Примеры использования State under review на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
State under review.
The UPR is a cooperative mechanism,based on an interactive dialogue with the State under review.
The State under review speaks first during the one-hour plenary meeting.
However, statements must be directed towards the draft report andnot the interactive dialogue with the State under review.
In those cases, the State under review frequently invoked the existing national framework.
Mexico emphasized that recommendations should be constructive andrespectful, allowing the State under review to receive feedback.
The State under review should choose which of the six official languages of the United Nations is to be used in the review. .
Information provided by NGOs helps the Committee to obtain a more complete picture of the human rights situation in the State under review.
Turkey stressed that the consultation of the State under review would be critical to ensure the ownership of findings and possible recommendations.
They can assist to and take the floor during plenary sessions of the Council when the report of the UPR Working Group is examined andthe final report on the State under review is adopted.
Turkey's action was not only insulting to the State under review, but was also detrimental to the credibility of the universal periodic review mechanism.
Responses to reporting tools such as the questionnaires, checklist or comprehensive software should be analysed by a team of experts,which would include at least one expert from the same regional group as the State under review.
In this case, the State under review would have to inform the team of experts and the Conference of the Parties of measures taken to follow up on these recommendations.
Furthermore, differing interpretations regarding the approved document lengths resulted in a much larger volume of documentation than planned resolution 5/1 provided for 40 pages of pre-session documentation for each State under review, whereas actual submissions averaged 75 estimated standard pages for each State. .
The State under review and the experts should identify issues to be discussed during the visit and decide whom to meet e.g. relevant stakeholders including civil society representatives.
The assessment should be objective, butit is also important that the State under review take ownership of the report, seek to address the problems it is facing and share good practices with other States. .
The encouragement of full cooperation and engagement with the Human Rights Council, other human rights bodies and OHCHR.257 While not targeted specifically towards indigenous peoples,the UPR usually involves an examination of the human rights situation of indigenous peoples when the State under review has groups identified as indigenous within its borders or jurisdiction.
The Working Group's report on each State under review includes a summary of the proceedings; conclusions; recommendations made by individual States in the dialogue; and voluntary commitments made by the State under review.265 261 Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, part I. D, para. 15.
The outcome may also include,inter alia, an assessment undertaken of the human rights situation in the State under review; sharing of best practices; the provision of technical assistance and capacity-building and voluntary pledges and commitments made by the State under review. .
As outlined in Council resolution 5/1, for each State under review three pre-session documents(limited to a combined total of 40 pages) and a report on the outcome of the review were to be submitted. Resolution 5/1 did not provide details regarding the report of the outcome of the review. .
Several of them were referred to during interactive dialogues with the States under review, and some were included in the reports of the sessions and specifically accepted by the States under review. .
States under review: Bahamas, Barbados, Botswana, Burundi, France, Israel, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Mali, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Tonga, United Arab Emirates.
Some States under review had welcomed the work of the special procedures and committed to invite them, with a few pledging to issue a standing invitation.
It was observed that an active and fruitful dialogue had taken place among the States under review, the experts appointed by the States concerned and the Secretariat.
OHCHR provided information briefings and financial assistance to ensure that States under review were represented in Geneva.
Outcome reports of the universal periodic review working group for the States under review were not expected to exceed 10 pages each, whereas the actual outcome reports averaged 27 pages in length.
The negative aspects of the universal periodic review process included the fact that States under review had an opportunity to reject publicly the recommendations of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, even though those recommendations were legally binding.
To engage fully in the universal periodic review, participate actively in the interactive dialogues with States under review and implement recommendations made during the first session of April 2008 during the examination of the Czech Republic.
In the context of the Universal Periodic Review mechanism, the Human Rights Council has raised the issue of reservations with States under review, and a number of them have been urged to withdraw their reservations to international human rights instruments.
Several States under review have either not yet discussed the possibility of further means of direct dialogue or indicated that they would take a decision on further means of direct dialogue after having received the desk review. .