List of illustrative indicators on the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (UDHR, Art. 5)

Physical and mental integrity of detained or imprisoned persons

Conditions of detention

Use of force by law enforcement officials outside detention

Community and domestic violence

Structural

International human rights treaties, relevant to the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (RtnT), ratified by the State

Date of entry into force and coverage of the RtnT in the Constitution or other forms of superior law

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic laws for implementing the RtnT, including code of conduct on medical trials and scientific experimentation on human beings

Type of accreditation of National Human Rights Institution by the rules of procedure of the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions

Date of entry into force of code of conduct for law enforcement officials, including on rules of conduct for interrogation of arrested, detained and imprisoned persons

Date of entry into force and coverage of formal procedure governing inspection of police cells, detention centres and prisons by independent inspection institutions

Legal maxima for incommunicado detention

Time frame and coverage of health policy for detention centres and prisons

Date of entry into force and coverage of specific legislations on community and domestic violence

Number of rehabilitation centres for victims of domestic violence including women, partners and children

Process

Proportion of received complaints on the RtnT investigated and adjudicated by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson or other mechanisms and the proportion of these responded to effectively by the government

Proportion of communications sent by the Special Rapporteurs on torture and on violence against women responded to effectively by government in the reporting period

Proportion of law enforcement officials (including police, military, specialised investigation agencies and custodial staff) trained in rules of conduct concerning proportional use of force, arrest, detention, interrogation or punishment

Proportion of detained or imprisoned persons in facilities inspected by an independent body in the reporting period

Proportion of custodial staff formally investigated for physical and non ‑physical abuse or crime on detained or imprisoned persons (including torture and disproportionate use of force) in the reporting period

Proportion of formal investigations of custodial staff resulting in disciplinary action or prosecution

Actual prisons occupancy as a proportion of prison capacity in accordance with relevant UN conventions on prison conditions

Proportion of detained and imprisoned persons in accommodation meeting legally stipulated requirements (e.g. drinking water, cubic content of air, minimum floor space, heating)

Number of custodial and other relevant staff per inmate

Proportion of detention centres and prisons with facilities to segregate persons in custody (by sex, age, accused, sentenced, criminal cases, mental health, immigration related or other cases)

Proportion of law enforcement officials formally investigated for physical and non ‑physical abuse or crime (including torture and disproportionate use of force) in the reporting period

Proportion of formal investigations of law enforcement officials resulting in disciplinary action or prosecution

Proportion of arrests and other acts of apprehending persons where a firearm was discharged by law enforcement officials

Proportion of public social expenditure on campaigns to sensitise people on violence against women & children (e.g. violence by intimate partners, genital mutilation, rape)

Proportion of healthcare and community welfare professionals trained in handling domestic violence issues

Proportion of teaching staff trained against the use of physical violence against children

Proportion of teaching staff subjected to disciplinary action, prosecuted for physical and non ‑physical abuse on children

Proportion of women reporting forms of violence (physical, sexual or psychological) against self or her children initiating legal action or seeking help from police or counselling centres

Number of persons arrested, adjudicated, convicted or serving sentence for violent crime (including homicide, rape, assault) per 100,000 population in the reporting period

Outcome

Incidence and prevalence of death, physical injury and communicable and non ‑communicable diseases (HIV/AIDS, malaria/tuberculosis*, mental illness) in custody

Proportion of detained or imprisoned persons held incommunicado or in prolonged solitary confinement

Reported cases of inhuman methods of execution and treatment of persons sentenced to death /incarcerated in the reporting period

Proportion of detained or imprisoned persons with body mass index < 18.5

Incidence of death and physical injury resulting from arrests or other acts of apprehending persons by law enforcement officials in the reporting period

Proportion of children or pupils per 1000 enrolled and patients who experienced corporal punishment in teaching and medical institutions

Incidence and prevalence of deaths and crimes related to community and domestic violence (including homicide, rape, assault) in the reporting period

Reported cases of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment perpetrated by an agent of the State or any other person acting under government authority or with its complicity, tolerance, or acquiescence, but without any or due judicial process (e.g. as reported to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture/ Violence against Women ), in the reporting period

Proportion of victims of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment who received compensation and rehabilitation, in the reporting period

24.04.08

All indicators should be disaggregated by prohibited grounds of discrimination, as applicable and reflected in metasheets

List of illustrative indicators on the right to participate in public affairs (UDHR, Art. 21) (* MDG related indicators)

Exercise of legislative, executive and administrative powers

Universal and equal suffrage

Access to public service positions

Structural

International human rights treaties, relevant to the right to participate in public affairs, ratified by the State

Date of entry into force and coverage of the right to participate in public affairs in the Constitution or other forms of superior law

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic laws for implementing the right to participate in public affairs, including freedom of opinion, expression, information, media, association and assembly

Date of entry into force of universal suffrage, right to vote, right to stand for election, legal provisions defining citizenship and limitations (including age limits) on permanent residents with respect to the right to participate in public affairs at national and local level

Quota, time frame and coverage of temporary and special measures for targeted populations in legislative, executive, judicial and appointed bodies

Type of accreditation of National Human Rights Institutions by the rules of procedure of the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions

Number of registered and/or active non ‑governmental organisations (per 100,000 persons) involved in the promotion and protection of the right to participate in public affairs

Periodicity of executive and legislative elections at national and local level

Date of entry into force and coverage of laws establishing an independent national electoral body

Date of entry into force and coverage of legal provisions guaranteeing access to public service positions without discrimination

Date of entry into force and coverage of administrative tribunals or dedicated judicial redress mechanism for public service matters

Process

Proportion of received complaints on the right to participate in public affairs investigated and adjudicated by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson or other mechanisms and the proportion of these responded to effectively by the government

Number of suffrages (election, referendum and plebiscite) at national and local level held during the reporting period

Number of legislations adopted by national and sub ‑national legislatures during the reporting period

Proportion of elections and sessions of national and locally elected bodies held as per the schedule laid down by constitutional or statutory bodies

Proportion of election campaign expenditure at national and sub ‑national level met through public funding

Proportion of elected personnel whose term of service was interrupted, by cause of interruption

Proportion of women and target groups included in the membership of national political parties or presented as candidate for election

Proportion of the voting ‑age population registered to vote

Reported irregularities (intimidation, corruption or arbitrary interference) with registration, maintenance and review of electoral rolls

Number of complaints per elected position recorded and addressed in the election process by national and sub ‑national electoral authorities

Share of public expenditure on national and sub ‑national elections spent on voter education and registration campaigns

Number of political parties registered or recognised at national level

Proportion of voting age population not affiliated to political parties

Proportion of vacancies in (selected) public authorities at national and sub ‑national level filled through selection of women and candidates from target population groups

Proportion of cases filed in administrative tribunals and dedicated judicial redress mechanism for public service matters adjudicated and finally disposed during the reporting period

Proportion of positions in the public service reserved to nationals or citizen

Outcome

Proportion of seats in parliament*, elected and appointed bodies at sub ‑national and local level held by women and target groups

Average voter turnout in national and local elections, by sex and target groups

Proportion of invalid and blank votes in elections to national and sub ‑national legislatures

Reported cases of denial of access to public service or position on account of discrimination

Proportion of public service positions held by women and members of target groups

24.04.08

All indicators should be disaggregated by prohibited grounds of discrimination, as applicable and reflected in metasheets

List of illustrative indicators on the right to adequate housing (UDHR, Art. 25) (* MDG related indicators)

Habitability

Accessibility to Services

Housing Affordability

Security of Tenure

Structural

International human rights treaties, relevant to the right to adequate housing, ratified by the State

Date of entry into force and coverage of the right to adequate housing in the Constitution or other forms of superior law

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic laws for implementing the right to adequate housing

Type of accreditation of National Human Rights Institutions by the rules of procedure of the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions.

Number of registered and/or active non ‑governmental organizations (per 100,000 persons) involved in the promotion and protection of the right to adequate housing

Time frame and coverage of national housing policy or strategy for the progressive implementation of measures, including special measures for target groups, for the right to adequate housing at different levels of government

Time frame and coverage of national policy on rehabilitation, resettlement and management of natural disaster

Date of entry into force and coverage of legislation on security of tenure, equal inheritance and protection against forced eviction

Process

Proportion of received complaints on the right to adequate housing investigated and adjudicated by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson or other mechanisms and the proportion of these responded effectively by the government

Number of and total public expenditures on housing reconstruction and rehabilitation by evicted/displaced persons during the reporting period

Net official development assistance (ODA) for housing (including land and basic services) received or provided as proportion of public expenditure on housing or GNI*

Proportion of habitations (cities, towns and villages) brought under the provisions of building codes and by laws in the reporting period

Share of public expenditure on social or community housing

Habitable area (sq. m) added through reclamation, including of hazardous sites and change in land use pattern in the reporting period

Habitable area (sq. m per capita) earmarked for social or community housing during the reporting period

Share of public expenditure on provision and maintenance of sanitation, water supply, electricity and physical connectivity of habitations

Proportion of targeted population that was extended sustainable access to an improved water source*, access to improved sanitation*, electricity and garbage disposal in the reporting period

Proportion of households that receive public housing assistance, including those living in subsidised rented housing and households subsidised for ownership

Proportion of targeted households living in squatter settlements rehabilitated in the reporting period

Proportion of homeless population that was extended the use of public and community based shelters in the reporting period

Average time taken to settle disputes related to housing and land rights in courts and tribunals

Number/proportion of legal appeals aimed at preventing planned evictions or demolitions ordered by court in the reporting period

Number/proportion of legal procedures seeking compensation following evictions in the reporting period, by result after adjudication

Number and proportion of displaced or evicted persons rehabilitated or resettled in the reporting period

Outcome

Proportion of population with sufficient living space (persons per rooms or rooms per household) or average number of persons per room among target households

Proportion of households living in permanent structure in compliance with building codes and by ‑laws

Proportion of households living in or near hazardous conditions

Proportion of urban population living in slums*

Proportion of population using an improved drinking water (public / private) source, sanitation facility, electricity and garbage disposal

Proportion of household budget of target population groups spent on water supply, sanitation, electricity and garbage disposal

Proportion of households spending more than ‘X’ percent of their monthly income or expenditure on housing or average rent of bottom three income deciles as a proportion of the top three

Annual average of homeless persons per 100,000 population (‘X’ being defined normatively for the country context)

Reported cases of “forced evictions” (e.g. as reported to UN special procedures), in the reporting period

Proportion of households with legally enforceable, contractual, statutory or other protection providing security of tenure or proportion of households with access to secure tenure

Proportion of women with titles to land or property

24.4.08

All indicators should be disaggregated by prohibited grounds of discrimination, as applicable and reflected in metasheets

The right to freedom of opinion and expression (UDHR, Art. 19) (* MDG related indicators)

Freedom of opinion and to impart information

Access to information

Special duties and responsibilities

Structural

International human rights treaties, relevant to the right to freedom of opinion and expression (RFoE), ratified by the State

Date of entry into force and coverage of the RFoE in the Constitution or other forms of superior law

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic laws for implementing the RFoE, including availability of judicial review of any decision taken by the State to restrict RFOE

Number of registered and/or active non ‑governmental organisations (per 100,000 persons) involved in the promotion and protection of the RFoE

Date of entry into force and coverage of code of conduct/ethics for journalists and other media persons

Date of entry into force and coverage of legislation for the protection of the freedom of the media, including decriminalization of libel, defamation and slander

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic law for the protection and safety of journalists and any other media persons, including protection against disclosure of sources

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic law for equal opportunity of access to radio concessions and TV broadcast frequencies

Time frame and coverage of national policy on education for all, including provisions for temporary special measures for target groups, human rights curricula and “active learning”

Date of entry into force and coverage of legislation on access to information

Date of establishment of an independent monitoring mechanism (e.g. Information Commissioner)

Date of entry into force and coverage of statistical legislation to protect independence and quality of official statistics

Timeframe and coverage of national policy to promote access to information technology

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic law prohibiting propaganda for war

Date of entry into force and coverage of domestic law(s) prohibiting advocacy of national, racial, religious or sexist hatred constituting incitement of discrimination, hostility or violence

Process

Proportion of received complaints on RFoE investigated and adjudicated by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson or other mechanisms and the proportion of these responded to effectively by the government

Proportion of communications sent by the UN Special Rapporteurs (e.g. Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of RFoE), responded to effectively by the government

Number of newspapers, magazines, radio stations, TV broadcasts, internet sites by ownership (public or private) and audience figures

Number of mergers or buying by the media companies investigated, adjudicated and refused by an independent competition commission in the reporting period

Number of newspapers, articles, internet sites and other media broadcasts closed or censored by regulatory authorities

Proportion of complaints filled by journalists or any other media persons investigated, adjudicated and approved by court or other competent mechanisms

Number of media institutions of ethnic, linguistic minority and religious population groups recognized or extended public support

Proportion of requests for holding demonstrations accepted by administrative authorities

Proportion of schools engaged in “active learning “ activities, giving children the opportunity to express themselves freely

Proportion of information requests by the media responded to effectively by government

Subscriptions and average daily sales of national and main regional newspapers

Proportion of population with access to TV and radio broadcasts

Number of personal computers in use with internet access per 100 population*

Number of internet domains registered per 1000 population

Proportion of judicial actions on alleged libel, defamation and slander investigated and resulting in conviction

Proportion of judicial actions against propaganda for war investigated and resulting in conviction

Proportion of (quasi ‑) judicial actions against advocacy of national, racial, religious or sexist hatred investigated and resulting in conviction

Outcome

Number of journalists and any other media persons who reported sanctions, political or corporate pressure for the publication of information

Reported cases of non ‑disclosure of documents, archives and administrative or corporate data of public interest (e.g. justice records, arms exports, environmental data, asylum seekers)

Proportion of linguistic population having access to media broadcasts in their own language

Proportion of victims of libel, defamation and slander who received compensation and rehabilitation

Reported cases of killing, disappearance, detention and torture against journalists, human rights defenders or any other persons who exercised her/his RFoE, perpetrated by an agent of the State or any other person acting under government authority or with its complicity, tolerance or acquiescence, but without any or due judicial process (e.g. reported to UN special procedures)

24.4.08

All indicators should be disaggregated by prohibited grounds of discrimination, as applicable and reflected in metasheets

Indicator 1

International human rights treaties, relevant to the right to life, ratified by the State(see structural indicators in the table on the right to life)

Definition

Proportion of international and regional human rights treaties, with direct reference and/or relevance to the realisation of the right to life, that have been ratified by the State. ‘International human rights treaties’ is used as a generic term embracing all instruments binding under international human rights law, regardless of their formal designation (e.g. Covenant, Convention or Optional Protocol). The reference to the ‘right to life’ follows primarily the formulation used in article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its elaboration in General Comment No. 6 of the Human Rights Committee.

Rationale

Ratification of an international human rights treaty reflects a certain acceptance of concerned human rights standards by a State and gives an indication, notably at international level, of a State’s commitment to undertake steps that help in the realisation of those rights. When the State has ratified a treaty it assumes a legal obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the human rights standards reflected in that treaty. The indicator is a structural indicator that captures the ‘commitment’ of a State to implement its human rights obligations.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed as a ratio of the actual number of treaties ratified by the State to the reference list of treaties. A reference list of core international human rights treaties, including optional protocols, adopted and opened for ratification by the General Assembly of the United Nations is available at http://www2.ohchr.org/English/law/index.htm#instruments .

Data collection and source

The main source of data on the indicator is administrative records at the depository authority, namely the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs (see http://untrea t y.un.org/ola/ ). The OHCHR website also presents this information and updates it periodically.

Periodicity

The indicator database is reviewed periodically and information can be accessed on a continuous basis.

Disaggregation

Disaggregation of information is not applicable for this indicator.

Comments and limitations

The right to life finds its most general recognition in article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognizes the inherent right of every person to life, adding that this right “shall be protected by law” and that “no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of life”. The right to life of persons under the age of 18 and the obligation of States to guarantee the enjoyment of this right to the maximum extent possible are both specifically recognized in article 6 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. UDHR, article 3, ICESCR, article 12(2‑a), CERD, article 5, ICRMW, article 9, CEDAW, article 12 and CRPD article 10 are other examples of provisions relevant to the right to life and this indicator.

The indicator provides information on acceptance by a State of international human rights standards and its intention or commitment to undertake steps to realise human rights in conformity with the provisions of the relevant instruments. It does not, however, capture the actual process of implementation or the results thereof.

Ratification constitutes an act whereby a State establishes its consent to be legally bound by the terms of a particular treaty. At the international level, it requires depositing a formal “instrument of ratification or accession” to the depository authority. At the national level, ratification may require a State to undertake certain steps, in accordance with its constitutional provisions, before it consents to be bound by the treaty provisions internationally. The process of ratifying a treaty is normally initiated with a State signing a treaty as a means of authentication and expression of its willingness to continue the treaty‑ratification process. The signature qualifies the signatory State to proceed to ratification. It also creates an obligation to refrain, in good faith, from acts that would defeat the object and the purpose of the treaty. Accession is the term used in situations where the State has not signed the treaty beforehand, but has directly expressed its consent to become a party to that treaty.

The indicator does not reflect possible “reservation” entered by a State on a treaty. A reservation is a declaration made by a State by which it purports to exclude or alter the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State. A reservation enables a State to accept a multilateral treaty as a whole by providing it with the possibility of not applying certain provisions with which it does not want to comply. Reservations can be made by a State when the treaty is signed, ratified or acceded to and in conformity with the objective and purpose of the treaty itself and the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, 1969.

Indicator 2

Time frame and coverage of national policy on sexual and reproductive health (see structural indicators in the table on the right to health)

Definition

The indicator refers to the date of adoption or the period for which the national policy statement on sexual and reproductive health has been put into effect at the country level. The indicator also captures the population coverage or the spatial administrative scope of the policy statement, such as in countries where there is division of responsibilities between the national government and the sub‑national/local governments.

Rationale

A national policy statement on a subject is an instrument that is expected to outline a government’s objectives, policy framework, strategy and/or a concrete plan of action to address issues under that subject. While providing an indication on the commitment of the government to address the concerned subject, it may also provide relevant benchmarks for holding the government accountable for its acts of commission or omission concerning that subject. Moreover, a policy statement is a means to translate the human rights obligations of a State party into an implementable programme of action that helps in the realisation of the human rights. The indicator is a structural indicator that captures the ‘commitment’ of a State to implement its human rights obligations in respect of the ‘sexual and reproductive health’ attribute of the right to health.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed separately for time frame or period of application and the coverage or administrative scope of the policy. Time frame is the date of adoption (e.g. 1/1/2006) of the policy statement by a country or the time period for which the policy should be implemented (e.g. 1/1/2006 ‑ 1/1/2010). Coverage is computed as a proportion of sub‑national administrative units or population covered under the ambit of national policy.

Data collection and source

The main source of data is administrative records at the national and sub‑national level.

Periodicity

The indicator database can be normally reviewed and accessed on a continuing basis.

Disaggregation

While disaggregation of information on the indicator is not conceptually feasible, a national policy may focus on specific areas, regions or population groups, in which case it may be desirable to highlight it.

Comments and limitations

The indicator provides information on a State’s commitment to undertake steps, outlining its policy framework and programme of action, to realise human rights in conformity with the provisions of relevant human rights standards on sexual and reproductive health. It does not, however, capture the actual process of implementation or the results thereof. For many countries, national policy on sexual and reproductive health may not be a separate policy document; rather it may well be a part of general policy statement on health or a human rights action plan. Accordingly, a judgment may have to be exercised on the extent to which sexual and reproductive health issues and the relevant human rights standards on reproductive health are reflected in the national policy on health or the human rights action plan.

In its General Comment No. 14 (ICESCR Art. 12) on the right to the highest attainable standard of health, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights elaborates on the need to develop comprehensive national public health strategy and plan of action to address the health concerns of the population, including reproductive health. It underlines that such a strategy should inter alia be devised on the basis of a participatory and transparent process and include indicators and benchmarks relevant to monitor the right to health. The Committee points out that “Reproductive health means that women and men have the freedom to decide if and when to reproduce and the right to be informed and to have access to safe, effective, affordable, and acceptable methods of family planning of their choice as well as the right of access to appropriate health‑care services that will, for example, enable women to go safely through pregnancy and childbirth.” Similarly, CEDAW Committee General Recommendation 24 (1999) points out that access to health care, including reproductive health, is a basic right under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

UDHR, article 25, ICESCR, articles 10(2) and 12, ICERD, article 5(e‑iv), ICRMW, articles 28 and 43(e), CEDAW, articles 12 and 14(2‑b) and CRPD article 25 are examples of provisions relevant to the right to health.

Indicator 3

Date of entry into force and coverage of the right to education in the Constitution or other form of superior law (see structural indicators in the table on the right to education)

Definition

The indicator refers to the date on which provisions of the Constitution or other superior laws relating to the right to education became enforceable. The indicator also captures the spatial or population coverage of the relevant provisions related to the right to education, such as in countries where there is division of legal competencies between the national government and the sub‑national or local governments. ‘Constitutional or other form of superior law’ refers to the system of fundamental laws that prescribes the functions and limits of government action and against which other supportive legislation is assessed for its validity. The reference to the ‘right to education’ follows primarily the formulation used in article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 13 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and its elaboration in General Comment No. 13 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The right to education is also developed in other core international human rights treaties, such as in articles 23, 28 and 29 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Rationale

Inclusion of the right to education in the Constitution or other form of superior law reflects a certain acceptance of this right by a State and gives an indication, notably at the national level, of a State’s commitment to protect and implement this right. When the State has enshrined a right in its Constitution or other form of superior law, it also assumes a legal obligation to ensure that other legislation (national and sub‑national legislation) is in conformity with and not contradictory to the right. The indicator is a structural indicator that captures the ‘commitment’ of a State to implement its human rights obligations in respect of the right to education.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed separately for the date of entry into force and the coverage or administrative scope of the law. The date of entry into force is the date on which the law or provision became enforceable. Coverage is computed as a proportion of sub ‑national administrative units or population covered under the law. Information on the date of entry into force should be provided with a direct and accurate link to the relevant provisions.

Data collection and source

The main source of data on the indicator is the legal records of the State.

Periodicity

The indicator data can be normally reviewed and accessed on a continuing basis.

Disaggregation

Disaggregation of information is not applicable for this indicator, however provisions under the Constitution or other superior law may have particular reference to the protection of the right to education for certain groups (e.g. minorities or girl child), in which case it may be desirable to highlight it.

Comments and limitations

This indicator provides information on the extent to which a State protects the right to education in its Constitution or superior laws, demonstrating its acceptance of international human rights standards and its intention or commitment to legally protect this right. It does not, however, capture the extent to which the legal protection of the right to education in the Constitution or superior laws is implemented and upheld at other levels of the legal system, nor how broadly or narrowly the right is applied, or the degree to which the right can be enforced and by whom. This indicator does not capture the actual process of implementation or the results thereof.

This indicator could be difficult to assess if the right to education is not explicitly articulated in the Constitution or superior laws. Moreover, provision for the right to education in the Constitution does not necessarily mean that the right is being protected by law (for example, further judicial interpretations may have rendered the Constitutional protection meaningless). Likewise, a lack of Constitutional protection may lead one to believe that there is no recognition of the right when this may not be the case. For example, in some countries there are only a few rights written into the Constitution or superior laws, and it is left to the judiciary to interpret the rights as being implied. In this instance, a mere reading of provisions may yield an inaccurate conclusion on the enforcement and coverage of the concerned right. A correct reading, in such cases, requires a detailed analysis of relevant jurisprudence/case law or administrative decisions.

UDHR, article 26, ICESCR, articles 13 and 14, ICERD, article 5 (e‑v), ICRMW, articles 30 and 43 (a‑c), CRC, articles 23, 28 and 29, CEDAW, articles 10 and 14(2‑d), and CRPD, article 24 are examples of provisions relevant to the right to education and this indicator.

Indicator 4

Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel (see process indicators in the table on the right to health)

Definition

The indicator refers to proportion of deliveries attended by persons trained to give necessary supervision, care and counsel to women during pregnancy, labour and the post‑partum period; to conduct deliveries on their own; and to care for newborns.

Rationale

Health and well‑being of the woman and the child during and after delivery greatly depends on their access to birth delivery services, the quality of these services and the actual circumstances of delivery. All of these are influenced by the State health policies, public provisioning of health services and regulation of private health care. Indeed availability of professional and skilled health personnel to assist in child birth is essential for reducing mortality ‑ maternal as well as of the child ‑ during and after delivery. The indicator captures efforts being made by the State to promote and provide professional and skilled health personnel to attend to the medical needs of pregnancy and birth. It is a process indicator related to ‘sexual and reproductive health’ attribute of the right to health.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed as a ratio of births attended by skilled health personnel (doctors, nurses or midwives) to the total number of deliveries.

Data collection and source

The main sources of data are country level administrative records maintained by local authorities, registration system for population data, records of health ministries and household surveys, including Demographic and Health Surveys.

The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) compile country data series based on these sources. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) also provides country data series through the implementation of its Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys.

Periodicity

In general, the indicator based on administrative records is available annually and the indicator based on household survey every three to five years.

Disaggregation

Disaggregation of indicator by region or areas, for example between rural and urban areas, is useful in assessing disparities in the availability of health services. In addition, data should be disaggregated by the age of women (at least for women under the age of 18 years) and, as applicable, by relevant demographic groups (e.g. ethnic groups, minorities, indigenous and migrants) and socio‑economic status (income or consumption expenditure quintiles).

Comments and limitations

Skilled health personnel include only those who are properly trained and who have appropriate equipment and drugs. Traditional birth attendants, even if they have received a short training course, are not included.

CEDAW, in its General Recommendation No. 24 (1999), requests States to inform about the “supply of free services where necessary to ensure safe pregnancies, childbirth and post‑partum periods for women. Many women are at risk of death or disability from pregnancy‑related causes because they lack the funds to obtain or access the necessary services, which include antenatal, maternity and post‑natal services. The Committee notes that it is the duty of States parties to ensure women’s right to safe motherhood and emergency obstetric services and they should allocate to these services the maximum extent of available resources.” The CESCR, in its General Comment No. 5 (1994) on Persons with disabilities, states that “Women with disabilities also have the right to protection and support in relation to motherhood and pregnancy.” UDHR, article 25, ICESCR, articles 10(2) and 12, ICERD, article 5(e‑iv), ICRMW, articles 28 and 43(e), CEDAW, articles 12 and 14(2‑b) and CRPD article 25 are examples of provisions relevant to the right to health.

This is a Millennium Development Goal indicator.

Indicator 5

Proportion of received complaints on the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment investigated or adjudicated by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson and other mechanisms, and the proportion responded to effectively by the government in the reporting period (see process indicators in the table on the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment)

Definition

The indicator refers to the proportion of received individual complaints on the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that were investigated or adjudicated by made to the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson and/or other officially recognised independent mechanisms during the reporting period. Where the mechanism transmits complaints to the government, or communicates in respect of the complaints, the indicator includes the proportion of such transmissions or communications that have received an effective response from the government. Useful guidance on what ought to be included in a complaint can be found on the OHCHR website, notably in the model complaint form for communications to the Human Rights Committee, Committee Against Torture, Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women.

Rationale

The indicator captures to an extent the effort required of States to respect, protect and fulfil the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in conformity with article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the provisions of other international laws. States parties must ensure that individuals have access to effective remedies to vindicate their right. States Parties should make appropriate reparation, take provisional or interim measures as necessary, as well as measures to prevent a recurrence of violations of the right, and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice (Human Rights Committee General Comment 31, CCPR/C//Rev.1/Add.13). It is a process indicator that reflects the willingness of States to take steps towards the realisation of the right.

Method of computation

The number of complaints is calculated as the sum of individual complaints on the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment received by all relevant independent bodies at national level. The proportion investigated or adjudicated is calculated as the ratio of the number of complaints received during the reporting period which were investigated or adjudicated to the total number of complaints received. The proportion effectively responded to by the government is calculated as the ratio of the number of complaints to which an effective response was made by the government to the total number of complaints communicated to the government during the reference period.

Data collection and source

The main sources of data are administrative records maintained by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson and other mechanisms.

Periodicity

The information is normally compiled and published annually.

Disaggregation

To enable detection of the pattern of abuse against particular groups or in particular areas, the indicator should be disaggregated by region and the characteristics of the alleged victim (sex, age, ethnic/racial/national/ religious/political affiliation, disability, sexual orientation, profession, whether or not detained at the time of the alleged abuse). Similarly, the indicator should be disaggregated according to whether the abuse is alleged to have been committed by a State agent, with the complicity/tolerance/ acquiescence of a State agent, or by a private individual or individuals.

To have an overall assessment of the effectiveness of investigation and adjudication procedures, data related to this indicator should be disaggregated by the end result of the procedure.

Comments and limitations

Where there is a communication with a government, the indicator will require a judgement to be made on what constitutes an “effective” response. While an official denial without supporting evidence or investigation of the alleged facts will not meet the criterion of effectiveness, the precise application of the criterion may vary from case to case. An assessment of the effectiveness of the response is best carried out by the national human rights institution, human rights ombudsperson or other mechanism in a transparent manner and may involve considerations like timeliness and completeness of the response, its adequacy in responding to specific questions posed or suggestions for action, as well as the effectiveness of action initiated by the government, which may include investigation, release or changes in the treatment of a detained or imprisoned person, payment of compensation, amendment of legislation, etc.

The basic source of information for this indicator comes from events ‑based data on human rights violations. Such data may underestimate (or sometimes, though rarely, even overestimate) the incidence of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, if used in a casual manner to draw generalised conclusions for the country as a whole. Moreover, in most instances, the number of cases reported to independent bodies depends on the awareness, access to information, motivation and perseverance of the alleged or potential victim, his or her family and friends, or civil society organisations in the country concerned.

The Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment No. 20 (1992) states, in its paragraph 14, that “the right to lodge complaints against maltreatment prohibited by article 7 must be recognized in the domestic law. Complaints must be investigated promptly and impartially by competent authorities so as to make the remedy effective. The reports of States parties should provide specific information on the remedies available to victims of maltreatment and the procedure that complainants must follow, and statistics on the number of complaints and how they have been dealt with.”

UDHR, article 5, CAT, articles 1‑16, ICERD, article 5(b), ICRMW, articles 10 and 11, CEDAW, articles 2 and 16, CRPD article 15 and CRC articles 37 and 39, are examples of provisions relevant to the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Model questionnaires for complaints are available on the OHCHR website at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/question.htm.

Indicator 6

Ratio of students to teaching staff in primary and secondary, public and private, education institutions (see process indicators in the table on the right to education)

Definition

The ratio of students to teaching staff or the pupil‑teacher ratio is the average number of pupils per teacher at the level of education specified in a given school‑ year, based on headcounts for both pupils and teachers. Teachers or teaching staff include the number of persons employed full time or part time in an official capacity to guide and direct the learning experience of students, irrespective of their qualifications or the delivery mechanism, i.e. face‑to‑face and/or at a distance. This excludes educational personnel who have no active teaching duties (e.g. headmasters, headmistresses or principals who do not teach) and persons who work occasionally or in a voluntary capacity.

Rationale

The ratio of students to teaching staff is an important indicator of the resources that a country devotes to education. To a limited extent, the indicator can also be interpreted as reflecting a qualitative aspect of education infrastructure in a country. Teachers are the most important resource in an educational environment, particularly at the primary and secondary levels. The student‑teacher ratio provides a measure of students’ access to teachers, and thus reflects an important element of the provisioning that the State may have to make for meeting its obligations on the realisation of the right to education This indicator is a process indicator related to the ‘curricula and educational resources’ attribute of the right to education.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed by dividing the number of full‑time equivalent students at a given level of education by the number of full‑time equivalent “teachers” at that level and in similar types of institutions, in a given school year. Some data collection methods include counts of all teaching staff, and since all teaching staff includes staff with administrative duties and both full‑ and part‑time teachers, comparability of these ratios may be affected as the proportion of part‑time teachers may vary from one country to another.

Data collection and source

The main source of data at the country level is administrative records on school enrolments and staff strengths maintained by the relevant public agencies.

The UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) compiles and provides national level information on the pupil ‑teacher ratio for both primary and secondary education, based on data reported by national education ministries or national statistical agencies. The information is gathered through questionnaires sent annually to countries and is made available by UIS with a two years lag with respect to the reference year.

While information on this indicator is not currently collated on a disaggregated basis for public and private schools at the international level, it should generally be available at the national level and could be useful to report in instances where there may be significant differences in the quality of public and private education at the primary and secondary levels.

Periodicity

For most countries the pupil‑teacher ratio is available annually.

Disaggregation

Beyond the disaggregation referred to in the indicator itself (primary/secondary, public/private) further disaggregation may be necessary for this indicator, for instance, by region or areas. A break‑up for rural and urban areas, is useful in assessing possible disparities across different regions. In addition, it may be useful to disaggregate the data for teaching staff and students by sex and, as applicable, by relevant demographic groups (e.g. ethnic groups, minorities, indigenous, migrant children, children with disabilities).

Comments and limitations

Teachers are the most important resource in an educational environment, particularly at the primary and secondary levels. The student‑teacher ratio provides a measure of students’ access to teachers, and thus reflects an important element of the provisioning that the State may have to make for meeting its obligations on the realisation of the right to education.

Because of the difficulty of constructing direct measures of quality of education being imparted, this indicator is also used as a proxy for assessing the education quality, on the assumption that a smaller ratio of students to teaching staff means better access by students to teaching resources. A lower ratio would generally imply that a teacher can potentially pay more attention to individual students, which may, in the long run, result in a better performance of students. There may be situations where such a conclusion may not be true due to accountability issues and ineffective use of teaching resources. However, a very high ratio of students to teaching staff certainly suggests insufficient professional support for learning, particularly for students from disadvantaged home backgrounds.

“Teaching staff” refers to professional personnel directly involved in teaching students. The classification includes classroom teachers; special education teachers; and other teachers who work with students as a whole class in a classroom, in small groups in a resource room, or in one‑to‑one teaching inside or outside a regular classroom. Teaching staff also includes chairpersons of departments whose duties include some amount of teaching, but it does not include non‑professional personnel who support teachers in providing instruction to students, such as teachers’ aides and other para‑professional personnel.

The concept of a ratio of students to teaching staff is different from that of class size. Although one country may have a lower ratio of students to teaching staff than another, this does not necessarily mean that classes are smaller in the first country or that students in the first country receive more teaching inputs. The relationship between the ratio of students to teaching staff and average class size is influenced by factors like differences between countries in the length of the school year, the annual number of hours for which a student attends class, the annual time teachers are expected to spend teaching, the grouping of students within classes, and the practices related to team learning.

This indicator does not take into account differences in teachers’ qualifications, pedagogical training, experiences and status, teaching materials and variations in classroom conditions, factors which could affect the quality of teaching/learning.

UDHR, article 26, ICESCR, articles 13 and 14, ICERD, article 5 (e‑v), ICRMW, articles 30 and 43 (a‑c), CRC, articles 23, 28 and 29, and CEDAW, articles 10 and 14(2‑d) are examples of provisions relevant to the right to education and this indicator.

Indicator 7

Reported cases of forced evictions in the reporting period (see outcome indicators in the table on the right to adequate housing)

Definition

This indicator refers to the number of reported individual cases of forced eviction during the reference period. “Forced eviction” is defined as “the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of and access to appropriate forms of legal or other protection” (General Comment No. 7, ICESCR).

Rationale

The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has observed that all persons should possess a degree of security of tenure which guarantees legal protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats. It has argued that forced evictions are prima facie incompatible with the requirements of the ICESCR (General Comment No. 7). Moreover, given the interdependence of all human rights, forced evictions frequently violate other human rights. Thus, while manifestly breaching the rights enshrined in the ICESCR, the practice of forced evictions may also result in violations of civil and political rights, such as the right to life, the right to security of the person, the right to non‑interference with privacy, family and home and the right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. It is an outcome indicator intended to analyze the degree to which States protect the security of tenure.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed as a head count of all reported cases of forced eviction in a specific period of time.

Data collection and source

The main data source for this indicator is records maintained by national human rights institutions, non‑governmental organisations and in certain instances records of administrative agencies responsible for or monitoring rehabilitation.

Periodicity

Information on the indicator should be available on a periodic basis. It is often reported annually by organisations monitoring security of tenure.

Disaggregation

In order to be meaningful, the information on this indicator should be disaggregated by sex and age (at least for children or young people under the age of 18 years) and, as applicable, by relevant demographic groups (e.g. ethnic groups, minorities and migrants) and socio‑economic status (income or consumption expenditure quintiles).

Comments and limitations

The indicator can be one good summary measure of the realisation of the right to adequate housing. Yet like all indicators that are based on event ‑based data on human rights violations and depend on multiple information sources, the indicator may suffer from reliability issues. It may underestimate (or sometimes, though rarely, even overestimate) the incidence of forced evictions, if used in a casual manner to draw generalised conclusions for the country as a whole. Moreover, in most instances, the number of cases reported would depend on the awareness, access to information, motivation and perseverance of the civil society organisations agencies and the media in following the relevant events.

The term “forced evictions” is, in some respects, problematic. This expression seeks to convey a sense of arbitrariness and of illegality. For many observers, the reference to “forced evictions” is a tautology, while others have criticized the expression “illegal evictions” on the ground that it assumes that the relevant law provides adequate protection of the right to housing and conforms with the Covenant, which is by no means always the case. Similarly, it has been suggested that the term “unfair evictions” is even more subjective by virtue of its failure to refer to any legal framework at all. The international human rights community, especially in the context of the UN human rights system, has opted to use “forced evictions”, primarily because all suggested alternatives also suffer from certain ambiguities. The prohibition on forced evictions does not, however, apply to evictions carried out by force in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of the International Covenants on Human Rights.

Women, children, youth, older persons, indigenous people, ethnic and other minorities, and other vulnerable individuals and groups all suffer disproportionately from the practice of forced eviction. Women in all groups are especially vulnerable given the extent of statutory and other forms of discrimination which often apply in relation to property rights (including home ownership) or rights of access to property or accommodation, and their particular vulnerability to acts of violence and sexual abuse when they are rendered homeless. The non‑discrimination provisions of articles 2.2 and 3 of ICESCR impose an additional obligation upon Governments to ensure that, where evictions do occur, appropriate measures are taken to ensure that no form of discrimination is involved.

UDHR article 25, ICESCR article 11, CERD article 5, CEDAW article 14, CRC article 27, CMW article 43 and CRPD article 28 have references of relevance to the indicator. The CESCR also recognizes legal security of tenure under its General Comment No. 4 (1991) on the right to adequate housing: “Notwithstanding the type of tenure, all persons should possess a degree of security of tenure which guarantees legal protection against forced eviction, harassment and other threats”.

Some institutions, such as the World Bank and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have adopted guidelines on relocation and/or resettlement with a view to limiting the scale of and human suffering associated with forced evictions. Such practices often accompany large‑scale development projects, such as dam‑building and other major energy projects.

Indicator 8

Conviction rates for indigent defendants provided with legal representation as a proportion of conviction rates for defendants with lawyers of their own choice (see outcome indicators in the table on the right to fair trial)

Definition

The indicator measures the ratio of conviction rate of defendants who were provided with free legal representation to that of defendants who had legal counsel of their own choice, in the reporting period. Though the indicator could be used separately for the two conviction rates, it is more useful when used as a ratio of the two.

Rationale

Article 14(3)(d) ICCPR provides that defendants should have legal assistance assigned to them, in any case where the interests of justice so requires, and without payment if they do not have sufficient means to pay for it. The Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment 32, states that “Counsel provided by the competent authorities on the basis of this provision must be effective in the representation of the accused”. Furthermore, blatant incompetence by assigned counsel may entail the responsibility of the State. The indicator is an outcome indicator that relates to the access to and equality before the courts attribute of the right to a fair trial. As such, it measures the extent to which equality is achieved in practice.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed separately for defendants provided with legal representation and for defendants with a lawyer of their own choice before taking the ratio of the two. For each group, the indicator is calculated as the ratio of the number of defendants in that group who were convicted to the total number of defendants in that group who stood trial during the reporting period.

Data collection and source

The main sources of data are court records and reports of the office of the prosecutor at the national or sub‑national level.

Periodicity

The data, if compiled, should be available on an annual basis.

Disaggregation

The indicator should be disaggregated by type of crimes (e.g. homicide, rape, assault, robbery, etc.), stage of proceedings (first hearing or appeal), and by region or administrative unit. It should also be disaggregated by characteristics of the defendant, in particular by sex, age (at least for children or young people under the age of 18 years), and, as applicable, by relevant demographic groups (e.g. ethnic groups, minorities, migrants, persons with disabilities, sexual orientation).

Comments and limitations

The indicator is a good measure of the relative level of competence of assigned lawyers, and thus of the effective implementation of the right to a fair trial regardless of economic status of the defendant. However, particularly in regions or States with a small number of cases, the indicator should not be over‑analysed; each case must be assessed on its own merits. It may also be useful to use this indicator jointly with an indicator on the nature and average length of sentences for indigent defendants and defendants with lawyers of their own choice.

UDHR articles 10‑11, ICCPR articles 14‑15, ICERD article 5(a), CEDAW article 2, CRC articles 12(2), 37(d) and 40, ICRMW articles 16(5‑9) and 18, and CRPD article 13, are examples of references of relevance to the right to a fair trial.

Indicator 9

Infant mortality rate (see outcome indicators in the tables on the right to life, the right to adequate food and the right to health)

Definition

The indicator refers to infants dying before reaching the age of one year per 1000 live births during the specified period.

Rationale

As a measure of child survival, the infant mortality rate is a key socio‑economic statistic for many human rights, including the right to life, the right to health and the right to adequate food. The level of this indicator can be potentially influenced by a wide range of economic, social, political and environmental determinants. As a consequence, the indicator will be particularly important in the monitoring of the results of State parties’ actions in fulfilling their obligations in creating favourable and necessary conditions in which infant mortality rates are minimised. In the tables of indicators, it has been identified as an outcome indicator for the right to life, the right to health and the right to adequate food.

Method of computation

The indicator is computed as number of deaths of infants under one‑year of age per 1000 live births in that year. The number of deaths is divided by the number of births and the result is multiplied by 1000.

Data collection and source

The main sources of data at the country level are national administrative records, including the vital statistic registration system and records of statistical agency, sample surveys, population censuses and household surveys, including Demographic and Health Surveys.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) compiles aggregate country data series based on administrative and survey data. The United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) also provides country data series in its Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys.

Periodicity

In general, the indicator based on administrative records is available annually, and the indicator based on household surveys every 3 to 5 years.

Disaggregation

Disaggregation of indicator by geographic or administrative regions, for example between rural and urban areas, is essential in assessing disparities in the infant mortality pattern across different regions. In addition, the indicator should be disaggregated by cause of death, by sex and, as applicable, by relevant demographic groups (e.g. ethnic groups, indigenous, minorities, migrants) and socio‑economic status (income or consumption expenditure quintiles).

Comments and limitations

The indicator is widely used and can be a good summary measure of the realisation of the right to life, the right to highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and the right to adequate food. The infant mortality rate is considered to be a more robust estimate than the under‑five mortality rate if the information is drawn from vital statistics registration covering at least 90 per cent of vital events in the population. For household surveys, infant mortality estimates are obtained directly (Demographic and Health Surveys) or indirectly (Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys). When estimated indirectly, the under‑one mortality estimates must be consistent with the under‑five mortality estimates.

Girls have a survival advantage over boys during the first year of life, largely based on biological differences. This is especially so during the first month of life when perinatal conditions are most likely to be the cause or a contributing cause of death. While infant mortality is generally higher for boys than for girls, in some countries girls’ biological advantage is outweighed by gender‑based discrimination. However, under‑five mortality better captures the effect of gender discrimination than infant mortality, as nutrition and medical interventions are more important after age one.

In its General Comment No. 14 (ICESCR Art. 12) on the right to the highest attainable standard of health, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights interprets that “the provision for the reduction of the stillbirth rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child” (Art. 12.2(a)) may be understood as requiring measures to improve child and maternal health, sexual and reproductive health services, including access to family planning, pre‑ and post‑natal care, emergency obstetric services and access to information, as well as to resources necessary to act on that information.

In its General Comment No. 6 (ICCPR Art. 6) on the right to life, the Human Rights Committee noted that the right to life has been too often narrowly interpreted. The expression “inherent right to life” cannot properly be understood in a restrictive manner, and the protection of this right requires that States adopt positive measures. In this connection, the Committee considers that it would be desirable for States parties to take all possible measures to reduce infant mortality and to increase life expectancy, especially in adopting measures to eliminate malnutrition and epidemics.

Administrative and household survey data may underestimate infant mortality. It is also important that the main causes of mortality be carefully investigated to ascertain the extent to which it is caused by poor healthcare services, poor health conditions of infants and health problems of their mothers and/or due to some other extraneous reasons that are difficult to anticipate so that policy measures may be suitably formulated to address the problem.

UDHR articles 3 and 25, ICESCR articles 10‑12, ICCPR articles 6, ICERD article 5, CEDAW article 2, 12 and 14, CRC articles 6, 27 and 24, ICRMW article 9, 28 and 43, and CRPD article 10, 28 and 25 are examples of references of relevance to the indicator.

This is a Millennium Development Goal indicator.