Unpacking the Relationship between State and NGO Recommendations in the UPR Process: Potential for Influence or Alignment?

Abstract

A substantial number of scholarly works have examined the role of NGOs in various international human rights mechanisms, including the treaty bodies and, to a limited extent, the UN Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review (UPR). This literature primarily focuses on NGO reporting and advocacy strategies to effectively engage with these international human rights mechanisms and influence their outcomes. Within the UPR context, recommendations for effective NGO engagement include forming coalitions, conducting advocacy and media campaigns, and participating in pre-session events in Geneva to shape the review process. However, the alignment between NGO recommendations in UPR reports and state recommendations remains underexplored in scholarly discourse. This gap is significant, as the UPR requires states to respond only to peer recommendations, not those from NGOs. The degree of alignment between state and NGO recommendations serves as a critical indicator of the relevance of state recommendations and their capacity to reflect the human rights priorities identified by NGOs. Focusing on Kenya and Zambia, this article investigates the extent to which NGO recommendations in UPR reports align with state recommendations. Findings reveal alignment between NGO and state recommendations, though the strength of this alignment – both in thematic focus and recommendation quality – varies based on the nature of NGO advocacy strategies. Understanding areas of convergence and divergence, as well as their underlying factors, can enhance the UPR's impact on domestic human rights. Given that states respond only to peer recommendations, examining the relationship between state and NGO recommendations is essential to assess whether state recommendations reflect the priorities and quality of those advanced by NGOs. In response to the question whether NGO recommendations matter in the UPR process, our article answers in the affirmative.