CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

CYIL 14 (2023)

STREAMLINING OR SURVIVAL? OUTCOMES OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS …

Independence and expertise of treaty body members differs • assessment of nominees by a Panel of Experts High burden of states • single report and single review at the Human Rights Committee

No improvement

Inefficiencies in dealing with individual communications • This measure needs to be addressed earlier

Deterioration

None

I argue that the above-presented structure of the system would well respond to the needs of the treaty bodies and mainly it would significantly reduce the long-term problems of the system. At the same time, it would be possible to introduce it within the current framework of the treaties. 105 In addition, it would be beneficial to schedule the review of states at the permanent Human Rights Committee in consideration with the dates of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) taking place at the Human Right Council. These two types of human rights reviews should not follow shortly after each other, rather they should be arranged in such a way that the UPR takes place approximately halfway between the reviews at the Human Rights Committee. Nevertheless, it should be said that such an important reform would have some financial consequences. A permanent Human Rights Committee would of course be more costly than a part-time body. On the other hand, it would integrate two current committees and contain only 18 properly paid experts instead of the current 36 experts that are provided daily subsistence allowances (DSA) for the time of their meetings. Therefore, the new permanent committee might not be as expensive as one would expect. 106 Furthermore, additional costs would stem from parallel meetings of specialized committees, as well as added post-session meetings. With regard to the above-mentioned, increased costs of the secretariat with more staff and conference services also need to be taken into consideration. In addition, there would be some financial implications associated with the work of the Panel of Experts. A thorough cost analysis should be undertaken with respect to the need for additional resources. Nevertheless, the final question is not going to aim at the level of costs. The real question will be whether we are willing to support a functional expert-based system of monitoring human rights at the universal level. 6. Conclusions When reading about the treaty bodies in books, the system seems to be in place. However, when one takes a closer look, analyses data and takes the major challenges into consideration, the picture is very different. The resulting outcome of the treaty body review is very poor as it does not face the real problems of the system. Having said that, I would like to express my

105 See possible legal issues discussed in Lhotský 2017 (n 94), pp. 58–60. 106 See preliminary calculation before the extension of review cycles in Lhotský 2017 (n 94), pp. 70–71.

131