24 S e cti o n ON E – GENERAL 2007. The UNDRIP is aspirational and does not contain reporting process and growing input from civil society. binding legal obligations. Although New Zealand was However, New Zealand’s human rights obligations are not actively involved in negotiations on UNDRIP, it was one reflected in a single entrenched constitutional instrument, of only four counties that voted against the final text. In but simply remain part of the ordinary statutory scheme 2010, the Government pledged its support for UNDRIP. and the common law. Parliament is able to disregard them In terms of reporting commitments, the introduction of and they are therefore much less secure than they should the UPR signals a new mechanism for monitoring human be. rights. Under the UPR mechanism, the human rights The Commission consulted with interested stakeholders situation of all UN member states will be peer-reviewed every four years. The examination by a group of fellow member states is based on reports by states, NGOs and NHRIs and a summary of treaty-body and specialprocedures recommendations to the country concerned. and members of the public on a draft of this chapter. The Commission has identified the following areas for action to advance New Zealand’s international human rights commitments: It deals with both advances and challenges in the country Constitutional arrangements under examination. New Zealand submitted its first report Identifying opportunities to give greater effect in New in March 2009 and was examined in May 2009. There Zealand’s constitutional arrangements to the Treaty of has also been increasing recognition of the importance Waitangi and human rights protections generally. of involving civil society and national human rights mechanisms in the reporting process. Parliament Strengthening Parliament’s human rights responsibilities SInce 2004, there have been a number of communica- by the establishment of a Human Rights Select Committee tions (individual complaints) to the UN Human Rights and by tabling in Parliament New Zealand’s reports Committee alleging breaches of covenant rights by the on implementation of human rights covenants and New Zealand Government. In one case, 41 the committee found (with one member dissenting) that the author’s right to an expeditious trial was violated under Article conventions and subsequent treaty-body recommendations as well as those of the Human Rights Commission. 14, and that measures should be taken to ensure such Domestic legislation violations did not recur. In 2010, the committee remained Fully incorporating ratified international human rights unconvinced that the author had not received reparation standards in domestic legislation, policy development and for the breach of his rights, while in another 42 it found that the author’s inability to challenge the justification for his preventive detention breached Article 9 (right to approach a court for determination of the lawfulness of the detention period). Conclusion Whakamutunga in public-sector professional development and training. Civil society Ensuring wider and more active civil-society participation in international human rights mechanisms by advocating for a range of mechanisms, including establishment of a fund to support civil society to more effectively engage with the international treaty processes. New Zealand has a good record of ratification of and compliance with its international obligations. It has demonstrated some commitment to considering further constitutional protection of human rights. There has also been strengthened engagement in the treaty-body 41 EB v New Zealand, United Nations Human Rights Committee, CCPR/C/89/D/1368/2005 (21/06/2007) 42 Dean v New Zealand, United Nations Human Rights Committee, CCPR/C/95/D/1512/2006 (29 March 2009)