Universal Periodic Review – Follow Up and Implementation

On 27 January 2011, Australia received 145 recommendations from the global community as to how to improve the promotion and protection of human rights on the ground. The recommendations ranged from enacting a comprehensive national Human Rights Act, to recognising same-sex marriage, to enshrining Indigenous and racial equality rights in the Constitution, to abolishing mandatory immigration detention.

The Australia Government has committed to fully consider the recommendations “in the coming months” and to formally respond to them at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in June. Australia’s response presents both a test and an opportunity for the protection of human rights at home and the enhancement of our international standing and reputation abroad.


Follow Up with Government

Process for Follow Up (February 2011)

Immediately following the UPR in January 2011, the Human Rights Law Centre wrote to the Government outlining a range of concrete actions to positively respond to and implement the recommendations of the UPR [Letter and Memorandum]. The Centre also joined with a major Australian NGO Coalition in writing to the Government seeking information regarding the process for follow up to the UPR [Letter].

Public Consultations (31 March 2011)

On 7 March, the Australian Government announced a public consultation seeking submissions on how it should respond to and prioritise the 145 UPR recommendations. Submissions were due by 31 March 2011.

The Human Rights Law Centre made a submission to the consultation [submission and annexure] on the Australian Government’s legal obligation to implement key human rights reforms.  According to the HRLC’s legal analysis of the recommendations, the Australian Government must immediately implement at least 55 of the UPR recommendations in order for Australia to avoid continuing breaches of its legal obligations under international law.

The Centre was also involved in the coordination of a major NGO Coalition submission to the Attorney-General’s Department regarding prioritisation and practical implementation of the 145 recommendations.

Ministerial Statement on the Universal Periodic Review (2 March 2011)

The HRLC warmly welcomed the Ministerial Statement of the Attorney General, the Hon Rob McClelland MP, regarding the Universal Periodic Review and the tabling of the 145 recommendations made in relation to Australia in Federal Parliament.

In the Statement, the Attorney states that ”the Government firmly believes that a nation that respects fundamental human rights is a nation that is safer, more resilient, productive and stable” and that “the Universal Periodic Review is an important opportunity to reflect on progress we have made and to renew our determination that in the fields of human rights, equality and opportunity, we can always achieve more.”

It is pleasing that the Statement forthrightly acknowledges that, in the course of the UPR, Australia received 145 recommendations, including in relation to ”international human rights treaties, domestic implementation of human rights obligations, the rights of Indigenous peoples, the rights of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants, our counter-terrorism laws, the rights of persons with disabilities and the rights of women and children”.

It is also pleasing that, through the Statement, the Attorney-General commits the Australian Government to working closely with the  Australian Human Rights Commission and NGOs to fully consider “the range of recommendations made and respond to the Council in the coming months”.


Follow Up with the UN Human Rights Council and States

NGO Statement on the Universal Periodic Review of Australia (16 May 2011)

On 16 May 2011, the NGO Coalition submitted a written statement on the Universal Periodic Review of Australia for consideration under Item 6 of the Agenda at the 17th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in June.

NGO Follow Up with UN Missions in relation to Immigration Detention (4 May 2011)

During the review, a significant number of countries asked questions and made recommendations about Australia’s immigration policies and the practice of mandatory detention. Australia gave a preliminary oral response to those questions during the January review and will provide a more detailed response to the Human Rights Council in June.

A coalition of leading human rights and refugee advocacy organisations – comprising the HRLC, Human Rights Watch, the Refugee Council of Australia, the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, the Refugee and Immigration Legal Centre and the Migrant and Refugee Rights Project at UNSW – is gravely concerned that Australia’s responses to questions from the international community did not accurately reflect Australian law, policy or practice on refugee and asylum seeker issues.

Accordingly, on 4 May 2011, the coalition sent a letter to the UN Ambassadors of each of the countries which raised concerns about Australia’s migration policies.

The letter provides accurate and up-to date information regarding:

  • the fact that Australian law provides for mandatory, indefinite detention without judicial oversight;
  • the fact that detention is not only used as a last resort or for the shortest practicable time;
  • children in detention; and
  • conditions of immigration detention.

The missions to which the letter was sent include those of Sweden, Norway, Slovenia, Pakistan, Guatemala, Ghana, the Philippines, Brazil, Switzerland, East Timor, Morocco and the United States.

The coalition is urging those countries to raise these concerns with Australia both, both bilaterally and in the Human Rights Council itself.


Further Information

The following further information is available about Australia’s Universal Periodic Review:


Found in Content