112 States Second Protocol:71 States 3

5. Composition of the HRC 18 experts not representing their States (5 women, 13 men) regional distribution Western Europe and North America7 African5 Latin American and Caribbean Countries3 Asia2 Eastern Europe1 4

6. Workload of the HRC 1.Examining State Reports 2.Considering Individual Communications 3.Adopting General Comments 5

7. Workload of the Human Rights Committee (1980-2008) 6

8. Examining Reports first report due one year after ratification of the ICCPR periodic reports every 4-6 years Report  List of issues  Constructive dialogue before the Committee shadow reports by NGOs concluding observations 7

9. Considering Individual Complaints no formal procedure, a simple letter to the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is enough no fees, no legal representation required since the institution of the complaints procedure, some 8,000 communications have been received no personal appearance, no fact-finding missions follow-up monitoring 8

10. Adopting General Comments summary of frequent problems either in the process of examining State Reports or Communications since 1981, 33 General Comments have been adopted legal character very disputed 9

11. Main Problems Filibustering Delay, Non-Reporting Cooperation with NGOs Standardization (Common Core Document) Compliance and Follow-up Backlog of over 400 Communications Evolutive Interpretation of the ICCPR and the Legitimacy Problem Human Rights Council 10

12. Conclusion and Personal Experience HRC is not a quasi-supranational institution (like the European Court of Human Rights); in the context of the U.N., it is one of the most successful treaty bodies. HRC is in a deep crisis (institutionally, personally and financially) Personally, the membership is equally challenging and inspiring The U.N. administration is a Moloch. 11