Guide to International Human Rights Mechanisms - Brookings

Go To Part I II III IV V
General Considerations in Using International and Regional Mechanisms
prompt reply by the government concerned. The treaty bodies and regional commissions and courts
of human rights can issue requests for “interim” or “provisional” measures to the government while
a communication is pending consideration.
language and format Without exception, every mechanism in this guide requires that communications
or other information be provided in writing and many require a signature by the submitting
party. Beyond this, however, there is substantial variation as to format. Some mechanisms have
issued forms, guidelines or sample communications (which are reproduced after the description of
the mechanism in Section V), although few absolutely require their use. The allowable languages
also vary, though English is universally accepted.
As a general matter, the mechanisms request that communications include the identity and
contact information of the submitting person or organization, and a comprehensive description
of the facts of the case, including relevant dates, places, names of witnesses, and the identities,
if known, of those responsible for the violation. Where relevant, a description of activities
taken to exhaust domestic remedies along with copies of final decisions at the domestic level
may also be required. Some of the mechanisms further require that the submitting person
identify the treaty provision(s) that they claim have been violated. However, where it is shown
that it is impossible in a particular case to obtain such details, many mechanisms will agree to
act with less than total information.
A central dilemma for all human rights mechanisms is assessing the credibility of the communications
they receive. It is therefore advisable to provide as much corroborating documentation and
information as possible with the communication. This could include press reports, signed witness
statements, photographs, medical reports, and/or copies of any relevant official documents.
(Documents are generally not returned to the sender, so only copies should be sent to the mechanisms.)
On the other hand, those responsible for these mechanisms realize that there frequently
is no document proving a particular rights violation and communications will not be rejected only
because they have no documentary support.
Abusive or overly politicized language should also be avoided, as it may lead to rejection of the
communication. It is far better simply to state the facts in as objective a manner as possible and let
them speak for themselves.
As noted above, a number of mechanisms accept information from affected individuals and NGOs
as background for their consideration of reports from states. This information can range from
comprehensive “shadow reports” (i.e. “shadows” to the states’ own periodic reports) to single-issue
updates. There is usually no required format for such information, although it is generally encouraged
that information be organized by the articles of the particular treaty.
confidentiality In many cases, persons making complaints of human rights violations justifiably
fear retaliation from the authorities. The policies of the various mechanisms vary widely on this
Guide to International Human Rights Mechanisms
for Internally Displaced Persons and their Advocates 1