The Universal Periodic Review Cycle
A practitioner's guide to the Universal Periodic Review: its legal basis, four-and-a-half-year cycle, working group mechanics, and follow-up architecture.
Origins and Legal Basis
The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) was established by General Assembly Resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006, the same instrument that created the Human Rights Council (HRC) to replace the discredited Commission on Human Rights. Paragraph 5(e) of that resolution mandated the new Council to "undertake a universal periodic review, based on objective and reliable information, of the fulfillment by each State of its human rights obligations and commitments." The procedural architecture was then elaborated in HRC Resolution 5/1 of 18 June 2007 (the Council's "institution-building package") and refined by HRC Resolution 16/21 of 25 March 2011, which set the parameters for the second and subsequent cycles.
The UPR's distinguishing feature is universality: every one of the 193 UN Member States is reviewed on the same basis, on a fixed schedule, regardless of treaty ratification status. This contrasts sharply with the treaty-body system, where review depends on accession to specific instruments (ICCPR, CEDAW, CAT, etc.) and is limited to obligations under those texts. The UPR's scope, by contrast, encompasses the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, human rights instruments to which the State is party, voluntary pledges and commitments (including those made when seeking HRC membership under GA Resolution 60/251 paragraph 8), and applicable international humanitarian law.
The Cycle and Its Pacing
The first cycle ran from April 2008 to October 2011 on a four-year schedule, reviewing 48 States per year across three two-week Working Group sessions. HRC Resolution 16/21 extended the periodicity to four and a half years beginning with the second cycle (2012–2016), reducing the annual throughput to 42 States across three sessions and allowing more time for implementation between reviews. The third cycle ran 2017–2022; the fourth cycle began in November 2022 and is scheduled to conclude in 2027.
The order of review is fixed by lot, drawn at the HRC's organizational meeting, with the same sequence preserved across cycles to ensure predictability. Members of the Human Rights Council are reviewed during their term of membership where feasible. The Troika — three rapporteurs drawn by lot from different regional groups — facilitates each review, compiles written questions submitted in advance, and prepares the outcome report. A State under review may request that one Troika member be from its own regional group, and may request the replacement of one rapporteur once.
Three documents form the evidentiary base for each review under HRC Decision 6/102 of 27 September 2007: (1) the national report by the State under review, capped at 20 pages; (2) a compilation of UN information prepared by OHCHR from treaty body concluding observations, special procedures reports, and other UN documents, capped at 10 pages; and (3) a summary of stakeholder submissions, also capped at 10 pages, drawn from NHRIs, NGOs, and other civil society actors. Stakeholder submissions are due roughly seven months before the review; OHCHR consolidates them under standard headings.
The interactive dialogue itself lasts three and a half hours per State (extended from three hours in the second cycle). Speaking time is allocated proportionally when oversubscribed — a routine occurrence, with 100-plus delegations now common for high-profile reviews such as China (2024) or Israel (2023).