US becomes first nation to skip UN human rights review process

The United States is set to become the first country to completely skip the UN Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review, with the Trump administration refusing to participate and reiterating its criticism of the council. Rights groups and experts warn the move could undermine the credibility of the UN review system and encourage other countries to avoid scrutiny.

Geneva:  The United States is set to become the first country to fully shun a regular review of its human rights record at the UN’s top rights body since it was created two decades ago.

The Trump administration last year pulled the US out of the Human Rights Council, accusing it of an anti-US and anti-Israel bias, and alleging that it didn’t uphold the very values it promotes.

---

Supporters back the council’s mandate to keep tabs on human rights in all UN member states including the US, which has drawn criticism for its policies including strong-arm deportations and targeted killings of alleged drug-runners in the Caribbean and Pacific — which the administration has said are designed to protect US workers and help keep the country safe.

The Geneva-based council regularly examines the rights records of all 193 UN member states — generally about every four to five years — as part of a process known as the universal periodic review.

The United States, under Trump, already skipped its appointment for its review a year ago. The scheduled November 2025 review was pushed back until Tuesday in hopes that the US government might change its mind.

It did not.

“(W)e give no credibility to the agency,” a State Department spokesperson said in an email to The Associated Press.

“This irredeemable body makes a mockery of human rights through consistent failures to uphold its own values’ as it pushes anti-American rhetoric,” the spokesperson said, alleging the council’s “persistent failure to condemn the most egregious human rights violators.”

The council says the process requires participation of the country in question, and in the case of an absence of any national representatives, the review cannot go forward.

As part of such reviews, national delegations — which at times can include a dozen officials or more — make a presentation, face questions and hear recommendations from other national envoys. It’s supposed to be a sweeping and constructive process, akin to holding up a mirror to governments to improve their human rights policies.

Critics of the US snub warn that the walkout could encourage other countries — many of which bristle about intense scrutiny from human rights monitors — to follow suit.

Jamil Dakwar, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s human rights program, said: “The administration is saying to the world, we don’t care about whether you would review us or not, we’re going to continue to violate human rights unabashed’.”

“And we are saying: No, enough is enough. This council should hold the United States accountable’,” he told reporters Monday in Geneva, as part of a push by civil society to raise awareness about the US rights record.

He said the ACLU and allies have called on the UN human rights chief to respond by presenting an update on rights in the United States early next year.

Eric Tistounet, a visiting professor at the Geneva Graduate Institute who was the council’s first secretary, said the US walkout could affect the credibility of the council’s review system.

“If the predominant global power — which has always claimed to adhere to the human rights norms — doesn’t show up and doesn’t even justify why, then you are in big trouble,” he said.