About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


90 UMKC L. Rev. 129 (2021-2022)
Challenges and Opportunities for the United Nations' Universal Periodic Review: A Case Study on Capital Punishment in the United States

handle is hein.journals/umkc90 and id is 135 raw text is: Challenges and Opportunities for the United Nations' Universal Periodic Review: A Case Study on Capital Punishment in the United States Alice Storey* I. INTRODUCTION In 2005, former-UN Secretary General Kofi Annan voiced his utopian ambition for the newly created UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to have an explicitly defined function as a chamber of peer review . . . to evaluate the fulfilment by all States of all their human rights obligations.' This vision was realized through the creation of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in 2006.2 The UPR involves intergovernmental and civil society input in the review of all 193 UN Member States' protection and promotion of human rights. Each review is recorded in publicly available documentation. This starts with the preparation of the three documents that form the basis of each review: the National Report, Compilation of UN Information, and Summary of Stakeholders' Information. The review itself is then held in the UNHRC, wherein an interactive dialogue takes place between the State under Review and other States. As part of the interactive dialogue, recommendations are provided by the UN Member States as to how the State under Review can better protect and promote human rights. The proceedings are written up into the Outcome Report, and the State under Review can then decide to accept or note each of the recommendations. The Outcome Report will thereafter be adopted at a UNHRC plenary session. Finally, the accepted recommendations must be implemented by the State under Review. The UPR has achieved success in attracting 100% cooperation from Member States, but opportunity remains for enhancing the UPR to fulfil its mandate. The UPR has the ability to address complex and controversial international human rights issues, such as racial discrimination, women's rights, LGBTQ rights, and capital punishment. The United States is a leader in the international community, but it is also subject to criticism about its promotion and protection of international human rights standards. This is particularly the case with regards to the United States' continued use of the death penalty, an issue that has featured significantly in the United States' three UPRs to date in 2010, 2015, and 2020, and is of particular concern to the UN as its ultimate goal is worldwide abolition.3 Using three broad themes extrapolated from an analysis of the United * (LLB (Hons), PG Dip (Legal Practice), LLM (International Human Rights), PhD). Lecturer and Associate Director of the Centre for Human Rights, School of Law, Birmingham City University, The Curzon Building, 4 Cardigan Street, Birmingham, B4 7BD, UK. I would like to thank the Arts and Humanities Research Council and Midlands4Cities Doctoral Training Partnership for funding this research. I would also like to thank Professor Jon Yorke, Dr. Sarah L. Cooper, and Laura Smillie for their comments and discussions on previous drafts of this Article. Any errors remain my own. 1Kofi Annan, Secretary General's Address to the Commission on Human Rights, UNITED NATIONS (Apr. 7, 2005), https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2005-04-07/secretary-generals- address-commission-human-rights. 2 UN G.A. Res. 60/251, ¶ 12(5)(e) (Apr. 3, 2006). 3 See International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 6(6), opened for signature Dec. 16,