Hailed as an international human rights innovation, the UN Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (“UPR”) is a peer-review mechanism that assesses the protection and promotion of human rights in all 193 UN Member States, including intergovernmental and civil society input. Importantly, within the UPR, other Member States provide recommendations to each state under review on how it can improve human rights on the ground. States can decide to accept or note recommendations and should then go on to implement those that are accepted. The recommendations are a fundamental part of the UPR process, yet they are not always formulated in a way that leads to positive change. Using the case study of domestic abuse in the UK, this article seeks to add to the current literature through an analysis of the formulation of UPR recommendations, providing five practical suggestions for how recommendations can be improved to ensure action is taken on the ground: (1) use consistent terminology, (2) be specific when discussion aspects of violence against women and girls, (3) UPR recommendations should be fluid and adapt to the changing human rights landscape, (4) utilize recommendations provided by civil society organizations in their stakeholder submissions, and (5) consider applying an intersectional approach when making recommendations.
Recommended CitationAlice Storey, Improving Recommendations from the UN's Universal Periodic Review: A Case Study on Domestic Abuse in the UK, 35 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 193 (2023)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pilr/vol35/iss2/2