International Human Rights and the International Human Rights System A Manual for National Human Rights Institutions 3. REVIEW PROCEDURE The monitoring procedure provides a mechanism by which States are required to account on a regular basis for the performance of their obligations under the core human rights treaties. Most States report regularly, meeting their reporting obligations under the treaties, even if they are often behind in doing so. Some States, however, have had poor records in reporting, either becoming overdue by many years in the submission of reports or not submitting reports at all. As a result, the TMBs became concerned that these States were not meeting a fundamental obligation under the treaties. States that met reporting obligations also became concerned that they were being subjected to scrutiny and often criticism, while other States, usually those with the worst records of human rights violations, were never examined. Over the past decade, the TMBs have developed a review procedure whereby States can be examined for their performance of treaty obligations in the absence of a State report. A TMB can decide to undertake a review of a State whose report is significantly overdue. It will announce its decision to undertake a review, indicate the timetable for the review and request the State to submit a report by a designated date. The process of the review is the same in all other respects as for the examination of a State report. The NHRI and NGOs are able to submit their parallel reports and other information and to brief the TMB. The TMB will also invite the State to participate in an interactive dialogue and it will prepare and release concluding observations and recommendations at the end of the process. The commencement of a review process is often enough to induce the State to prepare and submit its State report. Most States under review also participate in an interactive dialogue with the TMB. This process therefore encourages States to comply with their reporting obligations, that is, to submit a report and participate in the examination. NHRIs can encourage their States to submit their reports on time. Where a State does not, the NHRI can engage with the TMB to enable the review to proceed. It can provide essential information for the process and ensure that the TMB is able to proceed in the absence of the State, if necessary. It can also promote the results of the examination to build domestic pressure on the Government to meet its obligations. 4. INQUIRY PROCEDURE All but three of the TMBs have or will have a mandate to initiate inquiries, on their own initiative, if they receive reliable information of serious, grave or systematic violations of the particular treaty.223 These provisions only bind States that accept the TMB’s jurisdiction for this, either under an optional provision in the core treaty or under an optional protocol. NHRIs should encourage their States to accept the jurisdiction by making the necessary declaration or ratifying the optional protocol, as relevant. 223 The Committee against Torture (under article 20, CAT); the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (under article 10, Optional Protocol to CEDAW); the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (under article 6, Optional Protocol to CRPD); and the Committee on Enforced Disappearance (under article 33, CPED). When two new Optional Protocols come into effect, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (under article 11, Optional Protocol to the ICESCR) and the Committee on the Rights of the Child (under article 13, Optional Protocol to the CRC on a communications procedure) will also have inquiry functions. After that time, only the Human Rights Committee, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Committee on Migrant Workers will not have this jurisdiction. 78 | Chapter 11: Treaty monitoring bodies: Monitoring compliance