Western States, the UN Commission on Human Rights, and the ‘1235 Procedure’: The ‘Question of Bias’ Revisited

Abstract

For nearly three decades, the UN Commission on Human Rights (CHR) has been conducting public, country-specific investigations of gross human rights violations under the ‘1235 Procedure’. Being a UN body comprised of governmental representatives, its proceedings have often been highly politicised. During the 1980s, charges of bias against the CHR were especially frequent among American observers. However, a comparative analysis of individual governments' policies towards the 1235 Procedure is yet missing. This article provides such an analysis for the Western States and shows that these have themselves at least occasionally pursued biased policies in the CHR concerning gross violations of human rights. More importantly, they have since the late 1970s influenced the CHR's monitoring performance stronger than commonly acknowledged. Despite its exposure to the impact of governments' political interests, the 1235 Procedure nevertheless provides a valuable forum for continuous exchange and coordination of policies with respect to human rights violations, thus inciting governments to review their understanding of ‘national interest’ in light of the promotion of human rights and establishing precedents of legitimate interference leading to a partial reinterpretation of the doctrine of State sovereignty.