Special Procedures

s Future Foreign Policy' 81 International Affairs 87. [Hereafter referred to as Mandela] 4 Bohle-Muller supra note 1, at 5. 5 Ubuntu as reflected on the front page of White Paper on SA's Foreign Policy of 13 May 2011 refers to 'humanity'. In addition to that, the ubuntuideology is described as South African foreign policy diplomacy. However, rather than being know as foreign policy diplomacy, there are significant connotations attached to the concept of ubuntu. For instance, its meaning is shared across Nguni official languages in South Africa with the motto in isiZulu 'umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu' which directly translate in English (a human is a human through other human beings) as cited in Elechi OO, Morris SVC &Schafer EJ 'Restoring Justice (Ubuntu): An African Perspective' (2010) 20 International Criminal Justice Review 75. Furthermore, according to Mokgoro, the concept of ubuntuentails social values in South Africa or Africans such as group solidarity, conformity, compassion, respect, human dignity, humanistic orientation and collective unity (Mokgoro JY 'Ubuntu and the Law of South Africa (1998) Conrad-Adenauer-Sifting Seminar Report of the Colloquium 3).

Voluntary submission to punishment in misdemeanor proceedings In misdemeanor proceedings, the accused has the option to end the proceedings by voluntarily submitting to punishment. While in the context of criminal proceedings, consensual procedures are widely discussed in legal doctrine, in the case of misdemeanor proceedings, this issue has not yet been thoroughly analyzed. Due to emerging practical doubts in this area, a more extensive discussion is needed. Misdemeanor proceedings are less formalized and focused on speed. Therefore, the consensual procedures used in misdemeanor cases differ significantly from those in criminal proceedings.

Triggered by various factors, migrations change people's destinies, social, economic, and cultural bre and patterns of the states and regions, but also the geo-political map of the world. In their attempts to nd a better life conditions or environment, migrants are frequently faced with insecurity, serious human rights violation and violence, including exposure and additional vulnerability to be subjected to smuggling and tra cking and other forms of exploitation. Rigid migration policies of States such as refusal of entry, pushbacks o en accompanied by violence, expulsion or detention, and the increasingly perilous journeys of migrants cause a particular risk to become victims of enforced disappearances. is paper explores and presents the reasons behind the decision of the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances to adopt the First General Comment on Enforced Disappearances in the Context of Migration, but also elaborates on the process preceded the adoption as well as the content of the document itself. It also discusses the forthcoming steps in dissemination and implementation of the General Comment focusing on the speci c roles of other universal, regional and national human rights mechanisms, including the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances.

The research topic of the article focuses on the analysis of the principle of choosing a customs procedure in EU customs trade, which is of a normative nature. It is also the basic method of dealing with goods. In addition to the general legal principles constituting this principle, the article discusses the principle of freedom of trade in goods abroad; the principle of equal treatment of entities; the principle of equal treatment of goods; the principle of universality of customs duties and customs fees; the principle of universal access to information on customs law; the principle of nonrevokability of the customs declaration. The conditions for export and import customs procedures were also discussed.

After the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force, the process of concluding treaties between the EU and third countries or international organizations has sustained significant changes. The most important procedural novelty is the establishment of the ordinary procedure that covers almost all agreements the EU concludes with third parties. Under the Lisbon Treaty, this procedure involves a number of stages: negotiations, signing the agreement, and decision to conclude the agreement. For agreements whose subject matter exclusively or predominantly falls into the domain of common foreign and security policy, there are several derogations from the uniform rules of the ordinary procedure. The same provision of the founding treaty regulates the procedures for amending and suspending the agreement in force, as well as the judicial control procedure of those agreements that are yet to be concluded. The ordinary procedure does not cover two subject-specific proceedings pertaining to relativel...

Climate change introduce serious issues to environmental rights and human rights everywhere. This paper researches the tangled relationship between climate change, environmental degradation, and the protection of the basis human rights. Further studies explain how climate change affect the planet and how it violate human rights worldwide. Start from explaining The UNFCCC providing the trading emission and their strategies that mitigation and adaptation. And moving to The UNHRC secure the rapporteur in order to protect human rights.While this climate change is still there and even upgrading for a long term, the population must be prepared in order to save the next generation.

The report analyses the historical underpinnings of the UN human rights petitions system (comprised of the Special Procedures communications, Treaty Body communications, and the Human Rights Council’s Confidential Complaint Procedure); assesses the visibility, accessibility, responsiveness, and effectiveness of the current system; and makes recommendations for strengthening this vital protection tool in the future Authors: Marc Limon, Universal Rights Group Other Contributors: Elvira Dominguez-Redondo, University of Middlesex Hilary Power, formerly with the Universal Rights Group Ingela Stahl-Zulu, independent consultant Nathalie Munoz Tord, Universal Rights Group

The present work aims at exploring how an individual State is able to contribute decisively to the work of the Human Rights Council in one of the main successes of this still relatively new United Nations body: the elaboration of international human rights norms and standards. Argentina is studied as a relevant example in this regard. During the last 40 years, Argentina radically changed from defending itself from accusations of serious human rights violations to being deeply committed to the promotion and protection of human rights at the national level. This was translated into a very active foreign policy in the field of human rights, which contributed to the development of international human rights norms and standards on issues such as the right to the truth, the fight against impunity for cases of gross human rights violations such as enforced disappearances, and the rights of LGBTI individuals.

The present work aims at exploring how an individual State is able to contribute decisively to the work of the Human Rights Council in one of the main successes of this still relatively new United Nations body: the elaboration of international human rights norms and standards. Argentina is studied as a relevant example in this regard. During the last 40 years, Argentina radically changed from defending itself from accusations of serious human rights violations to being deeply committed to the promotion and protection of human rights at the national level. This was translated into a very active foreign policy in the field of human rights, which contributed to the development of international human rights norms and standards on issues such as the right to the truth, the fight against impunity for cases of gross human rights violations such as enforced disappearances, and the rights of LGBTI individuals.

In the commented judgement, the court discharged the responsibility of individuals who presented banners with photographs of human remains after abortions in front of the obstetrics hospital in Opole. They had been charged with public display of obscenity (Article 141 of the Petty Offences Code). Not only the discharge was wrong, although it is possible to apply Article 140 of the Petty Offences Code instead of Article 141, as the formerly prescribed responsibility for public indecency. The court applied also a completely erroneous interpretation of the presentation of public indecency, as limited to the intimate and gender sphere. Historical, comparative, linguistic, teleological and systematic interpretations indicate that public decency includes a commonly accepted and required public behavior, the violation of which causes or may cause negative reactions of others in the form of embarrassment, scandal, anger, opposition, condemnation. Such punishable public indecency is any that...

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

The development of mechanisms to target specific countries for human rights abuses was part of the campaign against apartheid at the UN in the 1960s. This campaign led to reform of the UN Commission on Human Rights, which turned it from a purely "promotional" or precatory body into one with an active mandate to protect individuals from human rights abuses perpetrated by their own state. The institutional politics of human rights at the Commission was plagued by claims of "double standards" and inter-bloc defensiveness. This article argues that the reform of the Commission in the 1960s and the way that its mechanisms were used in the 1970s defined the Commission's politics in a way that led to its eventual demise in the early 2000s.

After the Lisbon Treaty has entered into force, the process of concluding treaties between the EU and third countries or international organizations has sustained significant changes. The most important procedural novelty is the establishment of the ordinary procedure that covers almost all agreements the EU concludes with third parties. Under the Lisbon Treaty, this procedure involves a number of stages: negotiations, signing the agreement, and decision to conclude the agreement. For agreements whose subject matter exclusively or predominantly falls into the domain of common foreign and security policy, there are several derogations from the uniform rules of the ordinary procedure. The same provision of the founding treaty regulates the procedures for amending and suspending the agreement in force, as well as the judicial control procedure of those agreements that are yet to be concluded. The ordinary procedure does not cover two subject-specific proceedings pertaining to relativel...

Human Rights Council Sixteenth session Agenda item 1 Organizational and procedural matters Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council* 16/21 Review of the work and functioning of the Human Rights Council The Human Rights Council, Acting in compliance with the mandate entrusted to it by the General Assembly in paragraph 16 of resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006, in which the Assembly decided that the Human Rights Council should review its work and functioning five years after its establishment and report to the Assembly, Having considered the report of the open-ended intergovernmental working group on the review of work and functioning of the Human Rights Council, 1 established by the Council in its resolution 12/1 of 1 October 2009, 1. Takes note of the report of the open-ended intergovernmental working group on the review of work and functioning of the Human Rights Council, 2. Adopts the "Outcome of the review of the work and functioning of the United Nations Human Rights Council" as annexed to the present resolution, to be submitted to the General Assembly; 3. Decides that the "Outcome of the review of the work and functioning of the United Nations Human Rights Council" shall be a supplement to the institution-building package contained in Human Rights Council resolutions 5/1 and 5/2 of 18 June 2007, as well as in other related Council resolutions, decisions and President's statements; 4. Also decides to submit the following draft resolution to the General Assembly for its consideration: "The General Assembly, "Taking note of Human Rights Council resolution 16/21 of 25 March 2011, "Endorses the text entitled "Outcome of the review of the work and functioning of the United Nations Human Rights Council"." * The resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council will be contained in the report of the Council on its sixteenth session (A/HRC/16/2), chap. I.

Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the author's name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pagination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the date of the award.

Some States, having gained increased weight in the United Nations [UN] human rights machinery, pushed through reforms of the Charter-bodies designed to limit their powers of investigation. This paper focuses on the impact of these views in relation to the methods of work developed by special procedures. However, it also highlights how the limits imposed on the freedom enjoyed so far by mandate-holders in the performance of their functions may have provided the most powerful arguments to overcome their brittle legal foundations, and to provide a sound legal basis to the most intrusive activities of such procedures. The approval of a Code of Conduct appears to endorse a practice that subverts the traditional requirement of State consent when monitoring activities result in a final assessment based on international law as to the existence of a violation.

when operationalising their activities. Such flexibility has led to a diversity of methodologies, and to the progressive expansion of the competences of special procedures through practice, adding to the complexity of the functions they have come to fulfil. Today, most special procedures cover not only the examination of situations of gross violations of human rights, but also extend to the consideration of complaints from individuals; the use of 'urgent appeals' to protect the life and/or physical integrity of people allegedly under imminent risk; the conduct of fact-finding missions; the provision of technical assistance; and the codification of emerging norms of international human rights norms[1]. 4 This latter activity will form the prime focus of this chapter. This chapter explores the contribution of mandate holders of special procedures to the coherence of international human rights standards using as a paradigm their diverse interpretation of the legal framework, which serves as the basis of their operations. It evaluates the extent to which the human rights norms developed by the special procedures are consonant with other international efforts to regulate the same matters. The chapter is divided into four sections. Sections 1 to 3 provide an overview of the role of special procedures in the creation and/or consolidation of new norms of international human rights in the context of clarifying their own scope of competences. Special attention is paid, in the final section, to the most salient human rights instruments drafted by mandate holders, understanding as such, those that have received approval or endorsement by their parent body, the Commission on Human Rights and, sometimes, also the General Assembly. Whether these efforts contribute to the strengthening of emerging trends in international law (for example, the recognition of the right to water, or sexual orientation as human rights issues), or whether they add a layer of complexity to the quest for supporting the universality of human rights on the basis of the existence of uniform norms on a given topic, remains an open question, as will be demonstrated.

After four years in operation the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is subject to criticism, and various scholars and practitioners alike present and discuss reform proposals. In the present paper we study systematically the controversial decisions in the UNHRC. We find that controversial proposals are introduced by countries with a blemished human rights record, and that in the votes on these proposals the council members belonging to the European Union (EU) vote very distinctly from the remaining members and have preferences quite different from those member states that violate human rights. Extending an empirical approach frequently used in parliamentary research we can also show that in votes in the UNHRC preferences of member states dominate over their membership to particular blocs. As controversial votes also heavily polarize the UNHRC we argue that the problems faced by the UNHRC's predecessor, namely the Commission on Human Rights, have reappeared.

El objetivo del artículo es examinar el primer año de práctica del Consejo de Derechos Humanos con el fin de ofrecer una valoración crítica de la primera actividad del Consejo. Después de un debate sobre el proceso de establecimiento, mandato y métodos de trabajo del Consejo, se consideran las decisiones adoptadas por el CDH en su primer año de funcionamiento. La revisión de la primera práctica del Consejo de Derechos Humanos muestra los logros del nuevo órgano y los retos del futuro. En concreto, los socios y los métodos de trabajo del Consejo plantean temas muy polémicos. A modo de conclusión se observa que la construcción de la institución es con mucho el logro más importante del primer año de práctica del Consejo, especialmente en lo que concierne a la Revisión Periódica Universal. Presenta, sin embargo, aspectos desconcertantes referentes a la consideración de las situaciones del País y muestra un enfoque muy delicado y politizado sobre estos temas que se verá inexorablemente r...

The established practices of UN Special Procedures, like those of the wider human rights community, are being challenged by the rise of information and communication technologies (ICTs). Special Procedures mandate-holders need to be able to embrace the opportunities that new ICTs-namely the hardware and software that facilitate the production, storage, transmission and reception of digital informationcan provide. 1 If used sensitively, it seems ICTs present an opportunity to increase the pluralism of participation in human rights protection and promotion, and thus strengthen one of the core aims of human rights. 2 An early example of this opportunity came in 2009, when the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston, and then in 2010 his successor, Christof Heyns, were approached with mobile phone footage purporting to show grave human rights violations in Sri Lanka. After evaluating the footage, both Special Rapporteurs called on the Sri Lankan government to investigate the documented executions. 3 Without the mobile phone, this documentation would not have been possible, yet the use of this footage was not without its challenges. 4 Based partly on this experience, and building on Alston's earlier work on the topic 5 , Heyns chose to dedicate one of his 2015 thematic reports to the question of how ICTs

How to strengthen cooperation between Special Procedures and the un membership has been a constant source of debate and negotiation since the establishment of the first mandate in 1967. Over the intervening years, many ideas have been generated. Unfortunately they have rarely been acted upon or implemented. Building on the author's experience as a diplomat and as head of a human rights think tank, this short chapter looks at the current situation of state cooperation with Special Procedures. In so doing, it identifies where the key problems lie, analyses reform efforts of the past 50 years, and describes contemporary steps being taken at the Human Rights Council to strengthen cooperation in line with that body's founding documents.

THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN DISINTEGRATING STATES: A NEW CHALLENGE Bartram S. Brown* The disintegration of existing States raises many complex issues of international law, issues which have gained a new prominence with re-cent events in areas formerly ...

Study of the human anatomy, quite clearly, starts with an analysis of the body as a whole. It is not possible to conjecture what lies within a body if there is no understanding of the overall body being studied. Insofar as the Human Rights Council is concerned, this will be done succinctly based on an overall description of the Council and its main mechanisms. The aim of this chapter is to offer some general considerations that are necessary to understand their main features. The Human Rights Council (The Council) was established by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (The Assembly) in its Resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006 to replace the Commission on Human Rights (The Commission). Its status, which is supposed to be reviewed on a regular basis, is that of a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly.

The report analyses the historical underpinnings of the UN human rights petitions system (comprised of the Special Procedures communications, Treaty Body communications, and the Human Rights Council’s Confidential Complaint Procedure); assesses the visibility, accessibility, responsiveness, and effectiveness of the current system; and makes recommendations for strengthening this vital protection tool in the future Authors: Marc Limon, Universal Rights Group Other Contributors: Elvira Dominguez-Redondo, University of Middlesex Hilary Power, formerly with the Universal Rights Group Ingela Stahl-Zulu, independent consultant Nathalie Munoz Tord, Universal Rights Group

The stage for this rather unique book is set by none less than UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, whose very first sentence of his Foreword sums up the qualities of the office and its former holder: "the job of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights is not for the faint of heart". And faint of heart Mary Robinson, the subject and, in many ways, also object of this collection of public interventions made during her five years in the 'job', certainly was not. Which is why the collection's bland title comes as somewhat a surprise, not least as Kevin Boyle, its editor, has otherwise done a marvelous job in providing everything the reader might desire from this type of publication, be it the abundance of informative annotations, and introductory commentary, the comprehensive index and appendices, or simply the thematic organization which provides a fascinating and accessible overview of the multiple dimensions of UN human rights work. Only the title, A Voice for Human Rights, just does not quite do justice to the formidable story that emerges through the many places, people and occasions with which the book deals-with the 'voice' metaphor being so commonplace that the title finds itself in the company of such illustrious monographs as The Voice of Knowledge: a practical guide to inner peace, or Songs of the Humpback Whale: a novel in five voices. Yet, commonplace is not what Mary Robinson and her term as High Commissioner can be said to have been, neither in terms of her personal endurance in the face of an abundance of challenges, nor in relation to the testing times which marked her term of office. This is why the prima facie outmoded format of a collection of public speeches works here to the benefit of the reader, as it permits the presentation of a vast range of topics with a clarity and simplicity that no deeper academic treatment could ever achieve. As a consequence, complex and controversial issues such as 'mainstreaming' or 'human rights in development' become concepts debatable far beyond the bounds of UN staff, NGO fora, or specialist academic circles. Indeed, A Voice for Human Rights is as much an eclectic, if still rather comprehensive human rights lexicon, as it is an account of Mary Robinson's particular contribution "in her own words" (p. IX). That contribution is, as already mentioned, organized into five general thematic parts, which are, in turn, subdivided into twenty chapters devoted to specific human rights topics. It ends, rather movingly, with Mary Robinson's farewell speech to her BOOK REVIEW

Few names are so closely connected with the cause of human rights as that of Mary Robinson. As former President of Ireland, she was ideally positioned for passionately and eloquently arguing the case for human rights around the world. Over five tumultuous years ...

Foreign Policy' 81 International Affairs 87. [Hereafter referred to as Mandela] 4 Bohle-Muller supra note 1, at 5. 5 Ubuntu as reflected on the front page of White Paper on SA's Foreign Policy of 13 May 2011 refers to 'humanity'. In addition to that, the ubuntuideology is described as South African foreign policy diplomacy. However, rather than being know as foreign policy diplomacy, there are significant connotations attached to the concept of ubuntu. For instance, its meaning is shared across Nguni official languages in South Africa with the motto in isiZulu 'umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu' which directly translate in English (a human is a human through other human beings) as cited in

Non-discrimination and fundamental freedoms, together with other human rights examined throughout this course, play a central role in ensuring open, tolerant societies that respect the rule of law. They play a central role in counter-terrorism efforts in a number of ways. One way is that the very undermining and violation of these freedoms and their accompanying rights are commonly specific terrorist objectives. As the Human Rights Council noted in its Resolution 30/15 (2015) on human rights and preventing violent extremism, "acts, methods and practices of violent extremism, in all their forms and manifestations" are "activities that aim to threaten the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and democracy, and threaten territorial integrity and the security of States, and destabilize legitimately constituted governments" (para 1).

W doktrynie prawa karnego procesowego od przeszło 30 lat toczy się dyskusja na temat zakresu obowiązywania zakazu reformationis in peius w postępowaniu zainicjowanym wniesieniem sprzeciwu od wyroku nakazowego. Sprowadza się ona nie tylko do kwestii interpretacji przepisów wyrażających stosunek ustawodawcy do tego zagadnienia, ale dotyka również oceny zgodności poszczególnych uregulowań ustawowych z normami wyższego rzędu. Dyskusja ta odnosi się także do obszaru celowości uregulowania tej problematyki w taki czy inny sposób, wiążąc się z wyrażaniem przez poszczególnych przedstawicieli piśmiennictwa przeróżnych wniosków de lege ferenda. W niniejszej pracy zajęto się obecnym stanem nauki i orzecznictwa w odniesieniu do omawianego zagadnienia, a także zaprezentowano w tym względzie własne stanowisko.

The aim of this background paper is to explain the rationale leading to the existing communication system, charting its strengths and weaknesses taking into account the coordinates within which it has developed. With this purpose, the following pages provide an overview of the United Nations communication system, its origins, original purpose and evolution. This paper explains the main characteristics of each system and the framework of regulations and practices governing its operations since the first mechanisms commenced in the 1960s with the acceptance of such communications .

The human rights communications procedures are central to the purpose, effectiveness and credibility of the United Nations – representing the only direct link between the victims of human rights violations and the international human rights protection system. However, over the past half-century, what was once a vibrant part of the UN’s human rights work has become increasingly neglected and somewhat discredited – the victim of its own complexity and distance from ‘the Peoples’ of the UN.

This report on the UN’s system of individual human rights communications is the result of a two-year project led by the Universal Rights Group. It offers a number of conclusions.

First, each of the three main communications procedures plays a distinct and crucial role in the overall UN human rights petitions system. Each has its own strengths when viewed from a victim’s perspective.

Second, the challenges faced by, and the weaknesses of, each procedure, especially when viewed from a victim’s perspective, show significant overlap.

Third, these weaknesses or challenges cannot be addressed, within existing resources, by focusing on each procedure in isolation. Rather, States and the UN Secretariat must once again (as was the case in the late 1970s when the then Secretary-General published a ground-breaking analysis of contemporary communications procedures and their interaction) look at the procedures as three interconnected and complementary parts of a single coherent UN petitions system – with a single user interface and, perhaps, a single Secretariat.

Fourth, modern technology presents enormous opportunities to finally put in place such a ‘fully coordinated approach’ within ‘a fully automated system’ (as called for by the Chair of the Commission on Human Rights in 2000).

With these conclusions in mind, this policy report makes a number of recommendations. In particular, the report argues that reforming and re-energising the UN human rights petitions system should be a priority for States as they look towards the 2021-2026 review of the Human Rights Council by the General Assembly. In considering those reforms, States should adopt a victim’s perspective, viewing the current system – and possible changes thereto – through the lens of those people who need to use it.

In the opinion of the Universal Rights Group, such reforms, in order to be successful, must be based on the overarching objective of establishing a single, coherent UN human rights petitions system comprising a single user interface and single UN petitions Secretariat, responsible for channelling petitions to the most appropriate communications procedure(s) and following up on each and every case. To make this possible, the UN will need to leverage the power of modern information technology.

There is a growing recognition that as the Human Rights Council (HRC) approaches its twelve year anniversary there is a need to undertake an inclusive, cross regional and structured dialogue to review how the HRC could best fulfil its mandate and purpose, as set down in GA resolution 60/251. This includes discussions around how the work and effectiveness of the HRC might be further enhanced and strengthened in the future.

That does not mean root and branch reform based on a premise that the Council is fundamentally failing. It is not. Rather, it means pursuing evidence-based improvements in a number of specific areas where the experience of the past twelve years suggests the Council could do better. Examples of such areas include: 1) working methods; 2) the agenda and the programme of work; 3) the effective delivery of capacity-building and technical support; 4) membership – in particular supporting inclusivity and accessibility for a more diverse membership, and improved compliance with the principles and criteria set down in GA resolution 60/251; 5) support for domestic implementation; 6) strengthening coordination and communication between ‘Geneva’ and ‘New York’; and 7) securing a shift in how the Council considers and deals with situations of human rights violations – from reaction to prevention.

Calls for, and debates around, Council strengthening have steadily increased over the past two years. There appears to be broad agreement on the need for a process of reflection and review with a view to improving the functioning of the Council even further. Today, the key difference between States is not over whether there is a need to bring improvements to the work of the Council, but rather how and when to proceed in that effort and what improvements are needed.

Against this background, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Mexico, Rwanda, Japan, and Latvia, supported by the Universal Rights Group, organised, on 1st December 2017, a one day conference designed to provide an open platform for States to exchange views on the question of Human Rights Council strengthening.

This outcome document report aims to capture the spirit and substance of those discussions, to reflect all views put forward, while respecting the ‘Chatham House Rule’ format of the discussion. The report is not an exhaustive summary of all the discussions, focusing instead on the main outcomes. The report does not take a position on the ideas put forward, nor does it provide suggestions on the process for taking any of these ideas forward. The report is intended to be a reference document for future discussions on the strengthening of the Human Rights Council.