User:Mbm33/sandbox

right|thumb|200px|Logo

Background
The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a state monitoring mechanism of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC). It was established by General Assembly resolution 60/251 in 2006 to periodically review the protection and promotion of human rights in each of the 193 United Nations (UN) Member States.

The UPR Process
The UPR process is detailed in the HRC Resolution 5/1. Each State is reviewed every four years. The review is based on the United Nations Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, any other international human rights instruments the State is party to as well as any voluntary pledges or commitments it has made. The HRC appoints a ‘troika’ of three HRC Member States to review each State’s report. Three documents are provided for the troika to consider: The national State report, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) compilation of all UN information regarding that State and the OHCHR summary of stakeholder submissions. In addition, questions from other HRC Members States are given to the State party being reviewed to answer in its national report. The troika then present to the Working Group an outcome document, which summarises the review proceedings and includes recommendations. The Working Group comprises all 47 of the HRC Member States & conducts the country reviews.

New Zealand’s Review
In September 2008, the HRC selected Italy, Mauritius and the Philippines to form the troika. . A list of questions was prepared by Argentina, Denmark, Hungary, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; and presented to NZ for consideration. The majority of questions focused on the social inequities (health, housing, employment, education, social services and criminal justice) faced by the indigenous people of New Zealand (NZ) (Maori); the high level of domestic violence against women and children; and why the Treaty of Waitangi is not given greater constitutional recognition and protection. All three reports comment on the following areas: scope of international obligations, NZ’s constitutional and legislative framework, NZ’s institutional and human rights infrastructure, and the promotion and protection of human rights. This last category examines specifically:
 * Areas of equality and non-discrimination regarding Maori, women, persons with disabilities, senior citizens and sexual orientation;
 * Right to life, liberty and security of the person;
 * Right to freedom of expression;
 * Freedom of religion or belief;
 * Administration of justice and the rule of law;
 * Right to participate in political and public life;
 * Right to work and to just and favourable working conditions;
 * Right to social security & to an adequate standard of living;
 * Right to health;
 * Right to education and to participate in the cultural life of the community;
 * Rights of indigenous peoples;
 * Migrants, refugees and asylum seekers; and
 * Human Rights and counter-terrorism.

National Report
The NZ Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) engaged in a consultation process with relevant stakeholders. MFAT held meetings in August 2008 with over 70 civil society organisations and NGOs. Following ministerial and departmental consultation, a draft report was released to the public in February 2009 for comment, after which the report was finalised. The 20 page report noted that NZ is party to seven of the nine ‘core’ human right treaties. NZ has two primary human rights enactments: the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA) which affirms, protects and promotes fundamental rights and freedoms in NZ; and the New Zealand Human Rights Act 1993 which prohibits discrimination. NZ also has a varied human rights infrastructure; including the Office of the Ombudsman, the Health and Disability Commissioner and New Zealand Human Rights Commission(NZHRC) ; a National human rights institutions(sic) (NHRI) with an ‘A’ status accreditation. The report concluded with seven key priorities for future action of the NZ Government.
 * 1) Improving the economic, social and cultural wellbeing of people in New Zealand;
 * 2) Reducing violence within families and its impact on women and children;
 * 3) Improving the opportunities and responsibilities of young people in New Zealand through the education and youth justice systems;
 * 4) Strengthening the rights of victims of crime;
 * 5) Improving the consultation process with civil society for future human rights reporting and follow-up recommendations;
 * 6) Strengthening the partnership between the Government and Maori by continuing to support Maori to realise their potential and continuing the momentum on achieving fair, just and practical settlements of historical claims under the Treaty of Waitangi; and
 * 7) The implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the New Zealand Disability Strategy.

Stakeholder and Compilation Reports
Stakeholder submissions were made from the NZHRC, and the remaining 14 submissions were from NGOs and civil society organisations. The compilation report contains information gathered from the reports of other UN treaty bodies, special procedures, and any other relevant official UN documents. Both reports echoed the concerns found in the delegate questions to NZ and those acknowledged in the national report. In addition it was suggested that the Waitangi Tribunal recommendations should be made binding; concern was expressed at NZ’s vote against the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP) ; and repeal of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, which extinguished any Maori customary territorial title to the foreshore or seabed in NZ, was urged. The repeal of section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961 (which had provided a defence of reasonable force for parents who physically discipline their children) was welcomed, but unease was expressed about plans for a referendum on the issue. There was concern regarding the systemic gender pay gap; the alarmingly high child poverty rates; and the proposed amendments to the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002, which may result in unwarranted intrusion into the rights to freedom of association and expression. Also the 2007 New Zealand anti-terror raids and the treatment Maori received during them.

Working Group Review
The Working Group review was held on the 7th of May. The NZ delegation comprised 11 members and was led by Justice Minister Simon Powell. It included representatives of the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Crown Law, the Department of Labour, the Department of Corrections, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Permanent Mission of New Zealand to the United Nations Office at Geneva. Following the presentation by NZ of its report, the 36 delegates (from other State Members) entered into an interactive dialogue with NZ. Individual member states could ask questions and make recommendations, though NZ was under no obligation to accept any of the recommendations. Statements were made referring to positive achievements by NZ: accession to most international human rights statutes; efforts to protect and uphold the rights of the Maori population and economic and social improvements for Maori and Pacific peoples to combat discrimination, to enhance the rights of the child; advancements in the area of women’s rights and gender parity; the State’s Domestic Violence immigration policy, Taskforce for Action on Sexual Violence and the establishment of Family Courts; the active role of New Zealand in promoting the rights of persons with disabilities; the standing invitation extended to UN Special Procedures; the comprehensive scheme of social security and social safety nets; the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the Human Rights Act; policies to reduce poverty and to improve access to primary health; and the establishment of the NZHRC. Statements of concern were expressed relating to the issues identified in the reports mentioned above. NZ was given an opportunity to respond to these statements, and mention strategies being introduced to combat these issues.

Recommendations to New Zealand
Delegates then gave a list of 64 recommendations. 14 were directed at either the ratification of international instruments or the removal of existing reservations, including supporting the UN DRIP. Seven called for further incorporation of international human rights obligations into domestic law. Three related to the implementation of treaty body recommendations for the protection of human rights and a further two urged cooperation with human rights mechanisms. The vast majority of recommendations related to the area of equality and non-discrimination – 22 in total. Among the suggestions were calls to continue to adopt policies to achieve full gender parity and to address the socio-economic inequalities affecting Maori and other minorities, as well as incorporating the fight against xenophobia and racism in the education curriculum. A further 11 were directed at the area of right to life, liberty and security of the person: in particular to increase efforts to combat domestic violence; greater attention to the monitoring of human trafficking; and separate juvenile detention facilities for juvenile offenders. Four were directed specifically at issues concerning Maori: generally to settle land claims comprehensively and provide adequate compensation; and to continue dialogue between the State and Maori regarding the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004. Two addressed the proposed amendments to the Terrorism Suppression Act and recommended they be dropped. The final recommendation asked NZ to ensure that it consulted with civil society in the follow-up to the UPR recommendations.

NZ Response to Recommendations
The Government accepted 33 of the 64 recommendations unreservedly, with an additional 12 agreed to after further discussion. A qualified response was given to 11: for example NZ agreed with the “underlying premise” of recommendation 21 “to continue the public discussion on the status of the Treaty of Waitangi”, though NZ did “not assume that the current mechanisms in place were inadequate or that entrenchment of the Treaty is the only possible outcome”. Eight were rejected. Three of these related to International Labour Organisation conventions, which NZ believes are inconsistent with NZ’s “unique legal, constitutional and Treaty of Waitangi arrangements.”

The HRC formally adopted the outcomes of NZ’s UPR on 24 September 2009.