| Abstract [eng] |
Summary In an attempt to answer the question whether the new UN Human Rights Council is a guarantee of a more effective protection of human rights or merely an illusion, the paper discusses history, development, achievements, shortcomings and merits of the Council's predecessor -- the Commission. The paper also presents an assessment of this UN human rights institution's reform. The paper discusses the altered place and status of the Council within the UN system (from now on the Council is a subsidiary institution of the General Assembly). The paper also analyzes the Council's composition, discussing the changed number of members and their geographical distribution. The paper also provides detailed analysis of the new rules for electing Council members, which should make the Council more representative and should increase trust in the Council. The paper also examines requirements set for the countries vying for a seat on the Council as well as additional requirements for the countries elected to the Council. The paper discusses the increased number of sessions and their overall duration, something that should help the Council to react to sudden human rights crises and to deal with human rights problems in a faster, more serious and more consistent manner as well as help the Council to be proactive when it comes to human rights violations. The paper analyzes the elements of the Council's work mechanism -- special procedures, complaint procedure, the Advisory Committee and the new universal periodic review procedure. The paper also discusses another aspect that in great part determines the Council's effectiveness -- the role played by NGOs in the Council's activities, the role that has remained the same as it was during the Commission's lifetime. |
