Joint Statement to Human Rights Council working group on Expert Advice

Human Rights Council Working Group
16 February 2007

Joint Statement by IMADR and Lutheran World Federation

Taking into account various perspectives expressed in the discussions on this matter to date, we believe that it is possible to imagine a compromise. We envisage an expert advisory system consisting of a smaller core body of perhaps 6-10 expert members which would have regular annual meetings as the Sub-Commission has done. But attached to this body would be a roster of qualified experts to be drawn on for specific tasks, according to the precise type of expertise required.

We consider that this expert advisory system, and its associated roster of experts, should continue to have the role of conducting studies on matters within the field of human rights which might require further exploration and elaboration. At the same time, this body should have a special role in promoting implementation through the development of guidelines for the implementation of existing standards, on issues on which guidance with regard to implementation is seen to be needed.

We believe that some sort of limitation upon the maximum membership term of the core body would be desirable, and we favour a maximum of two 3-year terms.

The expert advisory system, while clearly subsidiary to and under the direction of the Human Rights Council, should have the discretion and independence to undertake preliminary examination of potential initiatives for recommendation to the Council.

With regard to the future of the Working Groups established by the Sub-Commission, we support the views and proposals expressed by our colleagues at Minority Rights Group International. We do not think that it is realistic to imagine that these Working Groups can meet during the regular annual sessions of the expert body. Provision should be made for them to meet inter-sessionally in order for them to make the contribution that they are capable of making.

We also wish to underline the importance of a high degree of NGO participation in and contribution to the expert advisory system. This has been a key strength of the Sub-Commission and its related processes, and should be preserved and extended.

Finally, we would like to stress that a strong and independent expert advisory system will be essential for the health of the UN’s human rights machinery, as it has been in the past.