How to Submit a Complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee

The UN Human Rights Committee considers individual communications alleging violations of rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. An individual complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee is not another appeal against a decision of a Russian court. The Committee examines whether the State has violated specific rights of the applicant protected by the Covenant.

Before submitting a complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee, several issues need to be assessed: whether the alleged violation falls within the Committee’s jurisdiction, whether domestic remedies have been exhausted, whether the relevant time requirements have been met, and whether the same matter is being examined under another international procedure. These issues are central to the admissibility of an individual communication and should be considered before the complaint itself is prepared.

A complaint must concern a specific right protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. An individual communication may, for example, concern the right to liberty and security of person, the right to a fair trial, the prohibition of torture, the right to private and family life, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, or protection against discrimination.

It is not sufficient to show that a Russian court incorrectly applied domestic law or that the applicant disagrees with the outcome of the proceedings. A complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee must explain why particular acts or omissions of the State amount to a violation of its international obligations under the Covenant.

The statement of facts should be coherent and self-contained. It should make clear what happened, what decisions were taken by the domestic authorities, which remedies the applicant used, and how the domestic proceedings ultimately ended.

The legal arguments concerning violations of specific provisions of the Covenant should be presented separately. For each alleged violation, the facts of the case should be connected to the relevant provision of the Covenant, with an explanation of why the State’s acts or omissions resulted in a violation of that particular right.

This approach distinguishes an international human rights complaint from a simple restatement of arguments previously made on appeal or cassation. The UN Human Rights Committee examines the case from the perspective of international law and assesses whether the State has complied with its obligations under the Covenant.

Before applying to the UN Human Rights Committee, domestic remedies must, as a general rule, be exhausted. In Russian cases, this will usually mean going through four judicial instances, including an application to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

However, exhaustion of domestic remedies is not an entirely mechanical rule. The Committee considers whether the relevant remedies were available and effective in the particular case. In some circumstances, the extent of exhaustion required may be different, for example where a particular procedure cannot realistically remedy the violation, is extraordinary in nature, or does not need to be pursued in the specific circumstances.

The question of which judicial instances must be completed before submitting an individual complaint to the UN should therefore be assessed in the context of the particular case. An error at this stage may result in the communication being declared inadmissible.

It is not enough simply to go through the required judicial instances before applying to the UN Human Rights Committee. The substance of the future international complaint must also have been raised before the Russian courts, so that the domestic authorities had an opportunity to consider the alleged violation and remedy it.

For this reason, a possible international application should ideally be considered while the Russian proceedings are still ongoing, rather than only after they have ended. The relevant international-law arguments should be raised in time, violations should be recorded in procedural documents, and evidence that may later form the basis of a complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee should be preserved.

If a significant international-law argument is raised for the first time only after the domestic proceedings have ended, this may create a separate admissibility issue. In cases with a potential international dimension, it may therefore be useful to involve a lawyer familiar with international human rights procedures at an early stage of the domestic proceedings.

The UN Human Rights Committee does not have the same short and strict application deadline that applied to the European Court of Human Rights. This does not, however, mean that the time limit for a UN human rights complaint can be ignored or that an application may be postponed indefinitely without consequences.

Under the Committee’s Rules of Procedure, a communication may be considered an abuse of the right of submission if it is lodged more than five years after the exhaustion of domestic remedies or, where applicable, more than three years after the conclusion of another international procedure, unless the applicant can justify the delay by reference to particular circumstances. An individual communication to the UN Human Rights Committee should therefore be prepared without undue delay.

Before submitting a complaint, it is necessary to determine whether the same matter is already being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. As a general rule, the UN Human Rights Committee will not consider an individual communication while the same matter is simultaneously being examined by another international body.

The concept of the “same matter” has its own legal meaning. The Committee considers whether the applicant, the factual circumstances, and the substance of the international claims coincide. UN Special Procedures, such as communications to Special Rapporteurs, are not always treated as international settlement procedures for this purpose, so the interaction between different international mechanisms requires separate assessment.

A complaint must be sufficiently substantiated already at the admissibility stage. It is not enough simply to assert that a right has been violated. The applicant should provide factual material enabling the Committee to assess the claim and establish the connection between the circumstances of the case and the alleged violation of the Covenant.

An individual communication will usually be accompanied by court decisions, procedural documents, responses from public authorities, medical records, correspondence, and other evidence directly relevant to the alleged violation. If a particular allegation is unsupported and has not been explained in sufficient detail, the relevant part of the complaint may be declared inadmissible for lack of substantiation.

If an individual communication satisfies the initial requirements and is registered, it is transmitted to the State for observations. The State may challenge both the admissibility and the merits of the complaint, after which the applicant is given an opportunity to respond to the State’s position.

The procedure before the UN Human Rights Committee therefore does not end when the initial communication is submitted. After registration, it may be necessary to analyse the State’s observations, prepare further written submissions, and provide additional materials where they are relevant to the Committee’s consideration of the case.

If the Committee finds a violation of the Covenant, it adopts its Views on the individual communication and indicates that the State must provide the applicant with an effective remedy.

Depending on the nature of the violation, this may involve compensation, release from detention, reconsideration of the case, an effective investigation, or other individual and general measures necessary to remedy the consequences of the violation.

In this respect, the procedure differs from proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights. The ECtHR could itself determine a specific amount of just satisfaction. The UN Human Rights Committee generally does not determine the amount of compensation: it may state that the applicant should receive adequate compensation or another effective remedy, while the specific measures are implemented at the stage of giving effect to the Committee’s Views.

A strong complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee usually begins long before it is actually submitted. The admissibility and substance of the future individual communication may depend on which arguments were raised before the domestic courts, which violations were properly recorded, and what evidence was collected during the national proceedings.

If a case may potentially reach the international level, it is therefore useful to develop the strategy while the domestic proceedings are still ongoing. This makes it possible to raise the relevant international-law arguments in time, preserve the necessary evidence, and avoid a situation in which important procedural issues can no longer be corrected once the domestic proceedings have ended.

This material is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute individual legal advice.