The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) is responsible for leading the United Nations human rights programme and for promoting and protecting all human rights established under the Charter of the United Nations and international human rights law.

The High Commissioner for Human Rights is the principal human rights official of the United Nations. He/She heads OHCHR and spearheads the United Nations' human rights efforts.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights provides secretariat support to the nine core human rights treaty bodies including the Human Rights Committee (CCPR), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) and the Human Rights Council with its subsidiary mechanisms as the Advisory Committee, the Universal Periodic Review and the two Working Groups established under the Council’s Complaint Procedure, the Working Group on Communications and the Working Group on Situations. In this role it receives communications, forwards them to the State concerned and engages in dialogue with the aim of securing respect for the human rights stipulated in the international human rights treaties.

The OHCHR can also be an important independent actor for the protection of human rights, including the right to conscientious objection. This is especially the case where the OHCHR is present in a country through its country offices or regional offices.
Currently the OHCHR has offices in Bolivia, Cambodia, Colombia, Guatemala, Guinea, Mauritania, Mexico, Nepal, the Occupied Palestinian Territories (stand-alone office), Kosovo (Serbia), Togo, and Uganda. Details of country offices can be found at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/Pages/CountryOfficesIndex.aspx.
OHCHR has 12 regional offices/centres covering East Africa (Addis Ababa), Southern Africa (Pretoria), West Africa (Dakar) Central America (Panama City), South America (Santiago de Chile), Europe (Brussels), Central Asia (Bishkek), South East Asia (Bangkok), Pacific (Suva) and the Middle East (Beirut). Details of the regional offices are available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/Pages/RegionalOfficesIndex.aspx.

Both, country offices and regional offices are engaged in the promotion and protection of human rights, and cooperate also with NGOs. Information they receive will be used for the compilation of the OHCHR report as part of the Universal Periodic Review (see below). In case of a national or regional presence, it can be very useful to establish a relationship with the relevant office of the OHCHR, and to keep them informed of the situation, and of individual cases.

The OHCHR is also coordinating the United Nations human rights education and public information programmes.

Office holder(s)

September 2008 – present: Ms. Navanethem Pillay

Summary

The Human Rights Committee (hereinafter referred to as HR Committee or Committee) is a treaty-based mechanism which monitors the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (see: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm) by State Parties. This is done through the examination of regular reports from States Parties (for States Parties see http://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&c...) The report is examined through a six-hour (periodic reports) or nine-hour (initial reports) dialogue between the Committee and representatives of the State. During the dialogue Committee members may raise any civil or political rights issues, including rights not addressed in the State report. After the dialogue, the Committee produces Concluding Observations, which outline recommendations, and comment on the State's practice and legislation.

1. Likely results from use of the mechanism

During the examination of the State's report, members of the Committee may also raise issues related to conscientious objection to military service. If the Committee comes to the conclusion that the State's practice does not comply with the ICCPR, it will outline this in its Concluding Observations in the form of concerns and recommendations. When the State reappears in front of the Committee, the Committee will be highly likely to ask the State about improvements it has made.
In some cases, the issue of conscientious objection to military service may also be chosen for the Committee's follow-up procedure.
The Concluding Observations may also be included in the compilation of UN information prepared for the Universal Periodic Review.

2. To which States does the mechanism apply?

The mechanism applies to those States who have ratified or acceded to the ICCPR. The status of ratifications is available at http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-4&c....

3. Who can submit information?

Anyone – including NGOs without ECOSOC consultative status, and individuals.

4. When to submit information?

Information for the List of Issues

The List of Issues is a document prepared by the Committee on the basis of the State report and information from other sources which aims to highlight the Committee's major issues of concerns for the review. The List of Issues is sent to the State several months before the dialogue so that the State can prepare responses. These responses form the starting point for the dialogue between the Committee and the State. It is therefore important to submit information before the drafting of the List of Issues to ensure that the issue of conscientious objection to military service is included in the List of Issues and so addressed throughout the review process.

The List of Issues is drafted by the Country Report Task Force (CRTF) with the support of the OHCHR at least two months before the session at which it is scheduled to be adopted.
For deadlines please visit: http://www.ccprcentre.org/next-session.

Submissions sent after the adoption of the List of Issues may be taken into account during the dialogue.

Information for standard reporting:

After the adoption of the List of Issues it is still worth submitting information for the examination of the State report. This should make reference to the List of Issues, if conscientious objection to military service is included. If the State has provided written replies to the List of Issues reference can also be made to these. However, the State is not obliged to provide its written replies in advance, so the NGOs should not wait for the State replies before preparing their submissions.
If the List of Issues does not include conscientious objection to military service, NGOs should prepare a short report explaining the issues with a view to getting them appropriately addressed during the dialogue with the State. Information should be submitted no later than two weeks before the start of the session at which the State report will be examined.

In their reports NGOs should highlight errors and omissions in the information provided by the State. The State reports are public and accessible online at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/sessions.htm. If not you might have to request it from your Ministry of Foreign Affairs or, if that is not possible, from the UN Human Rights Committee secretariat. Due to a backlog of State reports there is usually a delay of about a year between the submission of the State report and the start of the Committee's consideration.
Once the State report is available, check online when the report is likely to be considered: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/sessions.htm or http://www.ccprcentre.org/next-session.

Information for reporting under the Optional Reporting Procedure

In October 2009, the Human Rights Committee introduced a new Optional Reporting Procedure (also called LOIPR procedure), based on a List of Issues Prior to Reporting (LOIPR). A five year pilot period started in November 2010.
The Optional Reporting Procedure is optional, as the name applies. A State can continue to submit a full periodic report, or the Committee can request a full report “when it deems that particular circumstances warrant a full report, including when a fundamental change in the State party’s political and legal approach affecting Covenant rights has occurred; in such a case a full article-by-article report may be required”.

The Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights will publish a list of those States that report under the LOIPR procedure, where possible, at least nine months prior to the session during which the LOIPR is to be adopted by the Committee. This gives NGOs the opportunity to submit their information prior to the adoption of the List of Issues Prior to Reporting.

5. Any special advice for making a submission to this mechanism?

Structure of the Report

The following information applies to reports dealing only with conscientious objection to military service. If you are preparing a longer report covering multiple issues please consult the Centre for Civil and Political Rights' Guidelines for NGOs on Engagement with the Human Rights Committee (http://www.ccprcentre.org/en/ngo-guidelines).

Introduction

The introduction should include a presentation of the NGO (including the contact details) submitting the report and relevant information about the general context, such as historical context, specific situations (e.g. armed conflict or socio-economic context), without repeating information provided in the State report.

Substantive part

The information provided in the report should be directly linked to an analysis of the implementation of the Covenant, with clear indications of which articles are being breached, in what way, and the consequences that this implies. It may be useful to refer to already established interpretations of what constitutes a breach of the Covenant e.g. General Comment 22.
Also review and analyse how far the national laws, policies and other measures in the State Party comply with the ICCPR. Specific attention should be focused on gaps between the national laws and their implementation.
NGO written submissions should be objective and it is therefore advisable to acknowledge any progress, such as the positive measures taken by the State to implement the Covenant. It can be useful for NGO reports to illustrate the NGOs findings with cases that show concretely how the authorities fail to implement the ICCPR. Case law should be updated with the latest judicial process and other relevant information such as dates and sources. NGOs should be sure that the credibility of the information cannot be called into question.
It is worth reminding the Committee of its previous Concluding Observations where relevant.

Conclusions and recommendations

At the end of your submission, include a list of suggested questions about domestic legislation or practice that you would like the Committee to put to the government.
Many NGOs include recommendations in their reports, which they like the Committee to make in the Concluding Observations. Recommendations should be concrete, realistic and action oriented. Recommendations could also be made with regard to the role of NGOs in the implementation of the Concluding Observations.
However, others, such as War Resisters' International, do not include recommendations, and focus on criticising violations of the ICCPR.

Reference to the State report and the previous Concluding Observations

NGOs should indicate whether their information corroborates, supplements, or contradicts the information provided in the State report. If the State has not addressed the issue at all this should also be noted.

The Concluding Observations adopted by the Human Rights Committee after the examination of the previous State report should also be taken into account by NGOs when they start to draft their reports as one of the Committee's objectives is to monitor how far their previous recommendations have been implemented. It is extremely important to assess if any progress has been made by the authorities with regard to the previous Concluding Observations. When NGOs consider that no improvement has been made with regard to the recommendations of the Human Rights Committee, it should be clearly stated.
It may also be very useful to consult the summary records of the discussions that took place during the consideration of the previous report by the Committee as well as the written replies or comments (if any) provided by the State in response to the previous recommendations of the Committee. Both are available on the OHCHR web site as well as on the CCPR Centre website: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/followup-procedure.htm.

Consider putting out a press release saying that you have made the submission and send copies to anyone you think should see it. This might include other parts of the UN human rights machinery.

Confidentiality

Usually, NGO information submitted to the Human Rights Committee is made public and posted on the OHCHR website, if the NGO agrees to this. This means that the reports are also available to the State Parties. This should be kept in mind especially for NGOs coming from countries where civil society cannot work freely and is harassed by the authorities.
Although it is possible to state that information shall not be posted to the OHCHR website the Human Rights Committee cannot however withhold the information after a State request.
If you are concerned about confidentiality, please contact the CCPR Centre for advice.

Language

NGO reports should be submitted in one or more of the Human Rights Committee's working languages: English, French and Spanish. If the entire report cannot be translated NGOs should consider preparing a short executive summary in all three languages.
Naturally all information submitted should be as concise as possible.

Lobbying during the session

Everybody is allowed to attend the Committee sessions as observers. Before attending however you have to apply to the Secretariat for accreditation.
Attendance at the session at which the State report is reviewed by the Committee is very important as it allows NGOs to react to the information provided by the State representatives. If necessary NGOs should be ready to provide informal feedback to the Committee members when assertions made by State representatives seem to be irrelevant or inaccurate. Although NGOs are not allowed to take the floor in the plenary session, Committee members can be approached and lobbied during break in the meeting, at the end of the meeting or before the meeting starts the following day. NGOs should not hesitate to suggest additional questions or clarifications that the Committee could ask the State representatives. There are also two opportunities for NGOs to meet the Committee members and present their concerns:

Formal NGO briefings

NGOs have the opportunity to address the Committee on issues and subjects of concern related to countries being reviewed during the formal NGO briefings, typically lasting 30 minutes per country, and taking place on the same day or the day before the review of the country's report. These briefings are chaired by the Committee's President and are closed, which means that only Committee members and the NGOs are allowed to attend and participate. The meeting is conducted in the Committee's working languages (English, French and Spanish). Interpretation between these languages is provided.
The President invites each NGO to deliver a brief statement (statement should take no more than two or three minutes to read slowly) and afterwards time is allocated for Committee members to ask questions and NGOs to reply.
If a national NGO is not in a position to take part in the NGO briefing the CCPR Centre (http://www.ccprcentre.org/) can address the Human Rights Committee on its behalf.

Informal NGO Briefings

The Centre for Civil and Political Rights also organises informal briefings with the Committee. These informal meetings are usually scheduled over lunchtime and last up to 90 minutes. They are not held in the Committee room and no interpretation is provided. Although not all Committee members attend these meetings, they are a unique opportunity for NGOs to raise their concerns and to respond to the Committee members' questions. Usually there is one briefing on each State reviewed.
The Centre for Civil and Political Rights coordinates the informal briefings and assists NGOs with the practical arrangements. NGOs wishing to take part should contact the Centre before the session.

6. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

No

7. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

Due to a backlog of State reports there is usually a delay of about a year between the submission of the State report and the start of the Committee’s consideration. The Committee will prepare by reading the report and any other material available to it on the country in question, for example from special rapporteurs of the Human Rights Council, or NGOs.
The Committee, with the support of the Secretariat, will draft the List of Issues and adopt it during one of their sessions. The List of Issues is sent to the State so that they can prepare replies.
The State is then examined in a public meeting during one of the Committee's sessions. The examination begins with an opening presentation by the State Party’s delegation, including responses to the List of Issues. The Committee members then put questions to the representatives, seeking to clarify or deepen their understanding of issues concerning the implementation and enjoyment of the rights guaranteed by the ICCPR in the State Party. This often includes questions that have not been fully answered in the responses to the List of Issues.
Usually the Committee takes two half day meetings (of three hours) to consider a periodic State report and three meetings (of three hours) to consider an initial report. At the end of the session, the Committee will produce Concluding Observations outlining recommendations and comments on the State's practice and legislation.

A) Raising awareness about the Concluding Observations

One of the key areas for NGOs is engaging national interest to ensure that the Concluding Observations are widely disseminated, discussed, and implemented. Issuing press releases as soon as the Concluding Observations are available is the first step to ensure that the national media are aware of the recommendations of the Committee. Press releases should also integrate the findings and the concerns of the NGOs.

NGOs may also organise press conferences at the national level or take advantage of their presence at the United Nations Offices to meet press and agencies' correspondents based in New
York or Geneva.

Although it is the duty of the State to translate the Concluding Observations into national languages and make them available to the public this is often not done. It is therefore an important task for NGOs to make sure the Concluding Observations (or the relevant parts) are translated into national languages, minority languages) and accessible to all interested parties.

B) Lobbying for the implementation of the Concluding Observations

The implementation of the Concluding Observations is the ultimate objective of the NGOs. However this is probably the most challenging aspect of the follow-up process as the result depends on the willingness of the State authorities to cooperate and be actively involved in implementation.
NGOs and civil society can nevertheless play a role in this matter, particularly in lobbying the authorities to ensure that concrete steps are taken toward the implementation of the Concluding Observations.
Round tables or special events on the implementation of the Concluding Observations could be very useful to engage the State's authorities in dialogue, Parliamentarians and the bodies or ministries responsible for implementing and monitoring human rights should be targeted in particular.

C) Reporting back to the Human Rights Committee

The Human Rights Committee has a follow-up procedure in which it asks the State to report on the implementation of selected Concluding Observations one year after the review. However, to date the Committee has only once included conscientious objection to military service in the issues selected for this procedure.
At the time of the next review of the State the NGOs should report on the progress made in implementing the Concluding Observations.

8. History of the use of the mechanism

Most issues relating to conscientious objection will come up in front of the Human Rights Committee as opposed to any other treaty body.
The UN Human Rights Reporting Handbook provides guidance to States for raising the issue in their report to the Human Rights Committee. Under article 18 States are asked to discuss the status and position of conscientious objectors and to provide statistical information regarding the number of persons who have applied for conscientious objector status and the number who were actually recognised as such. They are also asked to give the reasons used to justify conscientious objection and the rights and duties of conscientious objectors as compared to those who serve in the regular military service.

Summary

The First Optional Protocol establishes an individual complaints mechanism, allowing individuals to complain to the Human Rights Committee about a violation of one or several of their rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Communications may only be submitted against a State that has ratified the First Optional Protocol and after domestic remedies have been exhausted. In addition, the claim should not have been submitted to another treaty body mechanism, nor to a regional mechanism such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, or the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights.

If the Committee finds that a State Party has failed in its obligations under the ICCPR, it will require that the violation be remedied and ask that the State Party provide follow-up information in this regard. The Human Rights Committee's decisions and its follow-up activities are made public and are included in the Committee's Annual Report to the General Assembly.

1. Likely results from use of mechanism

A decision from the Human Rights Committee on the case either declaring a violation of the Covenant by the State concerned, or declaring the case inadmissible. If a violation of the Covenant is found, the Committee may recommend that the State concerned make amends, or rectify the situation. This might include recommending compensation to the complainant, or releasing him or her from prison.

2. To which States does the mechanism apply?

This mechanism applies to States parties to the ICCPR which have also signed and ratified the First Optional Protocol (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr-one.htm).
A complaint can be brought against any State which had jurisdiction over the victim at the moment of the violation, and which has ratified the Optional Protocol. While the violation itself can have taken place before the Optional Protocol entered into force for the State concerned, it is important that some domestic court took a decision in relation to this violation after the Optional Protocol came into force.

3. Who can submit information?

Under the First Optional Protocol the Committee can receive Individual Communications from any individual under the jurisdiction of a State that is party to the First Optional Protocol who claims that his or her rights under the Covenant have been violated by the State Party.
If you wish to file a complaint on behalf of someone else or a group, you must submit a written consent from each of the victims you wish to represent or proof that they are incapable of giving such consent.

4. When to submit information?

There is no time limit after the alleged event for receiving information but it is best to submit the communication as soon as possible after the exhaustion of domestic remedies. In exceptional cases, submission after a protracted period may result in your case being considered inadmissible by the Committee.
Under Rule 96c of the Working Methods of the Committee, a communication submitted after 5 years from the exhaustion of domestic remedies, or after 3 years from the conclusion of another procedure of international investigation or settlement may constitute an abuse of the right of submission.
Repeated claims to the Committee on the same issue although they have already been dismissed are considered an abuse of the complaints process.

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

How to write a complaint:

The complaint mechanisms are designed to be simple and accessible to all. You do not need to be a lawyer or even familiar with legal and technical terms to bring a complaint to a Committee.

For a complaint to be admissible, it needs to meet the following requirements:

• It has to be submitted by the individual whose rights have been violated, or with the written consent of the individual. Only in exceptional cases, where the individual concerned is unable to give consent, this requirement may be ignored. Anonymous complaints will not be considered.
• Domestic remedies need to have been exhausted, which means all domestic appeal procedures need to have been tried. However, if you can demonstrate that local remedies are not effective (for example, because the highest court of the country already ruled on a very similar case), not available, or unduly prolonged, this requirement may be ignored.
• Not be under consideration by another international investigation or settlement procedure.

A complaint, sometimes also called a “communication” or a “petition” need not take any particular form. However, it needs to be in writing and signed (which means email complaints will not be considered). It should provide basic personal information - your name, nationality and date of birth - and specify the State party against which your complaint is directed.

A complaint needs to include – preferably in chronological order – all the facts on which your claim is based, and all efforts that have been made to exhaust domestic remedies (include copies of relevant court decisions and a summary in one of the working languages of the Committee).

It is useful to quote the relevant treaty articles which correspond to your case. It should be explained how the facts of the case disclose a violation of those articles. A model complaint form that can be used can be found at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/docs/annex1.pdf.

Emergency procedures:

If there is a fear of irreparable harm (for example in cases of imminent execution or deportation to torture) before the Committee has examined the case, it is possible to request an intervention by the committee to stop an imminent action (or omission) by a State, which may cause such harm. Such an intervention is called a “request for interim measures of protection”.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

The two major stages in any case are known as the “admissibility” stage and the “merits” stage. The "admissibility" of a case refers to the formal requirements that your complaint must satisfy before the relevant committee can consider its substance. The "merits" of the case are the substance, on the basis of which the committee decides whether or not rights under a treaty have been violated.

If the complaint contains the essential elements outlined above, the case is registered, that is to say formally listed as a case for consideration by the Committee. Due to a big back-log of complaints it can take at least two years for a case to be considered after registration.
After the registration the complaint is transmitted to the State party concerned to give it an opportunity to comment. The State is required to respond to the complaint within six months. If the State party fails to respond to the complaint, you are not disadvantaged, Reminders are sent to the State party. If there is still no response, the committee takes a decision on the case on the basis of the original complaint.
Once the State replies to a submission, the complainant is offered an opportunity to comment. At that point the, the case is ready for a decision by the Committee.
The committee considers Individual Communications in closed session, but its Views (decisions) and the follow-up are public.

7. History of the use of the mechanism

The Communication Procedure has been used successfully in a range of CO cases, which has helped to establish important jurisprudence on the length and terms of substitute service (Foin v. France, 1999) and on the right to conscientious objection itself (Yeo-Bum Yoon and Mr. Myung-Jin Choi vs. Republik of Korea, 2007).

Summary:

The Committee on the Rights of the Child is a treaty-based mechanism which monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (see: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm) and its Optional Protocols on the Sale of Children (OP1, see: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc-sale.htm) and on Children in Armed Conflict (OP2, see http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc-conflict.htm) by State Parties. This is done through regular reports from States Parties (for States Parties to the CRC see http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Treaties.aspx?id=4&subid=A&lang=en, for OP1 see http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Treaties.aspx?id=4&subid=A&lang=en and for OP2 see http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Treaties.aspx?id=4&subid=A&lang=en). The reports are examined through a dialogue between the Committee and representatives of the State. During this dialogue Committee members may raise and child rights issues, including rights not addressed in the state reports. After the dialogue, the Committee produces Concluding Observations, which outline recommendations, and comments on the State's practice and legislation.

The Committee will only address issues related to under-18s. For States Parties to the Optional Protocol on Children in Armed Conflict, the Committee addresses issues such as recruitment of minors, or excessive military recruitment efforts in schools. Although article 14 of the Convention guarantees the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, this mechanism is less likely to be directly relevant in relation to the right to conscientious objection to military service, but can be useful to highlight issues of recruitment of minors, irregular recruitment, and military in schools.

1. Likely results from use of the mechanism

During the examination of the State's report, members of the Committee may also raise issue related to recruitment and military in schools. If the Committee comes to the conclusion that the State's practice does not comply with the CRC, it will outline this in its Concluding Observations in the form of concerns and recommendations. When the State reappears in front of the Committee, the Committee will be highly likely to ask the State about improvements it has made.
The Concluding Observations of the CRC will also form part of the OHCHR compilation for the Universal Periodic Review.

2. To which States does the mechanism apply?

The mechanism applies to those States who have ratified the CRC. The Optional Protocol on Children in Armed Conflict only applies to those States who have ratified it.

3. Who can submit information?

Anyone – including NGOs and individuals.

4. When to submit information?

Information for the List of Issues

About three to four months before the session at which a State report will be examined, the pre-sessional working group of the Committee convenes a private meeting with UN agencies and bodies, NGOs and other competent bodies such as national human rights and youth organisations, which have submitted additional information to the Committee. This discussion leads to the List of Issues, which will be sent to the State, who will be requested to provide answers in writing in advance of the session.
It is therefore important that additional information is provided well in advance of the session, and it is recommended to submit a report no later than six month before.

Information for standard reporting

In their report, NGOs should refer to the State's reports (there are usually separate reports for the Convention on the Rights of the Child and each Optional Protocol), and highlight errors and omissions in the information provided by the State. The State reports are public and accessible online at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/sessions.htm.

Once the State report is available, check online when the report is likely to be considered: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/sessions.htm.

5. Any special advice for making a submission to this mechanism?

Structure of the Report

The NGO Group for the Convention on the Rights of the Child (NGO Group) has published detailed guides on reporting to the Committee on the Rights of the Child. These can be found at:

• Guide for Non-Governmental Organizations Reporting to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (2006): http://www.childrightsnet.org/docs/Reporting%20Guide%202006%20English.pdf
• Reporting on the OPSC and OPAC: A Guide for Non-Governmental Organisations (2010): http://www.childrightsnet.org/docs/FileManager/NGOGroup/Guide_OP_web.pdf

Introduction

The introduction should include a presentation of the NGO (including the contact details) submitting the report and relevant information about the general context, such as historical context, specific situations (e.g. armed conflict or socio-economic context), without repeating information provided in the State report.

Substantive part

It can be advisable that the NGO report follows the structure of the State report, in the form of a section-by-section analysis of the report. The report should comment on and correct information provided by the State, and explain the position of the NGO.

It is important to analyse the extent to which law, policy and practice of the State comply or not with the provisions of the Optional Protocol. While State reports are often very legalistic, an NGO report should provide information on the practical implementation or lack thereof. It should also reflect on the experience of children/under-18s throughout the country, including differences in legislation, administration of services, culture and environment of different jurisdictions.

It is always a good idea to refer to previous Concluding Observations of the Committee, and their implementation or lack thereof.

Conclusions and recommendations

It can be a good idea to include a list of questions the NGO wants the Committee to ask to the Government. Some NGOs include a list of concrete recommendations, but this is a matter of political approach.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

Following the submission of the periodic or initial State report, which will be published on the website of the Committee on the Rights of the Child (see http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/sessions.htm), NGOs have the opportunity to submit additional information or their own reports. This should usually be done between six months and two years before the examination of a State's report.

About three to four months before the examination of the State report a meeting of a pre-sessional working group of the Committee on the Rights of the Child will draw up a List of Issues (see under 4.). States might choose to provide written answers to questions raised in the List of Issues in advance of the examination of the report.

The examination of the State's report happens in form of a dialogue between the members of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and the delegation of the State concerned. Following the session, the Committee will draw of its Concluding Observations, which also include recommendations.

7. History of the use of the mechanism

This mechanisms has not been used for conscientious objection to military service itself, but has been used successfully to highlight issues of recruitment of under-18s, including aggressive recruitment by Armed Forces in schools.

Summary

The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure from 19 December 2011 (see http://treaties.un.org/doc/source/signature/2012/CTC_4-11d.pdf) establishes an individual complaints mechanism, allowing individuals to complain to the Committee on the Rights of the Child about a violation of the Convention or any one of the Optional Protocols to which the State is a party. Before submitting a complaint, domestic remedies have to be exhausted, unless these would be unreasonably prolonged or not effective. The complaint should also not have been submitted to any other procedure of international investigation or settlement.

If the Committee finds that a State Party has failed in its obligations under the CRC or its Optional Protocols, it will require that the violation be remedied and ask the State Party to provide follow-up information in this regard. The decisions of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and its follow-up activities are made public and are included in the Committee' Annual Report to the General Assembly.

At the time of writing (August 2012), the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure was not yet in force, as it had not yet been ratified by more than 10 States. Check for the status of ratification at http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11-...

1. Likely result from use of the mechanism

The Committee on the Rights of the Child will either declare the case inadmissible, or publish its views on the case if it finds on a violation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child or one of the Optional Protocols. If a violation is found, the Committee may recommend that the State concerned make amends, or rectify the situation.
The Committee might also attempt to reach a friendly settlement between the State Party and the victim or victims.

2. To which States does the mechanism apply?

This mechanism applies to States parties to the CRC which have also signed the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure. Check for the status of ratification at http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-11-....
A complaint can be brought against any State which had jurisdiction over the victim at the moment of the violation, and which has at the same time ratified the Optional Protocol.

3. Who can submit information?

Under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure the Committee can receive individual Communications (complaints) from any individual under the jurisdiction of a State that is party to the Optional Protocol who claims that his or her rights under the Convention have been violated by the State Party.
If you wish to file a complaint on behalf of someone else or a group, you must submit proof of consent from each of the victims you wish to represent in writing, or proof why they are incapable of giving such consent.

4. When to submit information?

According to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure, complaints have to be submitted within one year of exhaustion of domestic remedies, except where it can be demonstrated that it had not been possible to submit the communication within the time limit.

5. Special rules of procedure or advice on making a submission

At the time of writing, the Committee had not yet adopted rules of procedure for submitting complaints (communications) under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure. Please check the website of the Committee at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/sessions.htm for updates.

The following is therefore adapted from the guidelines for submissions to the Human Rights Committee:

How to write a complaint:

The complaint mechanisms are designed to be simple and accessible to all. You do not need to be a lawyer or even familiar with legal and technical terms to bring a complaint to a Committee.

For a complaint to be admissible, it needs to meet the following requirements:

• It has to be submitted by the individual whose rights have been violated, or with the written consent of the individual. Only in exceptional cases, where the individual concerned is unable to give consent, this requirement may be ignored. Anonymous complaints will not be considered.
• Domestic remedies need to have been exhausted, which means all domestic appeal procedures need to have been tried. However, if you can demonstrate that local remedies are not effective (for example, because the highest court of the country already ruled on a very similar case), not available, or unduly prolonged, this requirement may be ignored.
• Not be under consideration by another international investigation or settlement procedure.

A complaint, sometimes also called a “communication” or a “petition” need not take any particular form. However, it needs to be in writing and signed (which means email complaints will not be considered). It should provide basic personal information - your name, nationality and date of birth - and specify the State party against which your complaint is directed.

A complaint needs to include – preferably in chronological order – all the facts on which your claim is based, and all efforts that have been made to exhaust domestic remedies (include copies of relevant court decisions and a summary in one of the working languages of the Committee).

It is useful to quote the relevant treaty or Optional Protocol articles which correspond to your case. It should be explained how the facts of the case disclose a violation of those articles.

Emergency procedures:

If there is a fear of irreparable harm (for example in cases of imminent execution or deportation to torture) before the Committee has examined the case, it is possible to request an intervention by the committee to stop an imminent action (or omission) by a State, which may cause such harm.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

As the Optional Protocol was not yet in force at the time of writing, there is presently no experience with complaints to the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

7. History of the use of the mechanism

As the Optional Protocol was not yet in force at the time of writing, it could not be used yet.

Apart from the Human Rights Committee, the other treaty bodies, which include the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination (CERD) and the Committee Against Torture (CAT) are not likely to be the first port of call for a conscientious objector. The more obvious mechanisms for conscientious objectors to military service are the Human Rights Committee and the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council, such as thematic and country-specific rapporteurs.

Like the Human Rights Committee, each treaty body oversees the implementation of a convention. The outcomes from these treaty bodies are similar to those of the Human Rights Committee. Both CERD and CAT have an optional individual communications procedure, enabling the committees to consider individual cases as well as State practice and legislation. However, these procedures are very underused.

When you might use other treaty bodies

If you find that the State who is failing to recognise rights associated with conscientious objection is not a party to the ICCPR but is a party to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) or the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), you may wish to pursue your case or country situation under these conventions. All treaty bodies receive periodic reports from states party to the treaty. Rules of procedure are similar to those for the Human Rights Committee. You should read the relevant conventions in full to see if the State Party is failing to respect these rights. These are available on the web at http://www.ohchr.org.

Sources

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr-one.htm
http://treaties.un.org/Pages/Treaties.aspx?id=4&subid=A&lang=en

Summary

In 2006 the The United Nations Human Rights Council replaced the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. The Council is an inter-governmental body within the UN human rights system made up of 47 States elected by the UN General Assembly responsible for strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe. Its main purpose is addressing situations of human rights violations and making recommendations on them. Its mandate was established by General Assembly resolution 60/251 from 15 March 2006.
The Council meets in regular session three times annually and in special session as needed, and reports to the General Assembly.

In 2007 the Council adopted its “Institution-building package” which established a system of four subsidiary mechanisms, of which the following two are most relevant for NGOs and individuals working on conscientious objection to military service:

• The Universal Periodic Review mechanism assesses the human rights situations in all 192 UN Member States.
• The UN Special Procedures established by the former Commission on Human Rights and assumed by the Council.

For a list of all member states please go to: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/membership.htm

On 5 July 2012, during its 20th session, the Human Rights Council passed a resolution on conscientious objection to military service, “recalling all previous relevant resolutions and decisions, including Human Rights Council decision 2/102 of 6 October 2006, and Commission on Human Rights resolutions 2004/35 of 19 April 2004 and 1998/77 of 22 April 1998, in which the Commission recognized the right of everyone to have conscientious objection to military service as a legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as laid down in article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and general comment No. 22 (1993) of the Human Rights Committee”.

Summary

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) was established along with the Human Rights Council by resolution 60/251 in 2006 and is a unique mechanism of the United Nations human rights system which involves a review of the human rights records of all UN Member States once every 4½ years, based on the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and any other human rights instruments to which the State under review is a party, and voluntary pledges and commitments made by the State. During the review process, other States examine the human rights practice of a State under review based on information provided by the State, a compilation of relevant UN documents prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR) and information provided by other stakeholders, including NGOs (compiled by the OHCHR).

Other states may ask questions and make recommendations, which the State under review may accept or reject. The result of this review is reflected in an “outcome report” listing the recommendations made to the State under review. Until the next due review, the State under review has now four years time to implement the accepted recommendations and fulfil its voluntary pledges.

The third cycle of the Universal Periodic Review started at the 27th session (1st-12th May 2017), and will run until November 2021. Find the full calendar here: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/UPR/Calendar3rdCycle.doc (a download will begin).

Information, including a timetable of the current review cycle, is available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/UPRMain.aspx.

1. Likely results from use of mechanism

As this is an inter-governmental procedure, only States can ask questions or make recommendations to the State under review. NGOs can not intervene directly, but have to get a State to ask a question or to make a recommendation to the State under review. The State under review then can either accept or reject a recommendation.

2. To which States does the mechanism apply?

This mechanism applies to all member states of the United Nations.

3. Who can submit information?

The review at the Working Group is based on three sources of information:

• Information prepared by the State under Review on its human rights situation. This can take the form of a national report no longer than 20 pages.
• A compilation of “information contained in the reports of treaty bodies, special procedures, including observations and comments by the State concerned, and other relevant official United Nations documents, which shall not exceed ten pages” (Resolution A/HRC/RES/5/1). It can include for example Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee or the Committee on the Rights of the Child, reports by Special Rapporteurs or UN Country teams, etc. This compilation is prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR).
• Other “credible and reliable information” provided by “other relevant stakeholders” (including NGOs), which are summarised by the Office of the High Commissioner in a document not exceeding ten pages (Resolution A/HRC/RES/5/1).

These three documents are usually available on the OHCHR website ten weeks before the start of the UPR working group.

4. When to submit information?

4. When to submit information?
The Universal Periodic Review Working Group holds three sessions per year dedicated to 14 states each, until the total of all UN members has been reviewed.

According to resolution “A/HRC/RES/5/1, “States are encouraged to prepare the information through a broad consultation process at the national level with all relevant stakeholders”. If your State is following this procedure, it might be a good idea to get involved in the process, and to lobby for inclusion of the issue of conscientious objection in the State's report. Often, coalitions of national NGOs join forces to submit a joint report. If this is the case, it can be advisable to take part in such a coalition, to make sure that the issue of conscientious objection to military service is included in a broader NGO report. Such a national consultation process is likely to take place about one year before the review.

8-6 months before the review:: The deadline for the submission of information by NGOs to the OHCHR is about six to eight months before the session. Submissions must be submitted and received by midnight Geneva time (CET) on the day of the given deadline and late submissions are not considered.

About six weeks before the session of each Working Group, the NGO UPR-Info is holding public sessions for NGOs to suggest questions and recommendations. All government delegations are invited to these sessions, and the timing should provide enough time for the delegations to consult with their respective government.
NGOs interested in taking part should contact:
UPR Info
Avenue du Mail 14
1205 Geneva, Switzerland
Phone: + 41 22 321 77 70
Fax: + 41 22 321 77 71
Email: info@upr-info.org

As the review itself is an inter-governmental procedure, it is then important to lobby other governments to raise questions and make recommendations to the State under review, either via other States' embassies in your country, or via their permanent missions at the UN in Geneva. Please get in touch if you have specific issues to raise in relation to conscientious objection to military service.

During the review:: The review itself takes place in a Working Group of the Human Rights Council, which is composed of all UN member States and chaired by the President of the Council. NGOs in consultative status can attend but not take the floor during the review.
The review is prepared by a troika, which is selected by the drawing of lots among members of the Human Rights Council and from different regional groups. The troika receives the written questions and issues raised by States and relays them to the State under review. During the review itself, the members of the troika do not have any specific role. After the review, the troika is responsible for preparing a report of the Working Group, with the involvement of the State under review and assistance by the OHCHR. One of the members of the troika will introduce the report before its adoption at the Working Group.

3-4 months after the review: The report of the Working Group is adopted by consensus at a plenary session of the Human Rights Council. During this session, NGOs are allocated a total of 20 minutes for oral statement after the presentations of the State under Review and other States (20min each) and before the outcome report is adopted. Only NGOs in consultative status are allowed to make an oral statement.
It is also possible to write a statement as not every NGO can be considered and coalitions of NGOs are generally favoured. These written statements will become official United Nations documents but they have however less impact than an oral statement. There is a deadline of usually two weeks before begin of the session for written statements, and there are very detailed technical instructions for submissions of statements, which have to be submitted by email.

For a webcast of the interactive dialogues please visit: http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=080507.

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

As stated in point 3.) The OHCHR asks NGOs to limit their official submission to a five page (2815 words) document, to which other information can be attached. When the information is submitted by a large coalition of NGOs, the official submission can reach ten pages (5630 words). For ease of reference, paragraphs and pages should be numbered. NGOs need to submit their report as a Microsoft Word document by email, and not in any other file format (no PDF), nor on paper.

As of the third cycle of the UPR, the OHCHR has devised 'Matrices of recommendations of countries to be reviewed during the 3rd cycle of the UPR' . The purpose of the matrices is to collect precise and specific information on the level of implementation, in the State under review, of both the accepted and noted recommendations from their previous reviews. Stakeholders are now also encouraged to submit their completed country-specific matrix, alongside their written submissions. NGOs are encouraged to download their country matrix now available here http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/NgosNhris.aspx, and should complete the final column in the table. The matrix provides a list of received recommendations, clustered by theme, and then allows space for "Assessment/comments on level of implementation".

This is an example of a matrix here https://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/matrix_argentina.png

The second and subsequent cycles of the UPR will focus on the recommendations accepted by the State under review during previous review cycles, and on the development of the human rights situation in the State since the last review. However, any other issues that come within the scope of the Universal Periodic Review can also be raised.

The OHCHR has issues “technical guidelines” for National Human Rights Institutions and NGOs, which they need to follow when submitting information to the UPR. The guidelines for the second cycle (2017-2021) can be found at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/UPR/TechnicalGuidelines3rdCycle.... (a download will begin).

Submissions should be sent to through the "On-line UPR submissions registration system" to register contributions for the UPR documentation from UN entities and stakeholders available in the following link: https://uprdoc.ohchr.org. Stakeholders should follow the "Guidelines for the Use of the On-Line UPR Submissions Registration System" available here www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/UPR/How-to-GuideUPR_Online_Registration.... Should organizations encounter technical problems using the Online system, please contact the UPR Submissions Helpdesk through the following email address: uprsubmissions@ohchr.org.

For help and questions relating to the Universal Periodic Review, the website of UPR-Info at http://upr-info.org has a wealth of advice and information.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

If the submission complies with the technical guidelines, it will be made available on the OHCHR website ten weeks before the start of the UPR working group. Information contained in the submission will hopefully also be included in the OHCHR compilation of information provided by “other relevant stakeholders”.

Following-up

After the review, it is important to follow-up on the recommendations accepted by the State, and to monitor their implementation.

States are encouraged to submit a mid-term report on the implementation of UPR recommendation to the Human Rights Council. This provides a further opportunity for lobbying, and NGOs in consultative status can also submit comments in form of a written statement to the Human Rights Council.

7. History of the use of the mechanism.

The issue of conscientious objection was brought up several times during the first cycle of the UPR, for example during the review of Colombia in 2009. Resolution: A/HRC/10/82

The OHCHR has developed a special database for the documentation related to the universal periodic review at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/Documentation.aspx.

Summary

“Special procedures” is the name given to the mechanisms of the Human Rights Council to monitor human rights violations in specific countries or examine global human rights issues. There are basically two different mandates:

• Thematic mandates: these cover special themes or aspects of human rights. The two most relevant for conscientious objection are the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief. However, others might also be relevant in cases of recruitment, detention, maltreatment or other issues around conscientious objection, such as the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders (see http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/SRHRDefenders/Pages/SRHRDefendersIndex.aspx), the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (see http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Torture/SRTorture/Pages/SRTortureIndex.aspx), the Special Rapporteur on the right to Education (see http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Education/SREducation/Pages/SREducationIn...) and the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression (see http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/FreedomOpinion/Pages/OpinionIndex.aspx). An overview of the thematic mandates is available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Themes.aspx.
• Country mandates cover certain countries or regions. They can be relevant if there is a country mandate for your country. An overview of country mandates is available at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Countries.aspx.

The principal functions of Special Procedures are:

• analysing the relevant thematic issue or country situation, including visits to countries;
• advising on the measures which should be taken by the relevant Government(s) or other actors;
• alerting the UN agencies, in particular the Human Rights Council, and the public to the need to address specific situations and issues;
• advocating on behalf of victims of human rights violations through measures such as urgent action and by calling upon States to respond to specific allegations and provide redress;
• activating and mobilising the international and national communities and the Human Rights Council to address particular human rights issues, and to encourage cooperation among Governments, civil society, and inter-governmental organisations;
• following up on recommendations

In individual cases they can send so called communications (urgent appeals and letters of allegation) on alleged violations of human rights to the Governments concerned.
They present their annual reports, as well as reports on country visits and thematic studies to the Human Rights Council and selected documents to the General Assembly. All special procedures jointly produce a communications report for each session of the Human Rights Council, which includes letters of allegation and urgent appeals, and responses received from governments.

1. Likely results from use of mechanism

In individual cases, the mandate holder may send either an urgent appeal or a letter of allegation (of human rights violations) to the Government of the state concerned. Depending on the response received from the Government, the mandate holder will decide on further steps to take.
As a general rule, the existence and content of both urgent appeals and letters of allegation remain confidential until a summary of such communications and the replies received from the State concerned are included in the joint communications report of all special procedures to the Human Rights Council. The joint communications report also includes links to the original urgent appeal or letter of allegation, and – if available – to the Government's response.

The Special Procedures can be used for complaints about state law and practice. The mandate holder may raise these issues as and when he or she thinks it appropriate.
The mandate holders of the Special Procedures conduct country visits, during which they meet with representatives of the State, but also with NGOs. The Special procedures can only visit countries which have agreed to their request for invitation. Some countries have issued "standing invitations", which means that they are, in principle, prepared to receive a visit from any special procedures mandate holder. As of the end of December 2011, 90 States had extended standing invitations to the special procedures. After their visits, special procedures' mandate-holders issue a mission report containing their findings and recommendations.

2. To which States does the mechanism apply?

All states

3. Who can submit information?

Everybody.

4. When should information be submitted?

Information on individual cases should be submitted as soon as possible, especially in cases where an urgent action by the Special Procedure is desired.
For information on State law and practice information can be submitted at any time. It is also advisable to watch out for visits of a relevant Special Procedure to your country, and to submit information timely before a scheduled visit, and to attempt to schedule a meeting during the visit. A coalition of NGOs might have a higher chance to have a meeting during a country visit than an individual NGO so far unknown to the Special Procedure.

5. Are there any special rules of procedure?

Information can be submitted by post or electronically, but anonymous submissions will not be considered.
In individual cases, submissions to the Special Procedures are not a quasi-judicial procedure, which means that they are not meant to replace national or international legal procedures. Therefore, there is no need for domestic remedies to be exhausted.
Allegations of human rights violations should contain clear and concise details of the details of the case, the name and other identifying information regarding the individual victim(s), information as to the circumstances including – if available – date and place of incidents and alleged perpetrators, suspected motives, and any steps already taken at the national, regional or international level regarding the case(s).

6. What happens to a submission (how long will it take)?

Mandate holders of the Special Procedures may acknowledge receipt of information from individuals and organisations, but they often do not do so. They are also not required to inform those who provide information about any subsequent measures they have taken – and they often don't.
In case of request for an urgent action, the Quick Response Desk of the Special Procedures Division of the OHCHR coordinates the sending of communications by all mandates. Governments are generally requested to provide a substantive response to urgent appeals within 30 days. Only in appropriate cases a mandate holder may decide to make such urgent appeals public by issuing a press release.
Governments are usually requested to respond to letters of allegation of human rights violations within two months.
A summary of urgent appeals and letters of allegation and responses from Governments is usually included in the joint communications report of the Special Procedures to the Human Rights Council. This will include the names of the victims, unless there are specific reasons why the names of the victims should remain confidential. In this case, explain those reasons in your initial submission.
The joint communications reports can be accessed at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/CommunicationsreportsSP.aspx.

The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) from 1981, which entered into force in 1986, is Africa's oldest human rights instrument, and established the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Article 8 of the ACHPR states: “Freedom of conscience, the profession and free practice of religion shall be guaranteed. No one may, subject to law and order, be submitted to measures restricting the exercise of these freedoms.” The right to conscientious objection to military service could be derived from this article, similar to article 18 of the ICCPR and article 9 of the ECHR.

Other potentially relevant provisions of the ACHPR are article 2 (non-discrimination), article 5 (freedom from torture), article 7 (right to fair trial), article 10 (right of association), and article 16 (right to education), among others. The full text of the ACHPR is available at http://www.achpr.org/instruments/achpr/.

The African Commission is officially charged with three major functions:

• the protection of human and peoples' rights
• the promotion of human and peoples' rights
• the interpretation of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights

It consists of 11 members elected by the AU Assembly from experts nominated by the state parties to the Charter.

Similar to the Treaty bodies of the United Nations and the Human Rights Council, the African Commission has established several procedures to monitor and protect human rights, such as:

• a State reporting procedure
• a Communication procedure
• Special Mechanisms

The Special Mechanisms also undertake country visits to explore and discuss the human rights situation in a specific country.

Relevant Special Mechanisms might be:

• The Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information (http://www.achpr.org/mechanisms/freedom-of-expression/);
• The Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders (http://www.achpr.org/mechanisms/human-rights-defenders/); and
• The Committee for the Prevention of Torture in Africa (http://www.achpr.org/mechanisms/cpta/).

An overview of the Special Mechanisms is available at http://www.achpr.org/mechanisms/.

The present Commissioner is Catherine Dupe Atoki (since 2007).

Summary

The African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) draws its mandate from articles 32-46 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC). It was established in July 2001. Part of the mandate of the ACERWC is the monitoring the implementation of the ACRWC. To do so, the ACERWC receives and examines the reports submitted by State parties on the measures they have adopted to give effect to the provisions of the Charter as well as the progress achieved in the exercise of the rights recognised (article 43). Initial State reports were supposed to be submitted within two years of entry into force of the ACRWC, and periodic reports every three years thereafter. An overview of the status of state reports in available on the website of the ACERWC at http://acerwc.org/state-reports/. The due dates of initial reports are available at http://www.africa-union.org/child/Due%20date%20of%20Submission%20of%20Re....
The ACERWC examines a State report in a public plenary session, based on information included in the report of the State, and other information received by NGOs. Following the examination of the State report, the Committee of Experts produces Concluding Observations and Recommendations, which should be implemented by the State party. The Concluding Observations and Recommendations are also included in the report of the ACERWC to the AU Assembly of Heads of State and Government.

So far, conscientious objection to military service has not been addressed by the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. The issue of recruitment of minors has only briefly been addressed during the examination of the report of Uganda.

1. Likely results from the use of this mechanism

During the examination of State reports, the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child also draws on information provided by other AU agencies and by NGOs, and can raise issues based on information received from NGOs. The ACERWC might then include the issue in its Concluding Observations and make recommendations to the State concerned. The Concluding Observations and Recommendation will be transmitted to the State concerned and form part of the Committee of Experts' report to the AU Assembly of Heads of State and Government.

2. To which States does this mechanism apply?

The mechanism applies to those States that have ratified the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child. A table of ratifications of the ACRWC is available at http://acerwc.org/ratifications/.

3. Who can submit information?

According to rule 69 of the Rules of Procedure of the ACERWC, “the Committee may invite the …. NGOs and CSOs, in conformity with Article 42 of the Children's Charter, to submit to it reports on the implementation of the Children's Charter and to provide it with expert advice in areas falling within their scope of activity”

4. When to submit information?

Once a State party has submitted its State report to the ACERWC, the report is a public document and will be made available on the website of the ACERWC at http://acerwc.org/state-reports/. It is important to submit an NGO report – either a joint NGO report, or an individual NGO report highlighting specific issues – not too long after the publication of the State report, but certainly before the Pre-Session Working Group that will consider the State report.

5. Any special advice for making a submission to this mechanism?

The ACERWC has so far not issued guidelines for NGO reports. However, the Committee of Experts has elaborated guidelines and main themes for State reports, and it is useful to structure an NGO report around the same themes (or some of them). The themes are:

• General measures of implementation of the ACRWC
• Definition of the child
• General principles
• Civil rights and freedoms
• Family environment and alternative care
• Health and welfare
• Education, leisure and cultural activities
• Special protection measures
• Responsibilities of the child.

Issues of conscientious objection to military service and related discrimination, and of recruitment, can be raised under the ACRWC, especially in relation to article 9 (Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion), Article 11 (Education), and Article 22 (Armed Conflicts) of the Charter. Article 22 of the ACRWC states that States “shall … refrain in particular from recruiting any child”.

It can be useful to draft suggested questions to be posed by the Committee of Experts, organised by theme and relevant charter provision and include these in the NGO report.

Participation in the pre-session Working Group

Although the pre-session Working Group meets in private, the Committee of Experts can invite representatives of NGOs with Observer Status at the ACERWC to participate in it. It is therefore important to state in the cover letter when submitting the NGO report that you wish to participate in the pre-session Working Group. However, this is not a guarantee that you will be able to do so. It is also possible to lobby members of the Committee of Experts informally outside of the formal sessions of the pre-session Working Group.

Lobbying before and during the session

It is advisable to not only submit a report, but to engage with the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child prior, during, and after the consideration of the State's report. Following receipt of the State's report, the Committee of Experts appoints a Rapporteur from among its members, and it can be useful to engage with the Rapporteur responsible for your State's report, who will examine the State's report and information submitted by NGOs, and prepare a list of issues.

NGOs with Observer Status are allowed to attend the public meeting of the Committee of Experts, but are not allowed to speak.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

After the ACERWC receives a State's report, it will be published on its website at http://acerwc.org/state-reports/. The Committee of Experts will also assign a Rapporteur from among its members, who is responsible for the examination of the State's report and other information received, including information submitted by NGOs. The Rapporteur will draft a list of issues for discussion at the pre-session Working Group, which will decide on the list of issues.

The examination of the State's report happens during a public session of the Committee of Experts in the form of a dialogue with the representative(s) of the State concerned. NGOs with Observer Status can attend the session, but are not allowed to speak. Following the dialogue, the Committee of Experts meets in a closed session to discuss its Concluding Observations and Recommendations.

The Concluding Observations and Recommendations are transmitted to the State concerned, and are included in the report of the Committee of Experts to the AU Assembly of Heads of State and Government. They are also published on the website of the ACERWC.

7. History of the use of this mechanism

This mechanism has so far not been used for conscientious objection to military service. Issues of recruitment of minors have so far not been raised systematically by the ACERWC, although they were raised during the examination of the report of Uganda, and in the Concluding Observations and Recommendations on Uganda.

Summary

Under Article 44 of the African Charter of the Rights and Welfare of the Child, any correspondence or any complaint from a State, individual or NGO denouncing acts that are prejudicial to the right or rights of the child shall be considered as communication. However, by 2011 the ACERWC had only received two communications, and had made a decision on one of these two.
A communication can be presented by individuals, including the child which has been a victim of a human rights violation or his/her parents of legal representatives, by witnesses, a group of individuals or by an NGO recognised by the African Union, a member State of the African Union, or by any institution of the United Nations system. A communication has to be in writing and cannot be submitted anonymously.
A communication can only be submitted after domestic remedies have been exhausted, and if the same issue has not been considered according to another investigation, procedure, or international regulation.
As an urgent measure, the Committee of Experts can make a request to the State party concerned to take provisional measures necessary to prevent any other harm to the child or children who would be victims of violations of the Charter.
After investigating a complaint, the Committee of Experts makes a recommendation to the State(s) concerned to ensure that measures are taken to prevent the recurrence of violations of the Charter.

1. Likely results from the use of this mechanism

Following the submission of a communication, the Committee of Experts will first take a decision on admissibility. If a complaint is found admissible, the Committee of Experts will investigate the complaint and take a decision on the merits of the case, and make recommendations to the State concerned. This may include compensation to the victim(s) of violations of the African Charter of the Rights and Welfare of the Child and measures to prevent a recurrence.
To prevent irreparable harm to the victim or victims of alleged violations of the ACRWC as urgently as the situation demands, the Committee of Experts may request from the State concerned to take provisional measures before a decision on the merits of the case, but after the complaint has been found admissible.

2. To which States does this mechanism apply?

The mechanism applies to those States that have ratified the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, and have not entered a reservation to article 44. At the time of writing, Egypt is the only State party to the ACRWC that does not consider itself bound by article 44. A table of ratifications of the ACRWC is available at http://acerwc.org/ratifications/.

3. Who can submit information?

A communication can be presented by individuals, including the child which has been a victim of a human rights violation or his/her parents of legal representatives, by witnesses, a group of individuals or by an NGO recognised by the African Union, a member State of the African Union, or by any institution of the United Nations system.
A communication can also be presented by a State party to the ACRWC, and also by a State that is not party to the ACRWC, if it is in the best interest of the child.
The guidelines for the consideration of communications do not mention anonymity of the complainant, but it is likely that similar rules apply as for communications to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights.

4. When to submit information?

A communication should be submitted to the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child within a reasonable period from the time local remedies have been exhausted. After exhaustion of local remedies, or where the complainant realises that such remedies shall be unduly prolonged, he or she can submit the complaint to the Committee of Experts immediately.
The ACRWC does not give a time limit but talks of reasonable time. It is therefore advisable to submit a complaint as early as possible.

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

How to write a complaint:

The communication procedure of the Committee of Experts is straightforward, and does not require legal representation. A complaint can be brought by the victim(s) of alleged violations of the ACRWC or their parents, or by another person acting on their behalf, or a group of individuals, including an NGO recognised by the African Union, a member State of the African Union, or by any institution of the United Nations system. If your NGO does not fulfil the last criteria, it is advisable to submit a complaint as a group of individuals.

For a complaint to be admissible, it needs to meet the following requirements:

• it needs to include the name(s), nationality, and signature(s) of the person or persons filing it, or in case of an NGO filing the complaint the name(s) and signature(s) of the legal representatives, and evidence of the status of the NGO;
• whether or not the complainant wishes his or her identity to be withheld from the State concerned, and why;
• an address for correspondence, possibly including fax and/or email;
• a detailed description of the alleged violations of the ACRWC, specifying date, place, and nature of the alleged violations;
• the name(s) of the State(s) alleged to have violated the African Charter of the Rights and Welfare of the Child;
• any steps taken to exhaust domestic remedies, or an explanation why an exhaustion of domestic remedies would be unduly prolonged or ineffective;
• an indication that the complaint has not been submitted to another international settlement proceeding.

It is advisable to refer to the provisions of the African Charter of the Rights and Welfare of the Child that are alleged to have been violated, although this is not strictly necessary. The (http://acerwc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ACERWC-Guidelines-on-Commun...) include some helpful information.

Emergency procedures:

According to Article 2 IV of the Guidelines, the Committee of Experts “may forward to the State party concerned, a request to take provisional measures that the Committee shall consider necessary in order to prevent any other harm to the child or children who would be victims of violations”.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

Once a complaint has been received by the Secretariat of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, the Secretary will register it and make a summary, which will be circulated to all members of the Committee of Experts.
Before each session, a Working Group of the Committee of Experts will consider the admissibility of a complaint. The Committee of Experts will then decide on the admissibility during a regular session.
After a complaint has been declared admissible, the Secretariat will communicate this to the complainant(s). A communication will then also be sent to the State(s) concerned, with a request to comment on the communication in writing within three months.
Following this, the Committee of Experts or the Working Group may request additional information from the State(s) concerned or the complainant(s).
The Committee of Experts may requests the presence of representatives of the State(s) concerned and/or the complainant(s) in order to give additional clarifications relating to the communication. If one party is invited, the other party shall also be invited to be present and to make its observations, if it so wishes. The meeting of the Committee of Experts during which the complaint is considered is held in private.
According to article 3 of the Guidelines, the Committee of Experts “should take measures to ensure the effective and meaningful participation of the child or children concerned by the consideration of the validity of the communications and its author”. It is unclear what that means in practice.
Following the consideration of the complaint, the Committee of Experts will make a decision on the merits, either finding that the ACRWC has not been violated, or finding on a violation of the Charter, and making recommendations to the State(s) concerned. This may include compensation to the victim(s) of violations of the African Charter of the Rights and Welfare of the Child and measures to prevent a recurrence.
One of the members of the Committee of Experts will also be designated to monitor the decision, and will regularly report to the Committee of Experts.
The decisions of the Committee of Experts will then be submitted to Assembly of the Heads of State and Government of the African Union, and will be published after consideration by the Assembly.

7. History of the use of this mechanism

This mechanism has so far not been used for conscientious objection to military service, nor for issues of military recruitment of minors.

Summary

According to the Supplementary Protocol from 19 January 2005, “the Court has jurisdiction to determine cases of violations of human rights that occur in any Member State.” There is no requirement to exhaust domestic remedies, meaning individuals do not need to pursue national judicial remedies before bringing a claim to the ECOWAS Court of Justice. Rather, the principal requirements are that the application not be anonymous and that the matter is not pending before another international court.
A case can be brought by anyone under the jurisdiction of a member state of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). However, according to article 12 of the Protocol establishing the Court of Justice, representation by an agent or lawyer is required.
The reference framework of the Community Court of Justice are the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR), as well as other universal instruments for the protection of human rights adopted by the United Nations.
Proceedings before the court consist of written and oral proceedings, after which the Court will hand down its judgment in open Court. Judgements of the Court are binding on each Member State, institutions of ECOWAS and on individuals.
More information is available at the website of the Community Court of Justice at http://www.courtecowas.org/.

1. Likely result from the use of this mechanism

Following the filing of a case with the Community Court of Justice, the Court will appoint a Judge-Rapporteur, who will prepare the case for the Court, and make recommendations regarding what inquiries might be needed, which might include further documents, oral testimony, expert reports, or site visits. Following the completion of the preparatory inquiry, a date for the oral procedure will be set by the Court, which might involve the hearing of witnesses. This session will be public.
After the conclusion of the oral procedure, the Court will deliberate on the judgment in closed session, and deliver its judgment in open Court.

Urgent action:

According to article 20 of Protocol A/P.l/7/91 on the Community Court of Justice, “the Court, each time a case is brought before it, may order any provisional measures or issue any provisional instructions which it may consider necessary or desirable.”
When filing a case with the Community Court of Justice, it is possible – in a separate document – to also file an application for interim measures. Such an application should be referred to the Court by the President within 48 hours after it has been lodged.
Articles 79-86 of the Rules of Procedure deal in more detail with interim measures.

2. To which States does this mechanism apply?

The mechanism applies to those States that are members of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). A list of member States is available at http://ecowas.int/.

3. Who can submit information?

According to article 10 of Protocol A/SP.1/01/05, individuals who are subject to the jurisdiction of a member State of ECOWAS can apply to the Community Court of Justice for relief for violation of their human rights.
However, according to article 12 of the Protocol establishing the Court of Justice, representation by an agent or lawyer is required.

4. When to submit information?

A case should be filed with the Community Court of Justice as soon as possible, even though neither the Protocol establishing the Court, nor the Rules of Procedures give any time limits in cases of human rights violations. There is no need for the exhaustion of domestic remedies – in fact, the Community Court of Justice stated that it is not an appeal court, so a case should be filed directly with the Community Court of Justice.

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

The Community Court of Justice is a proper court, and according to article 12 of the Protocol establishing the Court of Justice, representation by an agent or lawyer is required. Any lawyer representing a victim of human rights violations needs to be authorised to practice before a court of a member State of ECOWAS.

How to file a case with the Community Court of Justice:

As representation by a lawyer or agent is obligatory when filing a case before the Community Court of Justice, the following is only a brief summary, which should aid a decision on whether to file a case.

While the official languages of the Community Court of Justice are English, French, and Portuguese, a case against a member State needs to be filed in one of the official languages of that State. Articles 32 to 40 of the Rules of Procedure relate to the written procedure before the Community Court of Justice.

An application to the Community Court of Justice needs to include:

• the name and address of the applicant;
• the party against which the application is made (the “defendants”), which – in the case of human rights violations – might be the State;
• the subject matter, which means a clear description of the alleged human rights violations, and which provisions of the ACHPR are alleged to have been violated;
• what kind of order the applicant wants the court to make;
• where appropriate, the nature of any evidence offered in support.

An application to the Community Court of Justice needs to be in writing and signed by the agent or lawyer of the applicant, with five certified copies for the Court plus one copy each for each party to the case.

Emergency procedures:

Article 20 of Protocol A/P.l/7/91 on the Community Court of Justice establishes that the Court may “order any provisional measures or issue any provisional instructions which it may consider necessary or desirable”, thus establishing an emergency procedure. Articles 79-86 of the Rules of Procedure deal in more detail with interim measures.
An application for interim measures or provisional instructions should be made in a separate document at the same time as the main application, and should explains why interim measures or provisional instructions are needed as a matter of urgency. The application should also include what measures or instructions the Court should order.
After lodging of the application, the President shall refer it to the Court within 48 hours. The defendant will also be given a brief period of time to respond to the application.
The Community Court of Justice will then decide on any interim measures or provisional instructions, and make the appropriate order.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

The Community Court of Justice deals with cases in the order in which they are registered. Following the lodging of a case, the applications will be served on the defendant, who then has one month to reply. However, this time limit can be extended on application.
Following this, the applicant is given one month time to respond to the defence, which then is again given one month to respond to the reply of the applicant.
A Judge-Rapporteur will be in charge of the application, and will produce a preliminary report, which includes recommendation whether a preparatory inquiry or other preparatory steps are needed. This can also include the commissioning of an expert's report.
Based on the report of the Judge-Rapporteur, the Community Court of Justice will decide on the measures of inquiry, which can include:

• the personal appearance of the parties;
• a request for information and for further documents;
• oral testimony;
• the commissioning of an expert's report;
• an inspection of the place or of evidence.

Following the completion of the preparatory inquiry, the Community Court of Justice will fix the date for the opening of the oral procedure, which can then include oral evidence by witnesses in open session of the Court.

After hearing all evidence and the presentations of the parties, the Court will deliberate on its judgment in closed session. The judgment itself will then be delivered in open Court, and it will be binding from the date of its delivery.

It is likely that the process takes more than two years in total.

7. History of the use of this mechanism

This mechanism has so far not been used for conscientious objection to military service.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) was created by a resolution of the Fifth Meeting of Consultation of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Organization of American States (OAS) in Santiago, Chile, in 1959, and began working in 1960. It became one of the principal organs of the OAS with the Protocol of Buenos Aires from 1967, which amended the Charter of the OAS.
The Protocol of Buenos Aires (see http://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_B-31_Protocol_of_Buenos_Aires.htm) transformed the Inter-American Commission into a formal organ of the OAS and prescribed that the Commission’s principal function should be “to promote the observance and protection of human rights” (Articles 53 and 106 OAS Charter — see http://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_A-41_Charter_of_the_Organization_of_Amer...).

The Inter-American Commission is characterised by a unique “dual role”, which reflects its origin as a Charter based body and later transformation into a treaty body when the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR) came into force. As an OAS Charter organ the Inter-American Commission performs functions in relation to all member states of the OAS (Article 41 ACHR) and as a Convention organ its functions are applicable only to States parties to the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR).

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has three principal functions:

• monitoring and investigating the situation of human rights in the Americas, which includes the production of country reports on the situation of human rights (see http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/country.asp) or thematic reports (see http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/thematic.asp). However, unlike in the United Nations or the African human rights system, there is no periodic reporting by States;
• dealing with individual petition on alleged violations of human rights. This can involve trying to find an amicable solution, or referring a case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for those countries that have accepted the Court's jurisdiction;
• Thematic or special rapporteurships, whose role is the monitoring and strengthening of specific aspects of human rights. Offices of rapporteurs "may function as thematic rapporteurships, assigned to a member of the Commission, or as special rapporteurships, assigned to other persons designated by the Commission." (see http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/mandate/rapporteurships.asp)

The dual role of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights means that it also has two different human rights charters as reference. All member states of the OAS have signed and ratified the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man of 1948. Article III of the American Declaration protects freedom of religion: “Every person has the right freely to profess a religious faith, and to manifest and practice it both in public and in private.” However, there is no reference to freedom of conscience in the American Declaration.
For those countries that have ratified the American Convention on Human Rights of 1969. Article 12 of the American Convention protects freedom of thought, conscience, and religion:
“1. Everyone has the right to freedom of conscience and of religion. This right includes freedom to maintain or to change one's religion or beliefs, and freedom to profess or disseminate one's religion or beliefs, either individually or together with others, in public or in private.
2. No one shall be subject to restrictions that might impair his freedom to maintain or to change his religion or beliefs.”
The list of countries that have ratified the American Convention is available at http://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_B-32_American_Convention_on_Human_Rights....

The American Convention also establishes the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. However, in addition to ratifying the American Convention, a State party must voluntarily submit to the Inter-American Court's jurisdiction for it to be competent to hear a case involving that state. Cases can only be brought by a State party or by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

Some of the Rapporteurships of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights can also be useful in cases of conscientious objection to military service, or in raising issues around the violation of human rights of those campaigning for the rights to conscientious objection to military service. These are:

• Special Rapporteurship for Freedom of Expression (see http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/expression/index.asp)
• Rapporteurship on the Rights of the Child (see http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/children/)
• Rapporteurship on Human Rights Defenders (see http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/defenders/default.asp)

Summary

According to article 23 of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, “any person or group of persons or non-governmental entity legally recognized in one or more of the Member States of the OAS may submit petitions to the Commission, on their behalf or on behalf of third persons, concerning alleged violations of a human right recognized in, as the case may be, the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, the American Convention on Human Rights”.
A petition can only be lodged after domestic remedies have been exhausted, and has to be lodged within six months after the final judgment. In addition, the subject of the petition or communication should not be pending in another international settlement procedure.
For those member States of the OAS that have ratified the American Convention on Human Rights, this will be the legal reference for evaluating a petition. For those who did not, it will be the 1948 Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (the American Declaration). In addition, any additional Inter-American human rights protocol ratified by a State can form the basis of a petition.
After a petition has been declared admissible, the Inter-American Commission proceeds to analyse the alleged human rights violations in detail. It might also attempt to reach a “Friendly Settlement” between the parties concerned. If the Inter-American Commission finds a violation of rights protected under the relevant human rights treaty, it will issue a report on the merits, which will include recommendations to the State aimed at ending the human rights violations, making reparations, and/or making changes to the law.
If a State does not comply with the recommendations of the Inter-American Commission, the Commission may decide to publish the case or to refer it to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, if it concerns a State party that has accepted the Court's jurisdiction.

1. Likely result from the use of this mechanism

Following receipt of a petition by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission will first decide on the admissibility of the petition. If a petition is found admissible, the Inter-American Commission might try to negotiate a friendly settlement between the parties concerned, or – if this is unsuccessful or the parties do not want it – proceed to a decision on the merits of the case.
If the Inter-American Commission finds on a violation of rights protected under the relevant human rights treaty, it will issue a report on the merits, which will include recommendations to the State aimed at ending the human rights violations, making reparations, and/or making changes to the law. This report will be transmitted to the State concerned.
If the State does not comply with the recommendations of the Inter-American Commission within three months, the Commission will either refer the case to the Inter-American Court (if it concerns a State party that has accepted the Court's jurisdiction in accordance with article 62 of the American Convention), or publish a final report with final conclusions and recommendations.

Urgent action:

According to article 25 of the Rules of Procedure, “in serious and urgent situations, the Commission may, on its own initiative or at the request of a party, request that a State adopt precautionary measures to prevent irreparable harm to persons or to the subject matter of the proceedings in connection with a pending petition or case.”

2. To which States does this mechanism apply?

The mechanism applies to all member States of the Organization of American States (OAS), albeit with variations. While the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights will deal with petitions related to human rights violations from all member States of the OAS, the procedure and the legal framework depend on what Inter-American treaties a State is party to.
A list of member States of the OAS is available at http://www.oas.org/en/member_states/default.asp.

3. Who can submit information?

According to Article 44 of the American Convention on Human Rights, “any person or group of persons, or any non-governmental entity legally recognized in one or more member states of the Organization, may lodge petitions with the Commission containing denunciations or complaints of violation of this Convention by a State Party”.
There is no need for a lawyer, but it is possible to be represented by a lawyer.

4. When to submit information?

A petition can only be lodged after domestic remedies have been exhausted, and has to be lodged within six months after the final judgment. In addition, the subject of the petition or communication should not be pending in another international settlement procedure.

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

While the petition procedure of the Inter-American Commission is straightforward, and does not require legal representation, it is advisable to read the Commission's information brochure on the “Petition and Case system”, which also includes a form that can be helpful when submitting a case (see http://www.oas.org/es/cidh/docs/folleto/CIDHFolleto_eng.pdf).
A petition can be filed by any person, or group of persons, or by any NGO legally recognised in one or more member states of the OAS.

How to write a petition?

For a petition to be admissible, it needs to meet the following requirements:

• It needs to include the name(s), nationality, and signature(s) of the person(s) filing the petition, or if it is submitted by an NGO, the name and signature of its legal representative;
• whether the person filing the petition wishes his or her identity be withheld from the State concerned;
• an address for receiving communication from the Inter-American Commission, if possible including telephone, fax, and email;
• a detailed description of the alleged human rights violations, specifying date, place, and nature of the alleged violations;
• if possible, the name(s) of the victim(s) and of the public authorities involved in the alleged human rights violations;
• the State responsible for the alleged human rights violations;
• any steps taken to exhaust domestic remedies;
• an indication that the petition has not been submitted to another international settlement procedure.

In addition, the petition has to be filed within the time limit of six months after exhaustion of domestic remedies. If for some reason domestic remedies cannot be exhausted, because they are unreasonably prolonged or ineffective, then this should be stated in the petition.

Emergency procedures:

According to article 25 of the Rules of Procedure, “in serious and urgent situations, the Commission may, on its own initiative or at the request of a party, request that a State adopt precautionary measures to prevent irreparable harm to persons or to the subject matter of the proceedings in connection with a pending petition or case.”
A request for precautionary measures should be made when submitting a petition, or – should this become relevant after the petition has been submitted – when the need arises.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

Upon receipt of a petition by the Secretariat of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Secretariat will be responsible for the initial processing of the petition, especially checking if it meets the requirements of article 28 of the Rules of Procedure. Should documentation be missing, the Secretariat will contact the person or NGO that submitted the petition and request additional information.
The Secretariat will also register the petition and acknowledge receipt.
Once all requirements are met, the petition will be forwarded to the Inter-American Commission. In serious or urgent cases, the Secretariat will notify the Inter-American Commission immediately.

During the admissibility procedure, the relevant parts of the petition will be forwarded to the State concerned for comments. If the person submitting the petition wants his or her identity be withheld, it will not be transmitted to the State. However, it is usually not possible for the identity of victims of alleged human rights violations to be withheld.

According to article 30 of the Rules of Procedure, the State should respond within two months of the transmission of the request by the Secretariat. This can be extended, but not beyond three months counted from the date of the initial request.

In serious or urgent cases, or when the life of personal integrity of the alleged victim is in real or imminent danger, the Inter-American Commission will request the promptest reply by the State.

Prior to a decision on the admissibility, the Inter-American Commission may request additional information from all parties concerned.

Prior to a regular session of the Inter-American Commission, a Working Group on Admissibility will meet and make recommendations as to the admissibility of petitions. A decision on admissibility will then be made by the Inter-American Commission. Any decision on admissibility or inadmissibility is public and will be included in the Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission. Reports on admissibility or inadmissibility can also be found at http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/decisions/cases_reports.asp.

Following a decision on admissibility, the Inter-American Commission will proceed to a decision on the merits of the case. First, the petitioners will be given two months to submit additional information to the Inter-American Commission. The relevant parts of these submissions will be transmitted to the State concerned, who will also be given two months to respond.

Prior to a decision on the merits of the case, the Inter-American Commission will then set a time period for the parties to express whether they are interested in initiating the friendly settlement procedure according to article 41 of the Rules of Procedure.

If it deems necessary, the Inter-American Commission may also convene a hearing with the parties. It may also carry out an on-site investigation (article 40 of the Rules of Procedure).

Finally, the Inter-American Commission will deliberate in private on the decision on the merits. If the Inter-American Commission does come to the conclusion that there was no violation of the relevant human rights treaty, the report will say so and will be published with the Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission.
If the Inter-American Commission finds a violation of human rights, it will prepare a preliminary report which includes recommendation to the State concerned, which will be submitted to the State in question with a deadline for reporting on the measures taken to comply with the recommendations. At that time, the report will not yet be published, and the State concerned is also not authorised to publish the report.
The petitioner will be notified of the report and that it has been transmitted to the State concerned.

If within three months after transmission of the preliminary report to the State concerned the matter has not been resolved, the Inter-American Commission may issue a final report which includes the opinion of the Commission and final conclusions and recommendations. The final report will again be transmitted to the parties concerned, with a deadline for submitting information as to the compliance with the recommendations.

After the expiration of the deadline, the Inter-American Commission will decide whether or not to publish the final report, and whether to include it in the Commission's Annual Report. Published final reports can be found at http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/decisions/merits.asp.

The above procedure applies to all member States of the Organization of American States, whether or not they have ratified the American Convention on Human Rights, and whether or not they have accepted the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court. However, the legal reference might be different, depending on whether or not a State is party to the American Convention or not. This should be kept in mind when submitting a petition.

Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The following only applies to States Party to the American Convention on Human Rights that have accepted the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights according to article 62 of the Convention.
Following the adoption of a preliminary report on the merits by the Inter-American Commission, the original petitioner will be notified about the decision, and will be given one month to present his or her position as to whether the case should be submitted to the Inter-American Court.

A case can be brought to the Inter-American Court either by the Inter-American Commission, or by the State concerned. The Rules and Procedure of the Inter-American Court are available at http://www.corteidh.or.cr/reglamento_eng.cfm. From the petitioner's point of view, it is likely that the case will be led by the Inter-American Commission.

A case before the Inter-American Court will normally end with a judgment by the Court, which may include an order to pay reparation to the victim(s) of human rights violations. Judgments of the Inter-American Court are available at http://www.corteidh.or.cr/casos.cfm?&CFID=1168842&CFTOKEN=75858991.

7. History of the use of this mechanism

The Inter-American human rights system has been used in cases of conscientious objection to military service, but with a mixed outcome. The first case of a conscientious objector filed with the Inter-American Commission was the case of Colombian conscientious objector Luis Gabriel Caldas León in 1995. However, this case was finally archived in 2010, without a decision on the case (see http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2010eng/COAR11596EN.doc).
In 1999, a group of Chilean conscientious objector filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission, alleging a violation of their right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. In its opinion, the Inter-American Commission denied that a right to conscientious objection existed under the American Convention on Human Rights (see Report No 43/05). In 2004, a case was filed by the Ombudsman of Bolivia concerning a conscientious objector from Bolivia. This case ended in 2005 with a friendly settlement (see Report No 97/05).
Since the negative decision of 2005 in the case from Chile, the United Nations Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights have moved forward with the interpretation of the equivalent articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights respectively, so it is possible that the Inter-American Commission too could change its interpretation of the American Convention, if presented with a good case. However, we advise anyone wanting to engage in this to contact the authors of this publication.

So far, no case of conscientious objection to military service has been presented to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Summary

The Ibero-American Convention on the Rights of Youth (see English version: http://scout.org/content/download/22369/200853/file/IBEROAMERICAN%2520CO...) was signed in 2005 in the Spanish city of Badajoz, and came into force on 1 March 2008. It applies those States that have ratified it, and is limited to the Ibero-American region, which also includes Spain, Portugal, and Andorra in Europe.
The Ibero-American Youth Convention defines “youth” as young people between the ages of 15 and 24 years.
The Ibero-American Youth Convention recognises explicitly in its article 12 the right to conscientious objection, and prohibits the recruitment of under-18s:
1. Youth have the right to make conscientious objection towards obligatory military service.
2. The States Parties undertake to promote the pertinent legal measures to guarantee the exercise of this right and advance in the progressive elimination of the obligatory military service.
3. The States Parties undertake to assure youth under 18 years of age that they shall not be called up or involved, in any way, in military hostilities.
While there is currently no mechanism to monitor the Ibero-American Youth Convention, ratifying States are required to submit a report every two years to the Secretary General of the Ibero-American Youth Organisation. The Secretary General in turn reports to the biannual conference of Ibero-American Ministers with responsibility for youth policy.

1. Likely result from the use of this mechanism

As there is presently no monitoring mechanism in relation to the Ibero-American Youth Convention, the best possible outcome is the inclusion of a violation of the Youth Convention in the report of the Secretary General of the Ibero-American Youth Organisation.

2. To which States does this mechanism apply?

The mechanism applies to States that have ratified the Ibero-American Convention on the Rights of Youth. A list of countries that have ratified the Youth Convention is available at http://www.laconvencion.org/index.php?secciones/mapa (in Spanish).

3. Who can submit information?

Anyone can submit information to the Ibero-American Youth Organisation.

4. When to submit information?

As there is no monitoring mechanism, there is no clear indication when best to submit information. However, there are two major opportunities:

• after a country submitted its biannual report according to article 35 of the Youth Convention “on the progress made in achieving the observance of the provisions of the present Convention“. This can be countered with an NGO report highlighting the violations of the Convention. State reports are available at http://www.laconvencion.org/index.php?secciones/estudios (in Spanish, at the bottom of the page)
• In a timely manner before the biannual conference of Ibero-American Ministers with responsibility for youth policy

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

There are no special rules or procedures. When submitting a report countering a State's report, it is advisable to refer to the relevant sections of the State's report.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

As there is no clear mechanism, there is no clear indication what might happen to a submission.

7. History of the use of this mechanism

This mechanism has so far not been used for conscientious objection to military service.

Summary

The Human Dimension Implementation Meeting (HDIM) is the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe's (OSCE) primary conference to discuss the implementation of so-called “human dimension” commitments of OSCE Member States. The term “human dimension” describes the sets of norms and activities related to human rights, the rule of law and democracy that are regarded within the OSCE as one of the three pillars of its concept of Security and Co-operation in Europe. The founding document of the OSCE, the Helsinki Final Act from 1975, defines “respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief” as one of the principles guiding the relations between participating States.
NGOs are allowed to fully participate in Human Dimension Implementation Meetings, on an equal footing with government representatives. NGOs and States can make recommendations for action to both the OSCE and to participating States. All recommendations made during a Human Dimension Implementation Meeting are recorded in the final report of the meeting. Recommendations presented by NGOs and participating States are then presented to the OSCE's Ministerial Council Meeting in December of the same year.
Recommendations can also be followed up with dedicated Supplementary Human Dimension Meetings on specific issues, or with thematic Human Dimension Seminars.

1. Likely result from the use of this mechanism

During the plenary sessions of Human Dimension Implementation Meetings, the progress made by participating States in implementing their human dimension commitments is examined. NGOs have the opportunity to participate in the discussion and to highlight non-compliance with human dimension commitments, and to make specific recommendations, which will be included in the final report of the meeting.

2. To which States does this mechanism apply?

The mechanisms applies to States participating in the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). This includes not only European States, but also several Central Asian States plus the USA and Canaca. A list of participating States is available at http://www.osce.org/who/83.

3. Who can submit information?

Any NGO participating in a Human Dimension Implementation Conference can submit information.

4. When to submit information?

NGOs wishing to participate in a Human Dimension Implementation Meeting can submit statements, background documents, and other written materials for distribution via the OSCE's Document Distribution System (DDS).

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

The objective of the Human Dimension Implementation Conferences is to examine the progress made by participating States in implementing their human dimension commitments. It is therefore important to refer to relevant commitments made when making a submission.

The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) has published Document Preparation Guidelines (see http://www.osce.org/odihr/92511). According to the guidelines, only material from participants who are both registered and present at the respective Human Dimension Implementation Conference will be published in the Document Distribution System of the OSCE. Making a submission is therefore only useful when it is also possible to attend the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting.

When making recommendations, it should be clearly stated whether a recommendation is meant for the OSCE, or for participating States.

Organising a side event

Side events during the official Human Dimension Implementation Meeting are a good opportunity to highlight a specific topic in a more informal setting. NGOs can organise side events during the lunch breaks or evenings. ODIHR will publish the agenda of side events in its conference calendar, if information is received on time.

Lobbying of delegations

During the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting, it is also possible to meet and lobby the delegation of one's own country, or of another country.

Information on Human Dimension Implementation Meetings is available at http://www.osce.org/odihr/44078.

6. What happens to the submission (how long will it take)?

Submissions by organisations participating in a Human Dimension Implementation Meeting will be published on the website of the OSCE.
Recommendations will be included in the conference report of the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting in their original form, but might also be summarised in the rapporteur's report of the conference.

7. History of the use of this mechanism

In recent years, several NGOs that work on conscientious objection to military service have submitted information and attended Human Dimension Implementation Meetings. WRI has submitted information in 2003 (see http://wri-irg.org/co/osce-rep.htm), but then did not participate in the meeting itself, so the submitted information is not available on the OSCE website.
The European Association of Jehovah's Christian Witnesses regularly submits information and attends the Human Dimension Implementation Meetings.

Summary

The post of the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe was created by a resolution of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 7 May 1999.
According to the mandate, the Commissioner for Human Rights, shall, besides promoting human rights, and supporting human rights education, “identify possible shortcomings in the law and practice of member States concerning the compliance with human rights as embodied in the instruments of the Council of Europe, promote the effective implementation of these standards by member States and assist them, with their agreement, in their efforts to remedy such shortcomings”.
As part of the mandate, the Commissioner carries out visits to all member states of the Council of Europe to monitor and evaluate the human rights situation.
While according to article 1 (2) of the mandate “the Commissioner shall not take up individual complaints”, he or she can draw conclusions from human rights violations in individual cases. Part of the mandate of the Commissioner for Human Rights is to engage with Human Rights Defenders in the member states of the Council of Europe, and to meet with a broad range of defenders during his or her country visits and to report publicly on the situation of human rights defenders.
The Commissioner for Human Rights publishes opinions, reports on country visits, thematic reports, and annual reports regarding the situation of human rights in the member states of the Council of Europe.

1. Likely result from the use of this mechanism

The Commissioner for Human Rights can take up information on the violation of human rights during a country visit, or when drafting a country report. Human rights violations can also be taken up in a thematic report, e.g. on freedom of expression.

2. To which States does this mechanism apply?

The mechanisms applies to all member States of the Council of Europe. A list of member States is available at http://www.coe.int/aboutCoe/index.asp?page=47pays1europe&l=en.
Which human rights treaties and instruments are applicable depends on which instruments have been ratified by the relevant State. The most important human rights treaties are the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention of Human Rights – see http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/Commun/ChercheSig.asp?NT=005&CM=7&DF=0... for status of ratifications) and the European Social Charter (see http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/Commun/ChercheSig.asp?NT=035&CM=7&DF=0... for status of ratifications).

3. Who can submit information?

The Commissioner for Human Rights can receive information from anyone, but especially from human rights NGOs and from human rights defenders.

4. When to submit information?

Information can be submitted at any time. However, it is advisable to check the agenda of the Commissioner for Human Rights, and to submit information prior to a scheduled country visit, possibly at the same time requesting a meeting during the Commissioner's visit.

5. Special rules of procedure of advice for making a submission?

There are no special rules for making a submission.

It is advisable to refer to the relevant human rights instruments of the Council of Europe applicable to the State concerned when making a submission. As the mandate of the Commissioner for Human Rights does not include individual complaints, individual cases of human rights violations should mainly be used as examples to highlight patterns of human rights violations.

6. What happens to a submission (how long will it take)?

As there is no regular reporting procedure by States, there are no regular intervals for the Commissioner for Human Rights to publish reports.
For submissions made prior to a country visit, especially if they were followed up with a meeting with the Commissioner, it can be hoped that the Commissioner will take up the issues in his or her report on the country visit. Country reports and other publications of the Commissioner related to countries are available at http://www.coe.int/t/commissioner/Activities/countryreports_en.asp.
Serious situations of human rights violations might be taken up in the Annual Report or Quarterly Report of the Commissioner, or even in an Opinion. Annual and quarterly activity reports are available at http://www.coe.int/t/commissioner/WCD/annualreports_en.asp#, and Opinions of the Commissioner are available at http://www.coe.int/t/commissioner/WCD/searchOpinions_en.asp#.

Following-up

If the Commissioner for Human Rights has taken up the issue of conscientious objection, and has made recommendations, it is important to provide information on the implementation of the recommendations made to the Commissioner. The Commissioner publishes follow-up reports to country visits a few years after a country visit, and it is highly recommended to use this opportunity to highlight non-compliance with recommendations.

7. History of the use of this mechanism

Although – to our knowledge – this mechanism has not yet been used by conscientious objectors, the Commissioner for Human Rights has taken the issue on board, for example in a blog post from 2 February 2012 (see http://commissioner.cws.coe.int/tiki-view_blog_post.php?postId=205).

Summary

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg is an international human rights court charged with dealing with individual complaints in relation to alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Before submitting a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, domestic remedies have to be exhausted, unless these would be unreasonably prolonged or not effective. The complaint should also not have been submitted to any other procedure of international investigation or settlement.
If a complaint is declared admissible, and the Court decides on the merits of the case, it will either find there has been a violation of specific articles of the European Convention or not. In a case where the Court finds a violation of the Convention, it will usually also award compensation.
Decisions by the European Court of Human Rights are legally binding on the State concerned.

1. Likely results from use of mechanism

The European Court of Human Rights will first take a decision of the admissibility of a complaint, depending on its admissibility criteria. Should the Court find that a complaint is admissible, it will issue a judgment on the merits of the case, either finding that there was a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, and usually awarding compensation, or finding that there has not been a violation of the Convention.
Following a judgment against a State, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe will monitor the implementation of the judgment by the State concerned.

Urgent action

The Court may, under Rule 39 of its Rules of Court, indicate interim measures to any State party to the Convention. Interim measures are urgent measures which, in accordance with the established practice of the Court, apply only where there is an imminent risk of irreparable damage. Interim measures are applied only in limited situations: the most typical cases are ones in which there are fears of a threat to life (situation falling under Article 2 of the Convention) or ill-treatment prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment).
More information on interim measures is included in a practical guide published by the European Court, available at http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/5F40172B-450F-4107-9514-69D6CBDECF5....

2. To which States does the mechanism apply?

The European Convention on Human Rights applies to all 47 member States of the Council of Europe. The rights set out in the Convention have to be guaranteed not only to their own citizens but also to everybody in their jurisdiction. A list of member States of the Council of Europe is available at http://www.coe.int/aboutCoe/index.asp?page=47pays1europe&l=en.

3. Who can submit information?

A complaint (called an “application”) can only be submitted by the victim(s) of alleged human rights violations or their legal representatives. However, NGOs or legal entities can also be the victims of human rights violations (for example in the case of freedom of association).

4. When to submit information?

Before submitting a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, all domestic remedies need to be exhausted. This means that all appeals to courts available in a country need to have been exhausted, including – if possible – an appeal to the Constitutional or Supreme Court. In these appeals, the substance of the violations of the European Convention (not the Convention itself) needs to have been raised.
An application to the European Court of Human Rights needs to be made within six months from the date of the final decision at domestic level (generally the judgment of the highest court). After this time limit an application cannot be accepted by the Court.

5. Special rules of procedure or advice for making a submission?

For the initial application to the Court it is not strictly necessary to be represented by a lawyer. However, it might be advisable to already involve a lawyer, as this might increase the chances of your application. About 90% of applications are declared inadmissible by the Court. Application forms are available for download at http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/EN/Header/Applicants/Apply+to+the+Court/App.... On the website of the European Court you can also go through a first admissibility checklist at http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/EN/Header/Applicants/Apply+to+the+Court/Che....

The first application to the European Court should include:

• a brief summary of the facts and of your complaint;
• an indication which of your rights under the European Convention have been violated;
• the domestic remedies you have used;
• copies of the decisions given in your case by all the public authorities concerned; and
• your signature as the applicant, or the signature of your legal representative, plus a form authorising your representative and signed by you.

For an application to be admissible, it is important that:

• the application is made by the victim(s) or their legal representatives;
• the alleged violation has not previously been under investigation by another international settlement procedure, which – in the case of the European Court – are the United Nations Human Rights Committee (individual complaint procedure), the Committee on Freedom of Association of the International Labour Organisation, and the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
• The victim has to have suffered a “significant disadvantage” as a consequence of the violation of his or her human rights.

Before making an application to the European Court, it is advisable to study the Practical Guide on Admissibility Criteria published by the Court (see http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/B5358231-79EF-4767-975F-524E0DCF2FB...).

Applications should be sent by registered post to:
The Registrar
European Court of Human Rights
Council of Europe
F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex.

An application can be sent by fax first, but should also be sent by post.

While the initial application can be made in any official language of any member State of the Council of Europe, any follow-up communication with the European Court after the Court has given notice to the Government concerned for their observations has to be in one of the official languages of the Court, which are English and French.