Carole Vann/Juan Gasparini/Human Rights Tribune - The marginalization of NGOs, the ban on in filming sessions, complacent evaluations and collusion among member states – could have made a mockery of Universal Periodic Review (UPR), the new UN instrument to turn the spotlight on the field of human rights. But during the course of the review of member countries these past two months, the guard rails of the UPR process apparently prevented it going off the track.

At the 8th Council session which begins on Monday, the 32 countries scrutinized in April and May (see Postscript) must respond to recommendations made by their peers. From this important step a series of measures will flow to insure respect for human rights in each country.

Thus it seems that two months after launching UPR, a certain number of obstacles have been sidestepped. In fact, it quickly became apparent that many states from all continents seized the opportunity to play the game and forge a new instrument as effective as possible. UPR is the only UN process that obliges each member country, without exception, to publicly be examined under the magnifying glass by its peers.

The few attempts to make UPR an alibi procedure were therefore quickly neutralized. UPR is based on three reports : that made by the state being analyzed, another furnished by the UN (Special Rapporteurs) and one compiled by NGOs. These documents were made available before the review. A country satisfied with a complacent report is thus exposed to criticism and recommendations urged by its peers.

At the same time, a state seeking to marginalize its civil society in an ostentatious manner, will be exposed by the transparent spirit of UPR. The moral of the story : the more a state goes along and acknowledges its weaknesses in the human rights sphere, the less it will be exposed to public criticism.

Nevertheless, a lot remains to be seen. States that have been reviewed until now are by far not among the worst violators of human rights. The same is true of the 16 who will be examined between now and the end of December. It is therefore too early to jump to conclusions about UPR on the basis of these first test cases. What will happen when it comes to those countries that present the most serious problems regarding human rights violations. Those under review next December include Colombia, Turkmenistan, Montenegro, Uzbekistan and Israel. The review in March 2009 will include : Cuba, China, Russia and Saudi Arabia. And what about states such as Myanmar and North Korea ? What will happen with Nigeria, a country almost unknown to the UN system since it has denied access to a Special Rapporteur ?

Translated from French by Pamela Taylor