States must ensure adequate resources for HRC to fulfill its mandate

As the United Nations approaches its 80th anniversary, the world stands at a crossroads. From escalating conflicts and rising authoritarianism to climate breakdown and deepening inequality, today’s crises are profoundly human. At this pivotal moment, the UN must recommit to its founding promise: to uphold the dignity and rights of all. A reformed and revitalised human rights pillar that is well resourced, principled, consistent and accountable is not a luxury—it is a necessity. On 12 March 2025, the Secretary-General Antonio Guterres launched the UN80 Initiative that aims to reform the UN’s structures, priorities, and operations. The UN80 Initiative must be a turning point that strengthens the UN’s capacity to respond effectively to injustice, elevates the voices of the marginalised, and ensures that human rights are not sidelined, but centered, in global governance. Yet, the UN faces a credibility crisis –  as a result of the lack of accountability for atrocity crimes and its connection with double standards, selectivity and the lack of enforceability and implementation of human rights obligations; and a financial crisis – as a result of the fact that for years not all member States have paid their contributions in full and on time. In addition, this year, several States have reduced significantly or withdrawn their financial support entirely across a number of key bodies and agencies.

The Council cannot fulfil its mandate without adequate resources, and for that, States must pay their dues in full and on time.  We need States to invest in the system politically and financially, increase voluntary and unrestricted contributions to OHCHR, and ensure that the UN human rights pillar is safeguarded from any further cuts.

The discussions around the PRSTs recognised that previous “time-saving” measures, such as reductions in speaking times, have reached their practical limits. The focus must now shift to medium- and long-term strategic and innovative measures, applied beyond the one-year cycle of the efficiency process, to strengthen the Council’s lasting impact. However, we are concerned that the primary metric proposed for measuring efficiency appears to equate to the Council doing less. Consolidation of mandates, shorter and less frequent resolutions and reports cannot, in themselves, be considered indicators of effectiveness or efficiency. In times of crisis, genocide, and global unrest, the Council must do more—not less—to uphold the protection and dignity of people on the ground. While resource constraints necessitate prioritisation, simply reducing or withholding initiatives cannot serve as the sole measure of success. A joint letter led by ISHR on behalf of 17 NGOs sets out a range of proposed measures that could contribute both to the effectiveness and efficiency of the Council, including strengthening independent mechanisms, providing the Council a mandate to request advisory opinions from the ICJ, and reviewing the necessity of the Advisory Committee and confidential complaints procedure.

In line with the 2024 Feasibility study on developing a digital system for the Human Rights Council, digitalisation efforts must focus on accessible, multilingual documentation and meaningful participation. Any proposals aiming to combine existing platforms must be cost-effective, preserve existing gains, and avoid duplicating registration systems. The decision to fold Council tools into E-Delegate and eventually replace existing digital tools does not meet these criteria and risks fragmentation, losing progress and excluding civil society organisations from the workings of the Council. The PRST should have instead considered full implementation of the feasibility study mandated by this very efficiency exercise in PRST OS/17/1, such as reviewing the extranet platform to enhance user experience.

We call on the Council to ensure that all stakeholders, including civil society organisations, do not lose access to the digital tools and information currently available, and preserve the Council’s institutional memory.

We call on the Council to ensure that decisions concerning clustering and consolidations of Council-mandated activities, including any consideration of mandate mergers, are guided by an objective assessment with clear criteria developed in consultation with stakeholders, including civil society.

We reiterate the important role of hybrid modalities in alleviating heavy workloads by allowing multiple stakeholders to participate remotely, reducing travel time, costs and emissions. UNOG should review the costs of hybrid informals and side events to enable effective and cost-efficient engagement. We urge the incoming HRC President and delegations to work with counterparts at the General Assembly to support the adoption of a mandate for hybrid participation.

President,  we appreciate your deep commitment to civil society participation at the Council. We regret, however, the increase in the incidence and severity of cases of reprisals and intimidation. This is the primary responsibility of States, but the President and Bureau also have a role and duties in this regard. We call on the incoming President to actively follow up on allegations, maintain a publicly accessible register of cases on the extranet, including allegation letters if victims consent, and documentation of any other actions taken, and present a summary of cases at every session. When the response of the State concerned is insufficient, we request that the case be brought formally to the Council’s attention for action. 

President, as you finish your mandate, ISHR thanks you for your leadership, commitment and accessibility, ensuring the Council continues its vital work. 

We look forward to working closely with the incoming President and Bureau to ensure that the Council remains safe, accessible and responsive for human rights defenders, and effective in contributing to human rights progress, justice and accountability on the ground.