Geneva International Centre for Justice - GICJ

𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐃𝐚𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐫𝐞𝐧 𝐕𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐠𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 - 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐲𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲: 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐫𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐭

𝐵𝑦 𝐽𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑠 𝐶𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡-𝐵𝑎𝑙 / 𝐺𝐼𝐶𝐽

Every year on 4 June, the international community observes the International Day of Innocent Children Victims of Aggression. Established by the United Nations General Assembly in 1982, this day emerged as a response to the suffering of Palestinian and Lebanese children during the 1982 Lebanon War. This historical genesis serves as an indictment of the international community’s failure to prevent the targeting of the most vulnerable. By institutionalizing this day, the United Nations highlighted that children, whose status as protected civilians is enshrined in international law, continue to be subjected to acts of aggression, demanding a re-evaluation of our collective commitment to their safety and dignity.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝

Contemporary armed conflicts have increasingly transcended traditional combat zones, infiltrating the spaces where children should be afforded sanctuary-their homes, schools, and healthcare facilities. The gravity of these violations is cataloged in the annual reports of the United Nations Secretary-General on Children and Armed Conflict, revealing a landscape where the rights of the child are routinely disregarded.

The use of explosive weapons in densely populated areas, including indiscriminate shelling and the use of remnants of war, has inflicted physical and psychological trauma upon a generation. Beyond these casualties, we are witnessing the recruitment of children into armed forces, the use of sexual violence as an instrument of terror, and the abduction of minors. Furthermore, the denial of humanitarian access-the obstruction of food, life-saving medicine, and essential education-constitutes a violation of the right to life, survival, and development as guaranteed under international human rights law. These are not merely collateral consequences; they are violations that dismantle the future of these children.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟔 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐜̧𝐚 𝐌𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭

A turning point in this advocacy arrived in 1996 with the report, Impact of Armed Conflict on Children, authored by Graça Machel. This study shifted the international paradigm by documenting how armed conflict destroys the infrastructure essential for a child’s survival, including schools, clean water systems, and healthcare networks. Machel’s work exposed the reality of the "weaponization of childhood," wherein children were forcibly recruited into hostilities through abduction and coercion.

The report did not merely observe this suffering; it demanded systemic change. Machel insisted that the protection of children be integrated as a pillar of all peace and security agendas, arguing that any peace process failing to prioritize the rehabilitation and safety of children is unsustainable. Her report led to the creation of the mandate of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict, establishing a mechanism to monitor violations and advocate for the accountability of perpetrators who treat children as collateral damage.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐚𝐩 𝐁𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐍𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐅𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲

The international community has forged a legal architecture to safeguard children, anchored by the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). As the primary instrument for the protection of minors, the CRC obligates States to ensure the survival and development of every child. These mandates are strengthened by the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, which establishes a prohibition against the recruitment and participation of children in hostilities. Complementing these are the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, which dictate the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, mandating protection for children against the effects of warfare.

Despite the universality of these instruments, a chasm exists between legal obligations and ground-level realities. We are witnessing an erosion of international norms, characterized by a climate of impunity where the perpetrators of these violations continue to act without fear of legal consequence. Monitoring and reporting mechanisms are essential, but they are ineffective in the absence of an enforcement apparatus capable of ensuring accountability.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐈𝐂𝐉 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞: 𝐀 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐄𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭

𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 (𝐆𝐈𝐂𝐉) condemns all violations perpetrated against children in situations of armed conflict. We maintain that the targeting of children is a breach of the tenets of international law and an assault on the conscience of humanity.

GICJ asserts that the international community can no longer rely on rhetorical concern. We demand that all parties to armed conflict, whether State or non-State actors, adhere to their obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and international humanitarian law. Protecting educational and healthcare facilities is a legal imperative. GICJ advocates for the strengthening of national and international judicial mechanisms to prosecute those responsible for war crimes involving children. Impunity for such acts is the catalyst for their recurrence; therefore, ending this cycle must be a prerequisite for any credible peace process.

Furthermore, we call for the guarantee of humanitarian access. The use of the denial of humanitarian aid as a tactical weapon of war is a violation of the child's right to life and must be met with decisive international intervention. The protection of children is a legal and moral duty. As we observe this day, GICJ reaffirms that the future of international stability and justice is linked to our ability to shield the young from the machinery of war. We remain committed to ensuring that the rights enshrined in international law transform from abstract declarations into a shield for every child, regardless of the conflict zone in which they reside.

𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐃𝐚𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐏𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬, 𝟐𝟗 𝐌𝐚𝐲

𝐵𝑦 𝐾𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑛 𝐾𝑙𝑎𝑢𝑠 / 𝐺𝐼𝐶𝐽

𝐇𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐓𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐖𝐡𝐨 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐞

Peacekeeping is often remembered through blue helmets, flags, and ceremonies, but its real measure lies in whether civilians are protected, communities can rebuild, and justice can take root after violence. Every year on 29 May, the international community marks the International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers to honour the women and men who have served, and continue to serve, in United Nations peacekeeping operations around the world.

The United Nations General Assembly established this international day through Resolution A/RES/57/129. The resolution designated 29 May as a day to pay tribute to all those who have served in UN peacekeeping operations for their professionalism, dedication, and courage, and to honour the memory of those who have lost their lives in the cause of peace.
The date carries special historical significance. On 29 May 1948, the Security Council authorised the first UN peacekeeping operation, the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization, UNTSO, in the Middle East. Since then, UN peacekeeping has become one of the most visible tools of the international community for responding to conflict, supporting ceasefires, protecting civilians, assisting political processes, and helping societies move from violence toward stability.
Today, more than 53,000 civilian, military, and police personnel serve in 11 UN peacekeeping missions. They operate in some of the most fragile and dangerous contexts in the world, often where political tensions remain unresolved, armed groups continue to threaten civilians, and humanitarian needs are severe. Their work is not only a matter of security. It is closely linked to human rights, international humanitarian law, accountability, and the dignity of affected communities.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠

United Nations peacekeeping is built on the idea that the international community has a responsibility to help prevent conflict from escalating, protect those at risk, and support conditions for lasting peace. Peacekeepers are not only soldiers. They include police officers, civilian experts, human rights officers, electoral advisers, engineers, medical personnel, gender advisers, rule of law specialists, and many others whose work supports peace from different angles.

Peacekeeping missions may monitor ceasefires, support the implementation of peace agreements, protect civilians, assist disarmament and reintegration processes, support elections, strengthen justice and police institutions, and promote respect for human rights. In many situations, they are deployed where state institutions have been weakened by years of conflict and where communities urgently need protection and stability.

However, peacekeeping cannot replace political solutions. It can create space for dialogue, reduce violence, support the rule of law, and protect civilians, but it cannot succeed without the genuine political will of conflict parties and Member States. Peacekeeping works best when it forms part of a broader strategy that includes diplomacy, justice, development, humanitarian assistance, and accountability for violations.

The International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers therefore serves two purposes. It honours the service and sacrifice of peacekeepers, and it reminds the international community that peace requires continuous commitment. The day is not only commemorative. It is also a call to action.

𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 (𝐆𝐈𝐂𝐉) honours the courage, service, and sacrifice of United Nations peacekeepers who work in some of the world’s most dangerous environments. GICJ recognises the vital role that peacekeeping can play in protecting civilians, supporting political processes, strengthening the rule of law, and helping communities recover from conflict.

GICJ stresses that peacekeeping must always place the protection, dignity, and rights of civilians at its centre. Peace operations cannot succeed where they lack clear mandates, adequate resources, accountability mechanisms, and genuine political support from Member States. The international community must not ask peacekeepers to fulfil ambitious mandates while denying them the tools required to do so.

𝐌𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐌𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬’ 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐊𝐞𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐚𝐰 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐲

On Thursday 21 May 2026, Geneva International Centre for Justice (GICJ) welcomed twenty-tow Masters students and staff members from Kennesaw State University at its office in Geneva.

This visit took place during their study abroad program, as a part of their Master of Science in International Policy Management course.

Naji Haraj, Executive Director of GICJ, introduced the organisation, the team and our missions and roles in relation to the U.N. Human Rights Council.

Mr Haraj elaborated on GICJ’s engagement with U.N. Human Rights Mechanisms such as the Human Rights Council regular and special sessions, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), U.N. Treaty Bodies as well as Special Procedures.

Members of the Team explained the different facets of their participation at GICJ, through their articles, reports, social media posts and written, video and oral statements.

Mutua Kobia, senior collaborator at GICJ, provided an example of an oral statement he had given for GICJ during a Human Rights Council Session. Delfina, Patricia and Mihretab presented their experience and activities with the organisation.

The coordinator of our Social Media Team, Lila, had the opportunity to present the diversity of GICJ’s content on social media. She emphasised the need for the organisation to have a regular social media presence in order to share our work and have a more global impact.

The students and staff members were very attentive and asked precise questions during the presentation.

GICJ would like to thank the Masters students and staff members of Kennesaw State University for their visit to our organisation.
It was a pleasure to have them !

...........

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐝𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝟓𝟐𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐏𝐑: 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐬

On 15 May 2026, the Adoption of Outcome Reports for the 52nd session of the Universal Periodic Review took place at the United Nations Office of Geneva.

During this meeting, the Outcome Reports of all States under review were formally adopted and every one of them was given the opportunity to give their last remarks before ending this session of the UPR.

First, the representative of Namibia took the opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to the protection of human rights. He emphasized the importance of the UPR process as a moment to reflect on Namibia’s achievements and on the remaining challenges of the country. He declared the “unwavering commitment” of Namibia to the UPR process and promised human rights improvements “rooted in their responsibility to improve lived realities”.

Then, the Outcome Report of Niger’s review was adopted after Cuba, on behalf of the Troika constituted of Kenya, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and Cuba, declared that 265 recommendations were received for Niger.
The representative of Niger affirmed that Niger’s government would examine those recommendations with the utmost attention.
He argued that, though Niger was willing to make efforts to improve their human rights situation, there were constraints out of their power, as well as socio-cultural specificities that made it difficult. Nonetheless, he promised efforts on the promotion of women’s and children’s rights and to fight against gender-based violence.

Moving on to Mozambique, their representative took the opportunity to thank its Troika, composed of Burundi, Chile and Japan, and to thank the 114 States who had participated in the review of Mozambique. Like Niger’s delegate, he mentioned the country’s constraints in their efforts of advancing human rights, specifically the issues of terrorism and the current situation in Cabo Delgado. The representative of Mozambique also affirmed its commitment to the promotion of the rights of the child and to the fight against gender-based violence.

Mozambique was followed by Estonia, who declared they had received 273 recommendations. The representative of Estonia recognized the need for Estonia to continue their close cooperation with their partners to efficiently advance human rights in their country.

It was then Paraguay’s turn to address their last remarks. Firstly, Ecuador, on behalf of Paraguay’s troika, composed of Ecuador, Kuwait and Slovenia, declared that Paraguay had received 266 recommendations and that 85 delegations had participated in their review.
The delegate of the Republic of Paraguay then took the floor to thank Ecuador as the head of the troika for their presentation, to thank the Secretariat for their organisation of the UPR, to thank all the Member States who had submitted their questions in advance and to all the representatives who were present at the review for their professionalism and commitment.
Finally, the delegate of the Republic of Paraguay evoked a particular sense of responsibility and conviction they felt for the improvement of human rights and affirmed that all 267 recommendations would be looked through in prompt fashion.

Paraguay was followed by Belgium. Estonia, as the head of their troika, declared that 300 recommendations for Belgium were received during this review.
Christophe Payot, the representative of Belgium to the U.N. in Geneva, declared that Belgium would not be able to take care of all the recommendations and questions that were addressed to them.
He recognized that most of the recommendations had been accepted but that 31 recommendations had been noted (meaning: refused). Mr Payot affirmed that Belgium would give explanations for those refusals later and that, overall, the competent Belgian ministries would perform an in-depth analysis of the recommendations given by Member States during their review. Finally, Mr Payot thanked Civil Society and affirmed that Belgium’s collaboration with Civil Society goes way beyond the UPR process.

Then, the delegate of Marshall Islands, as head of Denmark's troika, composed of Brazil, SouthAfrica and Marshall Islands thanked the Secretariat for their work and successful collaboration.
The Deputy Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of Denmark to the U.N. attested that Denmark would work closely with the Danish Human Rights Institutions and Civil Society. He took the opportunity to thank Civil Society for their continued engagement during the UPR process.
Finally, he stated that Denmark had received 265 recommendations, which covered a wide range of human rights issues and that all those recommendations would be reviewed by the competent ministries. He also noted that Denmark would submit their mid-term report, as they have done in the past.

It was then Palau’s turn to make their final remarks before the end of the 52nd session of the UPR working group. The representative of Palau took the opportunity to thank the OHCHR Pacific Office and stated that 59 Member States had taken part in their Universal Periodic Review. He noted that the UPR process was key for the accountability and transparency of States and that, though Palau wishes to fully implement their national human rights obligations, major challenges remained for them like geopolitical impacts on their economy, climate change (food insecurity) and isolation of being a small island in the Pacific. He added that Palau had already passed the Human Smuggling and Human Trafficking Act and that he wished for Palau to continue in this direction by making “decisions that truly reflect the needs of the Palau People”.

The representative of Angola, on behalf of Somalia’s troika, composed of Colombia, Vietnam and Angola, stated that 104 delegations had participated in their review and that Somalia had received 288 recommendations. He noted that though Somalia supports 259 of those recommendations, there were other ones they decided to not accept. He promised that Somalia would provide responses and explanations for those refusals. The delegate of the Federal Republic of Somalia then took the floor to affirm Somalia’s steady progress in the improvement of human rights, in promoting peace and reconciliation and in strengthening democratic institutions.

Following Somalia, the representative of Seychelles stated that 199 recommendations had been addressed to them and reaffirmed the commitment of Seychelles to cooperating with all human rights mechanisms.

Then, China, on behalf of Solomon Islands’ troika composed of Malawi, Switzerland and China, declared that 63 States had participated in the review of Solomon Islands, that they had received 10 advanced questions and that they had received a total of 181 recommendations. The Ambassador of Solomon Islands took the floor to vow that all recommendations given would be considered and to affirm Solomon Islands’ commitment to multilateralism and to their human rights commitments.

France, on the behalf of Latvia’s troika composed of the Dominican Republic, Pakistan and France, declared that 80 Member States had participated in the review of Latvia. She also stated that they had received 7 advanced questions and 283 recommendations. The representative of Latvia then confirmed Latvia’s commitment to the success of the UPR process because this process helps States “assess where we can do better”. He also thanked Civil Society for their participation in the process.

Finally, the representative of Indonesia, on behalf of Singapore’s troika, namely Albania, Benin and Indonesia, stated that Singapore had received 342 recommendations. Those recommendations, he said, would be thoroughly examined. The delegate of Singapore expressed its sincere thanks to the working group for their overwhelming support and for the participation of 142 Member States to their review. He confirmed that the recommendations would be carefully studied by the inter-ministry for Human Rights.
To finish, he complimented the Universal periodic Review process as a unique peer review tool and vowed that Singapore would continue to support (especially financially) and to uphold the UPR process.

In the following weeks, 10 reports will be published on GICJ’s website. They will fully cover the Reviews, compare the real human rights issues of those countries to what was publicly admitted, and analyze critically the evolution of the States under review’s human rights situation over the course of the last 4 cycles of the UPR.

Please stay tuned for more analytical content on the 52nd session of the UPR !

78 Years of the Ongoing Nakba: Upholding the Right of Return, Securing Restitution, and Advancing International Accountability

15 May 2026 marks 78 years since the 1948 Nakba, a definitive rupture in the history of the Palestinian people characterized by systematic forced displacement and the widespread dispossession of land and property. Between 1947 and 1949, the fragmentation of Palestinian society resulted in the exodus of 750.000 thousands of civilians and the extensive depopulation of hundreds of towns and villages.

This grave humanitarian crisis established a protracted state of statelessness and exile that remains a core obstacle to regional stability. For the international community, the Nakba remains a foundational issue of state responsibility, representing a refugee crisis that continues to test the efficacy of global human rights frameworks and the obligations of third states to ensure the protection of displaced persons under international law.

For nearly eight decades, generations of Palestinians have endured a "continuous Nakba"—a lived reality defined by the persistent denial of the right of return and the ongoing erosion of their territorial integrity. This displacement has relegated families to refugee camps for decades, where they remain deprived of restitution and the security of permanent residency. This situation is compounded by contemporary patterns of dispossession, including the expansion of settlements and the arbitrary confiscation of land, which systematically undermine the socio-economic viability of Palestinian life and the fundamental right to an adequate standard of living.

Geneva International Centre for Justice (GICJ) maintains that the realisation of a just and lasting peace is inextricably linked to the legal accountability of all parties involved in the grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and violations of peremptory norms of international law. We assert that the protection of the Palestinian people is a collective responsibility of the international community, necessitating a transition from rhetorical expressions of concern to the implementation of effective remedies against the prevailing culture of impunity.

GICJ calls for an all-encompassing framework of restorative justice that prioritizes the full restitution of property, the restoration of human dignity, and the realization of the right of return as recognized under UN General Assembly Resolution 194. We remain committed to our engagement within global forums, ensuring that the protection of Palestinian human rights remains a primary obligation for the restoration of international legality and the preservation of the rule of law. Only through the end of the occupation and the recognition of the right to self-determination can the international community fulfil its mandate to uphold the universal principles of justice and human rights.

......

𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐅𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐜 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 𝐂𝐲𝐜𝐥𝐞: 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐄𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐆𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲

𝑇𝑎𝑛𝑢𝑠ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝐺ℎ𝑜𝑠ℎ / 𝐺𝐼𝐶𝐽

On 12 May 2026, at the 52nd session of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process, Singapore outlined its assessment of the human rights situation in the country. The delegation of Singapore presented its National Report pursuant to Human Rights Council resolutions 5/1 and 16/21. During the review, it was noted that the socio-political structures in Singapore are highly organised, enabling sustained economic growth while maintaining social stability. Singapore provided an overview of both legislative and executive interventions to ensure the full and effective realisation of human rights. Protecting and promoting the rights of women, children, older persons and persons with disabilities emerged as an area of priority for the Government. The National Report reaffirmed Singapore’s commitment to fostering an inclusive, cohesive and resilient society.

Indeed, Singapore affirmed that it prioritises broader community interests over narrower individual considerations. The rights guaranteed to individuals, including the right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to life and personal liberty and the right to peaceful assembly are subjected to restrictions in the interests of security, public order or morality. The nature and scope of the restrictions imposed have been a matter of contestation, prompting recommendations from Member States during the review process. To align domestic rights protection with international human rights standards, it has been recommended that Singapore sign and ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1976) (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) (ICESCR) and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984) (UNCAT). Human rights recognised under international treaty instruments must necessarily be enforceable before an independent institution conferred with the authority to protect and promote such rights. Accordingly, the review process of Singapore included recommendations on the establishment of a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) in accordance with the Paris Principles to ensure that human rights violations are closely monitored and expeditiously investigated.

The delegation of Singapore acknowledged the recommendations issued by Member States. However, Singapore exercised caution in its response to recommendations on the ratification of the ICCPR, the ICESCR and the UNCAT. Consequently, domestic legislative frameworks that enshrine human rights protections continue to retain primacy in the legal system. Noting the recommendation to establish an NHRI, Singapore added that cases involving violations of human rights would be heard by competent authorities within the legal system. It further reiterated that the Inter-Ministry Committee on Human Rights engages with civil society to implement human rights policies in Singapore.

𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 (𝐆𝐈𝐂𝐉) welcomes the National Report presented by the delegation of Singapore. GICJ commends Singapore’s sustained engagement with the UPR process to ensure the protection and promotion of human rights in the country. It takes cognizance of Singapore’s human rights commitments affirmed during the fourth cycle of the UPR process and its follow-up on the recommendations issued during the previous cycle. Furthermore, GICJ urges Singapore to:
- Sign and ratify core international human rights treaty instruments, including but not limited to, the ICCPR, the ICESCR and the UNCAT.
- Ensure that the constitutional guarantees of the right to freedom of speech and expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly are aligned with universally recognised human rights standards.
- Impose a moratorium on executions as the first step towards the abolition of the death penalty as it constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.
- Establish an NHRI in accordance with the Paris Principles to monitor and investigate human rights violations.

A full report on Singapore’s fourth UPR cycle will be released shortly, providing a detailed analysis of the challenges facing Singapore and the measures undertaken by the Government to address pressing human rights issues.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐜 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐫𝐚 𝐋𝐞𝐨𝐧𝐞: 𝐚 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐝𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬

𝐵𝑦 𝑅𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑛 𝐴𝑙-𝐴𝑞𝑒𝑙 / 𝐺𝐼𝐶𝐽

During the 52nd session of the Universal Periodic Review on 12thMay 2026, Ms. Francess P. Alghali, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation started with presenting the National human right report for the 3rd cycle. The interactive dialogue, which took place in Geneva, saw dozens of delegations offering recommendations and posing critical questions. Delegations including the United Kingdom, Mexico, Australia, Mongolia, Morocco, Namibia, Uganda, and others engaged in a structured dialogue, raising recommendations and expressed multiple concerns.

Key recommendations focused on criminal justice reform, gender equality, child protection, and strengthening the National Human Rights Commission in line with the Paris Principles. Several States urged Sierra Leone to fully implement reforms to reduce prison overcrowding, improve legal aid, and expand non-custodial sentencing. They also recommended the explicit criminalization of female ge***al mutilation, stronger enforcement of the Child Rights Act and Child Marriage Prohibition Act, and an expanded access to education and maternal healthcare, especially in rural areas. Climate resilience and environmental rights were also highlighted by States like Tunisia and Mozambique.

The Sierra Leonean Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation acknowledged that challenges remain and stated that the Sierra Leonean Parliament had revised constitutional provisions, including Section 27 on non-discrimination, and reaffirmed commitments to women’s rights, education, healthcare, and justice sector reform. The delegation also highlighted efforts to strengthen child protection systems and continue community outreach and public education campaigns to address culturally entrenched practices while looking into the ratification of the convention.

Sierra Leone continues to face major human rights challenges despite important legal and institutional reforms in recent years. Key concerns include gender inequality, child marriage, female ge***al mutilation (FGM), human trafficking, discrimination, and weaknesses in the healthcare system. Women and children remain particularly vulnerable due to societal fragilities and culturally entrenched oppression.

The country also struggles with severe healthcare challenges. Reports also showed illegal fees being charged in public hospitals. All in all, Poverty, underfunding, corruption, and weak infrastructure continue to undermine access to quality healthcare and social services, making it especially difficult for Sierra Leone’s government to address this major human rights challenge.

𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 (𝐆𝐈𝐂𝐉) welcomes Sierra Leone’s progress in abolishing the death penalty, promoting women’s political participation, and strengthening legal protections for children and vulnerable groups. However, Geneva International Center for Justice remains concerned about persistent human rights challenges, including prolonged pre-trial detention, maternal mortality, discrimination, and the continued practice of female ge***al mutilation. GICJ encourages Sierra Leone to ratify the conventions and to strengthen safeguards against torture and arbitrary detention. The organisation also calls for increased investment in healthcare, education, and child protection, while urging authorities to address corruption, to ensure legal, social and political accountability, and to uphold the rights and dignity of all persons without discrimination.