Statement by India under General Debate : Agenda Item 6 in the

42^nd Session of the Human Rights Council (09-27 September 2019),

delivered by Mr. S. Senthil Kumar, First Secretary,

Permanent Mission of India, (Geneva, 23^rd September 2019)

Madam Vice President,

1.We believe that the UPR mechanism is an effective and visible instrument for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The UPR mechanism provides to the member states with regard to their final decisions on the recommendations, taking into account their respective social, political and economic circumstances and the conduct of the review in an objective, transparent, non-selective, constructive, non- confrontational and non-politicized manner. This has been key to the universal acceptance of the UPR mechanism.

2. The enhancement of State’s capacity through technical assistance and capacity building measures in consultation with, and with the consent of, the State concerned would contribute in the improvement of the human rights situation on the ground. When it comes to implementation of the UPR recommendations, we believe that the national or domestic mechanisms remains best placed to translate them into concrete outcomes. Extending technical assistance and capacity building measures towards the implementation of UPR recommendations at the request of member states is the best way for further progress on UPR mechanism.

3. In this context, the UPR mechanism should not be tinkered with, as any such attempt carries the potential of diluting the universal support that it currently enjoys. The practice of encouraging Member States to focus on a particular set of rights is counter- productive.

4. Considering UPR’s universal acceptance and genuine dialogue process, India has been urging that time given to the member states for UPR review process should be enhanced. As observed by all of us, the limited time allotted for universal periodic review has restricted states from having fruitful exchange of views. States are compelled to express its views at times in 50 seconds on the human rights issues on a country. This is also in contrary to the practice of allotting fixed and reasonable time to states and other stakeholders in all sessions of the Council. India proposes that the review of the HRC should allot more hours to the UPR process to address this asymmetry.

5. We take positive note of the role of the OHCHR in the conduct of the Universal Periodic Review. We also appreciate the Office’s technical support for capacity building to various States in this process despite budgetary constraints it faces.

Thank you, Madam Vice President.

*****