United Nations Charter-Based Mechanisms

Human rights has been a pillar of the United Nations (UN) since the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945. The UN has two types of mechanisms to promote and protect human rights: Charter-Based mechanisms and treaty-based mechanisms. Charter-based mechanisms are derived from the United Nations Charter and tasked with promoting human rights and monitoring state compliance with them.  Charter-Based mechanisms include the Human Rights Council, the Universal Periodic Review, Special Procedures and Independent Investigations. Treaty-Based mechanisms are committees of independent experts who monitor a country/State’s compliance with the treaties it has ratified. 

Charter-based mechanisms monitor ALL countries that are part of the UN; whereas treaty-based mechanisms only monitor the countries that joined its related treaty.  These two mechanisms work together to comprise the UN International Human Rights machinery. Together, they monitor State compliance with international human rights law all over the world and work with countries to encourage cooperation with these laws.

The Human Rights Council (HRC) is the main Charter-based human rights mechanism of the UN. It is an intergovernmental body composed of 47 UN member states that comes together to engage in dialogue, produce reports, respond to human rights emergencies, and to make recommendations to protect and promote human rights. HRC members are elected by the UN General Assembly, can serve a maximum of two consecutive terms, and represent all five of the UN’s regional groups. The Human Rights Council also receives technical and advisory support from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). The Human Rights Council was established in 2006 and replaced the prior Commission on Human Rights. 

The HRC serves as an international, intergovernmental forum for dialogue on human rights. In deference to State sovereignty, it adopts a collaborative rather than a confrontational approach. Dialogue gives states the opportunity to engage with each other, build trust and ultimately strengthen cooperation with the UN. The Human Rights Council has many different functions and responsibilities.  It holds sessions, emergency meetings and debates. It adopts resolutions to pressure non-compliant states to comply with human rights law. It also conducts fact-finding missions to investigate allegations of human rights abuse, coordinates the Universal Periodic Review process, and oversees Special Procedures.  Through Special Procedures, the HRC can address human rights concerns in one specific country or thematic human rights issues that impact many parts of the world. Overall, the Human Rights Council is responsible for bringing states together to promote human rights by building trust, applying peer pressure, and appointing experts to examine human rights conditions around the world. While it can receive complaints, it does not have independent enforcement power over sovereign states.

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a mechanism of the Human Rights Council that requires each UN member state to go through a detailed review of its human rights record. Established in 2006, the goal of the UPR is to gather information on individual countries’ human rights records and to help them improve where needed.  The UPR occurs every 4.5 years and aims to treat all UN member states equally. 

There are two main parts of the UPR process. First, States self-report on the status of human rights in their country. The UPR prompts and encourages member states to fully report actions the country has taken to improve human rights in their country while also acknowledging the challenges they face in fulfilling their duties - like economic difficulties or natural disasters that might inhibit States from full compliance. Second, the Human Rights Council and other UN states give recommendations to States about how to improve their human rights practices. These recommendations are often informed by independent human rights experts, civil society organizations, UN Special Rapporteurs, human rights treaty bodies, and other UN entities. The review itself occurs publicly using an interactive dialogue using these reports as a basis.

International human rights law is based on the principle of state consent. In deference to state sovereignty, the UPR process only examines a State’s human rights record against the legal commitments it has made:  the UN Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international human rights treaties that they ratified, voluntary human rights commitments the State has made (domestic laws or programs), and applicable international humanitarian law. 

After the UPR, states can publicly accept or acknowledge recommendations. They have the primary responsibility for implementing measures to improve their human rights situations, and report back on their progress at their next UPR. Other states may assist a state in building their capacity to implement new laws or with technical measures. 

Ecuador and UPR Recommendation Adoptions

In November, 2022, Ecuador underwent its 4th UPR process. After going through the full review process, Ecuador accepted and committed to implementing 164 of 174 recommendations provided to them by the Human Rights Council and other UN states.  The international community congratulated Ecuador for its commitment to universal human rights and the UN international system that promotes them. Some of the major themes addressed during the 2022 review process were the rights of women and girls, Indigenous rights, and freedom of expression. 

Ecuador made several voluntary implementations over its 4 reviews. Most notably, Ecuador established the Ministry of Women and Human Rights to create policies that work toward eliminating discrimination and gender-based violence. Ecuador also committed to taking several steps to work towards eradicating the discrimination of people of Indigenous and African descent. One very interesting implementation was a new regularization process for immigration and socioeconomic integration, particularly for Venezuelans, a historically discriminated group in Ecuador. This measure was made possible by “donor countries,” or other states who financially supported the policy implementation in Ecuador. 

The UPR process also highlighted Ecuador’s human rights shortcomings and challenges When a country like Ecuador commits to UPR recommendations, that commitment does not necessarily signify immediate change to the human rights issue but it does become the basis for future evaluation in the next UPR cycle.

Resistance to the UPR in the United States of America

The Human Rights Council takes pride in the fact that 100% of member states have engaged with their review and submitted reports on their human rights situations. Since its creation in 2008, not a single UN member state has failed to be reviewed. That was until the United States refused to participate in their November 2025 review. When the US refused to participate in its review in 2025 it made history. The UPR lost the participation of a state that should be leading the fight for human rights, setting a dangerous precedent where other states may be empowered to do the same. 

This rejection of an international human rights mechanism coincides with a worsening human rights situation in the US. Though President Biden rejoined the Human Rights Council after President Trump’s 2020 withdrawal, President Trump’s second administration has continued down a path of resisting international law. Withdrawing from the Human Rights Council means rejecting the experts that monitor human rights. In the midst of a deteriorating human rights situation in the United States, international monitoring bodies play a crucial role in documenting the truth, holding leaders accountable, and being a voice for victims of human rights violations. 

It is important to note that while the US government refused its review, more than 100 American civil society organizations (Eg: NGOs, non-profits) submitted reports in accordance with the UPR in April 2025. These reports provide an international voice to local organizations who are on the front lines of the struggle for human rights. They allow the entire world to hear what is actually happening on the ground, which is extremely important given the federal government’s non-participation. 

After the US rejected its own review, the Human Rights Council delayed the UPR process for the United States to November 2026.

The People Speak

In October 2025, the People’s UPR was held in New York City. This was a convention of numerous civil society organizations from around the country that have documented the United States’ human rights situation over the past few years. The People’s UPR was organized by grassroots human rights actors who work to fulfill the mission of the United Nations, despite the federal government’s refusal to participate in their scheduled UPR. Among many organizations and universities, Minnesotan human rights advocates such as the Center for Victims of Torture, The Advocates for Human Rights, the University of Minnesota’s Human Rights Program, and the Mondale School of Law’s Human Rights Center all participated in the People’s UPR alongside national actors like the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center. These organizations publicly presented reports on topics such as the death penalty, LGBTQIA+ rights, and immigration. With United Nations and representatives from other embassies in attendance, the People’s UPR ensured that the US human rights record was publicly scrutinized. The People’s UPR illustrates the important role of civil society in protecting human rights.  

The Special Procedures mechanism refers to either individuals known as Special Rapporteurs or working groups that investigate human rights thematically or related to a specific country. These individuals are independent human rights experts appointed by the Human Rights Council to report and advise on their specific theme or country. They may conduct research, do country visits, act on reported violations by sending written communications to States or others, contribute to the development and interpretation of international human rights standards, engage in advocacy, and raise public awareness of human rights violations. They also provide expertise to states and civil society organizations to promote human rights in their specific thematic area. Although the UN can seem like a massive, abstract organization, the Special Procedures mechanism functions through the work of real people that keep the UN and the international struggle for human rights moving forward.

Click here for the Directory of Special Procedures Mandate Holders.

As of January 1, 2025 there were 60 Special Procedures. Of these there were 46 thematic mandates and 14 mandates that relate to a specific country or territory. 

Examples of Thematic Special Procedures: 

• Working Group on Arbitrary Detention

• Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances

• Working Group on Discrimination Against Women

• Special Rapporteur on the right to food

• Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants

• Special Rapporteur on the protection of human rights defenders

Examples of Country and Territory Special Rapporteurs: 

• Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territories occupied since 1967

• Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia

• Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar

• Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia

• Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Russian Federation

• Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Central African Republic