2nd Email from ... United Nations – Human Rights - OHCHR - Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) - Geneva, Switzerland ...Special Procedures Branch Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division ... ►►►sent to me, Mohini Kamwani...Please see the UN-OHCHR Email…to me... https://facebook/photo.php?fbid=673158506096934&set=a.107002192712571.15407.100002083720059&type=1&theater Citizens of India …ARE YOU ALSO FACING – JUDICIAL / POLICE TERRORISM OR INJUSTICE ? - Then Complain to - UN-OHCHR AT: [email protected] - You will get a Reply in 1 or 2 Days - Print that UN Reply - & Give to the Court /Police - Tell the Judge / Police – Now if You do more Injustice to me…Then I will Re-Complain to UN-OHCHR AT: [email protected] - Then see the Result !!! ►►► UN-OHCHR…Website LINK + Details…Given at the END of d Post… + ▼▼▼ ►►►PLEASE ALSO READ...►►►ATTACHED - ►►►MY COMPLAINT TO OHCHR...►►►ON …RS. 2 CRORE (20 Million) …CASE FILED ON…2 BOM. HC LD. JUDGES …MR. P V HARDAS & MS. MRIDULA BHATKAR…IN NHRC… + ►►►How Special Procedures Branch-Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Division... ►►►undertakes country visits; ►►►acts on individual cases and concerns of a broader, structural nature ►►►by sending communications to States and others in which they bring alleged violations or abuses to their attention...etc.◄◄◄ ►►►WHEN United Nations OHCHR Special Procedures Branch…TAKES ACTION…THIS WILL BENEFIT MILLIONS OF INDIANS…FACING INJUSTICE OF …JUDICIAL + POLICE TERRORISM & CORRUPTION !!! ◄◄◄ ►►►Email from OHCHR...to me: from: [email protected] to: Mohini Kamwani date: Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 11:02 PM subject: Re: Rs. 20 Crore (200 Million)…Criminal + Defamation Cases…on 2 Bom. HC Ld. Judges… Ld. Judge P V Hardas Ld. Judge Mridula Bhatkar …by 79 Yr Mohini Kamwani - Freedom Fighter’s Widow… mailed-by: ohchr.org [email protected] 11:02 PM (15 hours ago) to me Your message has been received and forwarded to the concerned mandate(s). For information about the Special Procedures (Independent Experts, Special Rapporteurs and Working Groups) of the Human Rights Council, please visit: ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Welcomepage.aspx For information on the Communications Procedure of Independent Experts, Special Rapporteurs and Working Groups, please visit: ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Communications.aspx For Information on contacting specific mandate-holders, please visit: ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Themes.aspx Sincerely, Special Procedures Branch Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Divison OHCHR NOTE: this is an AUTOMATED EMAIL and replies to this email address will not be responded to. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ~o~o~o~ ►►►My Email COMPLAINT to OHCHR: Rs. 20 Crore (200 Million)…Criminal + Defamation Cases…on 2 Bom. HC Ld. Judges… Ld. Judge P V Hardas Ld. Judge Mridula Bhatkar …by 79 Yr Mohini Kamwani - Freedom Fighter’s Widow… …After …DEEMED SANCTION…of 4 Months…as per SC Judgment/Order *… Hon. President/PM/HM/CJI SC/CJ BHC/Law Minister/Women’s Minister 79 Yr Mohini Kamwani - Freedom Fighter’s Widow Files 1st Case on 2 Bom. HC Judges Ld. Judge P V Hardas Ld. Judge Mridula Bhatkar For Rs. 2 Crore (20 Million) Interim Compensation In NHRC – National Human Rights Commission For Violating her Fundamental Rights due to Criminal Conspiracy by Ld. Judges by NOT Prosecuting 4 Cops DGP Home Guards Ahmed Javed Addl. SP P. Karad SPI Laxman Kale SPI R Sardesai as per SC Directions & Law More Criminal + Defamation Cases for Rs. 20 Crore (200 Million) On 2 Ld. Judges to follow… Mohini Kamwani (on Facebook)… A COMPLAINANT...who was Arrested & Jailed ILLEGALLY… ►►►I am Grateful to SC/HC Advocate Nilesh Ojha…for his Kind Guidance…in d Drafting of this Case…He has also Written a Book…”HOW TO PROSECUTE JUDGES, POLICE & GOVT. PLEADERS”… Though Nilesh Ojha is an Advocate…but He Gets us Justice…LIKE A JUDGE…by Showing us the Ways through his Book…& Prosecuting Judges, Police, APP, etc. !!! Because…some Corrupt Judges…don’t even…ACT AS ADVOCATES…for the Poor Victims…WHICH IS THEIR DUTY !!! Respondents of my Case: 1) Shri P V Hardas Judge, Bombay High Court, Fort, Fountain, Mumbai 400001. 2) Smt. Mridula Bhatkar Judge, Bombay High Court, Fort, Fountain, Mumbai 400001. 3) Hon. Registrar General, Bombay High Court, Fort, Fountain, Mumbai 400001. 4) Hon. Chief Justice, Bombay High Court, Fort, Fountain, Mumbai 400001. 5) CBI Director, Room No. 114, North Block, New Delhi 110001. 6) CBI Joint Director - Zone-I, Tanna House, Nathalal Pareekh Marg, Mumbai 400039. 7) State of Maharashtra, through Govt. Pleader. Bombay High Court, Fort, Fountain, Mumbai 400001. * DEEMED SANCTION - As per the Law and Ratio laid down Hon SC in the case of Subramanian Swamy vs Manmohan Singh 2012 (Vol. 1) SCC (Crim.) 1041 if after receipt of Complaint, Sanction is not granted within 4 months, then it may amount to Deemed Sanction. In present case the Complaint was lodged on 19 March 2014 and even after 4 Months no communication regarding Sanction to Prosecute the 2 HC Judges was given, therefore it is a Deemed Sanction. Moreover, sanction is required for taking Cognizance and no Question of Sanction for the Investigation. ►►► Apart from this, Hon President’s Office also Forwarded my Complaint to Dept. of Justice as per my Grievances Regtn. No. PRESEC / E / 2014 / 05517 of 21 March 2014 under CPGRAMS Portal and Ministry of Law & Justice, Dept. of Justice also sent a Letter dated 02 June 2014, Ref No – L – 19017 / 14 / 2013 – Jus. to Bom HC Registrar General and Copy to me, for taking action on my Grievances against 2 Bom. High Court Judges, therefore it is clear that no question remain for Sanction to Investigate the Case against 2 Bom HC Judges. PRAYERS: It is therefore Humbly Prayed that Hon’ble National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) may pleased to; i) Direct Respondent No. 3, Registrar General of Bombay High Court to initiate Criminal Prosecution under Sec. 167, 466,193,191 etc of I.P.C. against Respondents No. 1 and 2, HON. BOM. HC JUSTICES MR. P.V. HARDAS AND MS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, and also - as per the Letter of Ministry of Law and Justice sent to Hon. Bom. HC Registrar General dated 02 June 2014, Ref No – L – 19017 / 14 / 2013 – Jus. on Hon. President’s Office forwarding my Complaint to Dept of Justice as per my Grievances Regtn. No. PRESEC / E / 2014 / 05517 of 21 March 2014 under CPGRAMS Portal. ii) Grant Interim Compensation of Rs. 2 Crore as per Section 18(3) of Human Rights Act to Petitioner as compensation of damages caused due to unlawful acts by Respondents No. 1 and 2, HON. BOM. HC JUSTICES MR. P.V. HARDAS AND MS. MRIDULA BHATKAR. iii) As per Section 18(2) of Human Rights Protection Act, the petitioner Prays to Hon. NHRC to file writ petition to Hon’ble Supreme Court or Division Bench of Bombay High Court against Hon. Shri Justice P V Hardas And Smt. Justice Mridula Bhatkar for serious Violations of our Human Rights by passing a Biased and Partial Final Judgment Order dated 13-6-2013 by only awarding us Rs. 6 lac Compensation and Protecting 4 Guilty Police officers by NOT taking Legal Action against them as per our Clear Prayers and also for Violation of 1997 D. K. Basu SC Arrest Directives and Contempt of Hon. Supreme Court and Forgery and Perjury committed by Guilty Police which was Caught by another Bench of Hon. Bom. HC vide 2 HC Orders dated 20-11-2012 and 23-11-2012 in our Crim. WP no. 1857/2012 and causing serious prejudice to us. iv) Grant any other relief in the interest of justice. v) CBI Director be directed to register F.I.R. against Hon. Justices Mr. P.V. Hardas And Ms. Mridula Bhatkar u/s. 217, 218, 201, 191, 192, 193, 200, 465, 466, 471, 474, r/w. Sec. 120-B of Indian Penal Code. vi) Direct Respondent No. 4 Hon’ble Chief Justice Bombay High Court to transfer Hon. Justices Mr. P.V. Hardas And Ms. Mridula Bhatkar [Respondents no. 1 and 2] out of Maharashtara State till the enquiry/investigation of the matter in order to ensure free and fair enquiry as per law down in 2014 Cr.L.J.9 (SC). vii) Since the misbehavior, Criminal offences, incapacity, illegality, malafides and biasness of Respondents No. 1 and 2 Hon. Justices Mr. P.V. Hardas And Ms. Mridula Bhatkar are ex-facially proved therefore, they be directed to resign from their posts in view of law laid down by 5-Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K. Veerswami –vs- Union of India 1991 (3) S.C.C. 655. viii) If Respondents No. 1 and 2 Justices Mr. P.V. Hardas And Ms. Mridula Bhatkar fail to resign within 7 days then appropriate direction be issued for the forwarding reference for impeachment proceeding against Hon. Justices Mr. P.V. Hardas And Ms. Mridula Bhatkar for their proved misbehavior, incapacity to act as High Court Judge and biased treatment to 79 year old senior citizen widow of freedom fighter petitioner and also violating the mandate of article 14 of the constitution about equality before law and equal protection of the law. ix) Hon. Bom. HC Registrar General be directed to seize the records of the case. x) The C.B.I. be directed to collect the mobile phone details of all the accused involved in the conspiracy. xi) Take Suo Moto Appropriate Action against Respondent No. 7 State of Maharashtra through Government Pleader for his omission to perform his duty as stated in the Para 49. https://facebook/photo.php?fbid=672627866149998&set=a.107002192712571.15407.100002083720059&type=1&theater ►►► AS the Matter is too Long …For the …FULL CASE Copy…Please Click on this Link ►►► https://dropbox/s/ty50oqovmcjw8ie/NHRC%20-%20Hardas%20%26%20Bhatkar%20Case.pdf Or …If the above Dropbox Link has a Problem …then… ►►► Read it in 3 Parts - in my Notes Part – 1 : https://facebook/notes/mohini-kamwani/rs-20-crore-200-million-criminal-defamation-cases-on-2-bom-hc-ld-judges-by-mohin/672615376151247 Part – 2 : https://facebook/notes/mohini-kamwani/rs-20-crore-200-million-criminal-defamation-cases-on-2-bom-hc-ld-judges-by-mohin/672614302818021 Part – 3 : https://facebook/notes/mohini-kamwani/rs-20-crore-200-million-criminal-defamation-cases-on-2-bom-hc-ld-judges-by-mohin/672594062820045 Mohini Naraindas Kamwani – 79 YEAR OLD PETITIONER MOB – 91-9920412577 – RES. TEL - 022-27823443 EMAIL - mohini.kamwani@gmail ►►► UN-OHCHR…Website LINK + Details… Please go to this LINK of UN OHCHR… ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Welcomepage.aspx Then…pl CLICK on … Communications …at the BOTTOM of that Page…under…”Contact us:” For further information on how to submit communications on alleged human rights violations, please read the webpage on Communications and send your submission to: [email protected] The Communications Page Contents are as Follows: SIR PL READ THIS IS IMP Communications Several special procedures mechanisms intervene directly with Governments on specific allegations of violations of human rights that come within their mandates. The intervention can relate to a human rights violation that has already occurred, is ongoing, or which has a high risk of occurring. The process, in general, involves sending a letter to the concerned State requesting information and comments on the allegation and, where necessary, asking that preventive or investigatory action be taken. Communications may deal with individual cases, general trends and patterns of human rights violations occurring in a particular country, cases affecting a particular group or community, or the content of draft or existing legislation considered to be not fully compatible with international human rights standards. Occasionally communications are also sent to intergovernmental organisations or Non-State actors to ensure that there are no protection gaps. The decision to intervene is at the discretion of the special procedure mandate holder and will depend on the various criteria established by him or her, as well as the criteria laid out in the Code of Conduct. The criteria will generally relate to: the reliability of the source and the credibility of information received; the details provided; and the scope of the mandate. However, it must be emphasized that the criteria and the procedure involved in responding to an individual complaint vary, so it is necessary to submit a communication in accordance with the specific requirements established by each special procedure. Communications can be sent by mandate holders irrespective of whether an alleged victim has exhausted all domestic remedies. Documents • Urgent Appeals and Letters of Allegation A C E F R S • Questionnaires for submitting information • Communications report of Special procedures I. How to submit information In order for a complaint to be assessed, the following information is needed: • Identification of the alleged victim(s); • Identification of the alleged perpetrators of the violation (if known); Please provide substantiated information on all the actors involved, including non-state actors if relevant. • Identification of the person(s) or organization(s) submitting the communication (this information will be kept confidential); • Date, place and detailed description of the circumstances of the incident(s) or violation. The information submitted can refer to violations that are said to have already occurred, that are ongoing or about to occur. Other details pertaining to the specific alleged violation may be required by the relevant thematic mandates (e.g. past and present places of detention of the victim; medical certificates issued to the victim; identification of witnesses to the alleged violation; legal remedies or other measures taken to seek redress, etc.). For communications relating to legislation, a copy of the text of the (draft) law should be submitted preferably translated into English, French or Spanish. Please provide information why the legal provisions or the application of the law is allegedly incompatible with international human rights standards. Communications that contain abusive language or that are obviously politically motivated are not considered. Communications should describe the facts of the incident and the relevant details referred to above clearly and concisely. Communications should not be based solely on media reports. Protection of victims and sources It should be noted that neither special procedure mandate holders nor the United Nations have the means to ensure the safety of persons on whose behalf they may intervene. Communications sent and State replies received remain confidential until they are published in communications reports submitted to each regular session of the Human Rights Council (in March, June and September). However, in appropriate situations, including those of grave concern a special procedure mandate-holder may issue a press statement or public statement earlier. The names of alleged victims are usually included in the communication sent to the State to enable the competent authorities to investigate the alleged violation or take appropriate preventive action. These names are also published in the public communications reports, except if privacy or protection concerns require keeping the identity of the concerned victim(s) confidential. Persons making submission should clearly indicate whether the name of the alleged victim(s) or other details should not be published. The identity of the source of information is always kept confidential and neither included in the communication sent to the Government, nor in the public communications report. Questionnaires To facilitate the consideration of reported violations, questionnaires relating to several mandates are available to persons wishing to report cases of alleged violations. It should, however, be noted that communications are considered even when they are not submitted in the form of a questionnaire. For specific information concerning the individual communication procedures of each special procedure mandate please consult the individual webpages of thematic mandates or country mandates. Submissions should be in English, French or Spanish to ensure a timely consideration of allegations. After consulting the requirements established by each mandate for the submission of allegations, information can be submitted by fax to +41 22 917 90 08, by e-mail to [email protected], or by postal mail to: OHCHR-UNOG 8-14 Avenue de la Paix 1211 Geneva 10 Switzerland Please specify which special procedure the information is addressed to in the subject line of the e-mail or fax, or on the cover of the envelope. Follow-up information Individuals and organizations are encouraged to provide updates on new developments relating to a case they have brought to the attention of special procedures by sending such information to [email protected] and to the mandate(s) to which they have addressed their submission. Such updates could relate to the following events: The release of a concerned individual from detention, a new court judgment or a measure taken by the concerned authorities to improve the situation. Communications reports Special procedures submit on a regular basis communications reports to the Human Rights Council containing summaries of the concerns raised over the last reporting period. Since September 2011 the text of all communications sent and the replies received can be accessed through these periodic reports. Some mandates have continued to publish on an annual basis their observations on replies received. Other complaint procedures Several other complaint mechanisms have been established as part of the international human rights system. For more information please visit the page on Complaints procedures of Human Rights Treaty Bodies and the page on the Complaint procedure of the Human Rights Council. Overview Introduction Country mandates Thematic mandates Directory of mandate holders Current and former mandate holders for existing mandates How to submit information Activities Country and other visits Communications Engagement with other intergovernmental fora Reports to the Human Rights Council Reports to the General Assembly Seminars and consultations Recommendations Information tools Press releases Weekly email news updates Video clips Annual Facts & Figures Publications System wide information Code of conduct A C E F R S (Word) Manual of Operations E (PDF, 308KB) Nomination and Appointment Standing invitations Annual Meeting Coordination Committee Further information Related links Human Rights Council Universal Human Rights Index Conference report Vienna+20 • © OHCHR 1996-2014 • | • Contact Us • | • | • FAQ | • Site map And Sir…this is the Special Procedure Branch of …UN Human Rights Council and Special Procedures Divison OHCHR : The special procedures of the Human Rights Council are independent human rights experts with mandates to report and advise on human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective. The system of Special Procedures is a central element of the United Nations human rights machinery and covers all human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political, and social. As of 1 July 2014 there are 38 thematic and 14 country mandates. With the support of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), special procedures undertake country visits; act on individual cases and concerns of a broader, structural nature by sending communications to States and others in which they bring alleged violations or abuses to their attention; conduct thematic studies and convene expert consultations, contribute to the development of international human rights standards, engage in advocacy, raise public awareness, and provide advice for technical cooperation. Special procedures report annually to the Human Rights Council; the majority of the mandates also reports to the General Assembly. Their tasks are defined in the resolutions creating or extending their mandates. Special procedures are either an individual (called Special Rapporteur or Independent Expert) or a working group composed of five members, one from each of the five United Nations regional groupings: Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, Eastern Europe and the Western group. The Special Rapporteurs, Independent Experts and members of the Working Groups are appointed by the Human Rights Council and serve in their personal capacities. They undertake to uphold independence, efficiency, competence and integrity through probity, impartiality, honesty and good faith. They are not United Nations staff members and do not receive financial remuneration. The independent status of the mandate holders is crucial in order to be able to fulfil their functions in all impartiality. A mandate-holder’s tenure in a given function, whether it is a thematic or country mandate, is limited to a maximum of six years. Country visits Mandate holders carry out country visits to analyse the human rights situation at the national level. They typically send a letter to the State requesting to visit the country, and, if the State agrees, an invitation to visit is extended. Some countries have issued standing invitations, which means that they are, in principle, prepared to receive a visit from any thematic special procedures mandate holder. As of 30 July 2014, 108 Member States and one non-Member Observer had extended standing invitations to the special procedures. After their visits, special procedures mandate-holders issue a mission report containing their findings and recommendations. Communications Most special procedures receive information on specific allegations of human rights violations and send urgent appeals or letters of allegation to States asking for clarification. Mandate holders may also send letters to States seeking information about new developments, submitting observations, or following-up on recommendations. These letters do not necessarily allege that a violation has taken place or is about to occur. In 2013, a total of 528 communications were sent to 116 countries. 84% of these were joint communications of two or more mandate holders. Communications sent and the responses received are reported at each regular session to the Human Rights Council. Nomination, selection and appointment of mandate holders In its resolution 5/1 the Human Rights Council clarified the parameters related to the selection and appointment of special procedures mandate holders: Candidates can be nominated by Governments, the Regional Groups operating within the United Nations system, international organisations or their offices, non-governmental organizations, other human rights bodies and individuals. A Consultative Group appointed by the Council reviews all applications for Special Procedures’ positions and proposes a list of candidates to the President of the Council. Resolution 16/21 has further strengthened and enhanced transparency in the selection and appointment process of mandate holders. National Human Rights Institutions that comply with the Paris Principles may also nominate candidates. Furthermore, candidates have to submit an application for each mandate they wish to apply for with a motivation letter. Shortlisted candidates are afterwards interviewed by the Consultative Group. According to resolution 5/1, the following general criteria will be of paramount importance while nominating, selecting and appointing mandate-holders: (a) expertise; (b) experience in the field of the mandate; (c) independence; (d) impartiality; (e) personal integrity; and (f) objectivity. Due consideration should be given to gender balance and equitable geographic representation, as well as to an appropriate representation of different legal systems. Eligible candidates are highly qualified individuals who possess established competence, relevant expertise and extensive professional experience in the field of human rights. Individuals in decision-making positions in Government or in any other organization or entity which may give rise to a conflict of interest with the responsibilities inherent to the mandate are excluded from being appointed as experts. Technical and objective requirements have been further clarified in HRC decision 6/102. Recent Developments In 2006-2007 the Human Rights Council engaged in an institution building process, which included a review of the special procedures system. On 18 June 2007 the Human Rights Council adopted resolution 5/1 entitled Institution-building of the United Nations Human Rights Council, which included provisions on the selection of mandate holders and the review of all Special Procedures mandates. The Human Rights Council also adopted resolution 5/2, containing a Code of Conduct for special procedures mandate holders. In 2011, the Human Rights Council undertook a review of its work and functioning. The outcome of this review reaffirmed and strengthened essential principles, such as the obligation of States to cooperate with special procedures and the integrity and independence of special procedures. The outcome reaffirmed as well the principles of cooperation, transparency and accountability and the role of the system of special procedures in enhancing the capacity of the Human Rights Council to address human rights situations. Member states also confirmed their strong opposition to reprisals against persons cooperating with United Nations human rights mechanism. The Council further recognized the importance of ensuring transparent, adequate and equitable funding to support all special procedures according to their specific needs (see HRC resolution 16/21). Since 2006 several new thematic mandates were established: 1. Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery (2007) 2. Special Rapporteur on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation (2008) 3. Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights (2009) 4. Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association (2010) 5. Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice (2010) 6. Independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order (2011) 7. Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation & guarantees of non-recurrence (2011) 8. Working Group on transnational corporations and other business enterprises (2011) 9. Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment (2012) 10. Independent Expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons (2013) 11. Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities (2014) The Human Rights Council also established the following new country mandates since 2006: 1. Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan (2009) 2. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran (2011) 3. Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Côte d’Ivoire (2011) 4. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic (2011) 5. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus (2012) 6. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea (2012) 7. Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Mali (2013) 8. Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Central African Republic (2013) 9. Independent Expert on the enhancement of capacity building and technical cooperation with Côte dIvoire in the field of human rights (2014) Code of Conduct and working methods The Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in 2007 and the Manual of operations adopted by special procedures mandate holders during their Annual Meeting in 2008 provide guidelines on the working methods of special procedures. Mandate holders also established an Internal Advisory Procedure to review practices and working methods, which allows any stakeholder to bring issues relating to working methods and conduct to the attention of the Coordination Committee. The procedure was devised to enhance the independence and effectiveness of special procedures and cooperation by States, and to contribute to the self-regulation of the special procedures system and of individual mandate holders. In 2008 the Human Rights Council adopted a Presidential statement concerning the terms of special procedures mandate holders and their compliance with the Code of Conduct. Annual Meeting and Coordination Committee Annual meetings of special rapporteurs, independent experts and chairs of working groups have been organized since 1994. The meeting serves to coordinate and harmonize the work of special procedures and mandate holders to meet and exchange views with States, the President of the Human Rights Council, civil society/non-governmental organizations (NGOs), national human rights institutions (NHRIs), and representatives from OHCHR and UN entities. In 2005 Special Procedures mandate holders also established a Coordination Committee. The Committees main function is to seek to assist coordination among mandate holders and to act as a bridge between them and the OHCHR, the broader UN human rights framework, and civil society. The Coordination Committee promotes as well the standing of the Special Procedures system. History of the System In the early days of the United Nations the Commission on Human Rights – the predecessor of the Human Rights Council –focused on elaborating human rights standards. The Economic and Social Council had passed a resolution stating that the Commission had “no power to take any action in regard to any complaints concerning human rights” (ECOSOC Resolution 75 (V) (1947)). However in 1965, the Commission on Human Rights was faced with a number of individual petitions from South Africa and came under considerable pressure to deal with them. As a result, in 1967 the Commission departed from previous practice and established an ad hoc working group of experts to investigate the situation of human rights in Southern Africa (CHR resolution 2 (XXIII)). The ad-hoc working group can be considered as the first Special Procedure of the Commission on Human Rights. Following the 1973 coup in Chile against President Allende by General Augusto Pinochet, the Commission established an ad hoc working group in 1975 to inquire into the situation of human rights in Chile. In 1979, this working group was replaced by a special rapporteur and two experts to study the fate of the disappeared in Chile. This led to the establishment of the first thematic Special Procedure in 1980: The Working Group on Disappearances to deal with the question of enforced disappearances throughout the world (CHR resolution 20 (XXXVI)). Ten years later, in 1990, there were six thematic mandates covering enforced disappearances, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, religious intolerance, mercenaries, torture and sale of children. Since then, many new mandates have been established to deal with human rights challenges in various parts of the world. They now cover all regions and rights: civil, cultural, economic, political, and social. Overview Introduction Country mandates Thematic mandates Directory of mandate holders Current and former mandate holders for existing mandates How to submit information Activities Country and other visits Communications Engagement with other intergovernmental fora Reports to the Human Rights Council Reports to the General Assembly Seminars and consultations Recommendations Information tools Press releases Weekly email news updates Video clips Annual Facts & Figures Publications System wide information Code of conduct A C E F R S (Word) Manual of Operations E (PDF, 308KB) Nomination and Appointment Standing invitations Annual Meeting Coordination Committee Further information Related links Human Rights Council Universal Human Rights Index Conference report Vienna+20
Posted on: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 15:58:22 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015