a Total number of cases decided (by the adoption of Views, decisions of inadmissibility and decisions to discontinue consideration).

25.By the end of the 131st session (26 March 2021), some 335 communications were ready to be prepared by the secretariat for the Committee to take decisions on admissibility and/or the merits. Unless there is a significant increase in the capacity of the secretariat to process communications, however, the Committee’s ability to address its backlog in that regard will continue to be seriously compromised.

26.During the period under review, the Committee, through its Special Rapporteurs on new communications and interim measures, transmitted 183 new communications to States parties under rule 92 of the Committee’s rules of procedure, requesting information or observations relevant to questions of admissibility and the merits.

2.Cooperation by States parties in the examination of communications

27.In several cases decided during the period under review, the Committee noted that States parties had failed to cooperate in the procedure by not providing observations on the admissibility and/or the merits of the authors’ allegations. The Committee strongly regretted the situation and recalled that good faith implementation of the Optional Protocol required States parties to transmit to the Committee all information at their disposal. In the absence of a reply by States parties, due weight had to be given by the Committee to the author’s allegations, to the extent that they had been properly substantiated.

3.Issues considered by the Committee

28.A review of the Committee’s work under the Optional Protocol from its second session, held in 1977, to its 131st session, held in March 2021, can be found in the Committee’s annual reports from 1984 to 2020, which contain summaries of the procedural and substantive issues considered and summaries of the decisions taken by the Committee. The full texts of the Views adopted by the Committee and of its decisions declaring communications inadmissible under the Optional Protocol are available in the treaty body database.

29.During the period under review, the Committee examined and found violations of the Covenant in the following communications: Volchek v. Belarus (CCPR/C/129/D/2337/2014), Malei v. Belarus (CCPR/C/129/D/2404/2014), Reviako v. Belarus (CCPR/C/129/D/2455/2014), Timoshenko et al. v Belarus (CCPR/C/129/D/2461/2014), Koreshko v. Belarus (CCPR/C/129/D/2482/2014), Malashenak v. Belarus (CCPR/C/129/D/2486/2014), Toregozhina v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/129/D/2503/2014), Sadykov v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/129/D/2456/2014), Sotnik v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/129/D/2478/2014), Baytelova v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/129/D/2520/2015), Akhmedyarov v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/129/D/2535/2015), Pretelt de la Vega v. Colombia (CCPR/C/129/D/2930/2017), Velásquez Echeverri v. Colombia (CCPR/C/129/D/2931/2017), A.G. et al. v. Angola (CCPR/C/129/D/3106/2018-3122/2018), Mukhlisov v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2457/2015), Kekzhan et al. v . Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2661/2015), Huseynova v. Azerbaijan (CCPR/C/130/D/2845/2016), Mammadov et al. v. Azerbaijan (CCPR/C/130/D/2928/2017), Goldade et al. v. Belarus (CCPR/C/130/D/2330/2014), Markhotko v. Belarus (CCPR/C/130/D/2713/2015), Sambetbai v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2418/2014), Alekseev v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/130/D/2727/2016), Dafar v. Algeria (CCPR/C/130/D/2580/2015), Zhao v. Netherlands (CCPR/C/130/D/2918/2015), Berkaoui v. Algeria (CCPR/C/130/D/2639/2015), Rsiwi v. Algeria (CCPR/C/130/D/2843/2016), Abessolo v. Cameroon (CCPR/C/130/D/2587/2015), X v. Iceland (CCPR/C/130/D/2818/2016), Eliseev v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2500/2016), Ismagulova and Taukina v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2664/2015), A.S. et al. v. Italy (CCPR/C/130/D/3042/2017), Dzhuraev v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2160/2012), F.N.N. et al. v. Democratic Republic of the Congo (CCPR/C/130/D/2396/2014), Uulu v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2400/2014), Yuldashev v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2405/2014), Chynybekov v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2429/2014), Boyarkin and Popchenko v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2432/2014), Bagale v. Nepal (CCPR/C/130/D/2777/2016), Tholal et al. v. Maldives (CCPR/C/130/D/3248/2018), Farah v. Djibouti (CCPR/C/130/D/3593/2019), Kurtinbaeva v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2540/2015), Tikhonov v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2551/2015), Alekseev v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/130/D/2757/2016), Kekerko and Sekerko v Belarus (CCPR/C/130/D/2572/2015 and CCPR/C/130/D/2573/2015), Mirzakhadzhaev v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2526/2015), V.I. v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2451/2014), Kitumaini et al. v. Democratic Republic of the Congo (CCPR/C/130/D/2731/2016), Rezazade v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2866/2016), Vanchev v. Bulgaria (CCPR/C/130/D/2820/2016), Usekeev v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/130/D/3000/2017), Malinovsky et al. v. Czech Republic (CCPR/C/130/D/2839/2016), Nurlanuly v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2546/2015), Kulumbetov v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2547/2015), Narymbaev v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/130/D/2521/2015), B.B. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/131/D/3069/2017), Gurbanova et al v. Azerbaijan (CCPR/C/131/D/2952/2017), Ibragimov v. Kazakhastan (CCPR/C/131/D/2452/2014), Tsukanov v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/131/D/2676/2015), Correa Barros v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (CCPR/C/131/D/2652/2015), Ivanov v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/131/D/2635/2015), Ersaliev v. Uzbekistan (CCPR/C/131/D/2574/2015), Chakupewa et al v. Democratic Republic of the Congo (CCPR/C/131/D/2835/2016), Muhirhi v. Democratic Republic of the Congo (CCPR/C/131/D/2772/2016), Madhewoo v. Mauritius (CCPR/C/131/D/3163/2018), Toregozhina v. Kazakhstan (CCPR/C/131/D/2688/2015), Hidalgo Rea v. Mexico (CCPR/C/131/D/3259/2018), Aliyev et al v. Azerbaijan (CCPR/C/131/D/2805/2016), Borokiv v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2695/2015), Dobrotvor v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2622/2015), Rubtsov v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2679/2015), Burakov v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2692/2015), Andreev v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2863/2016), Katsora and Nepomnyashchikh v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2867/2016) and Belova et al v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2891/2016).

30.The Committee found no violations of the Covenant in the following communications: Rosenberg and Jacquard v. France (CCPR/C/130/D/2584/2015), Lee et al. v. Republic of Korea (CCPR/C/130/D/2776/2016 and CCPR/C/130/D/2809/2016), J.Y. v. France (CCPR/C/131/D/2944/2017), Fares v. Canada (CCPR/C/131/D/2838/2016), Topoza v. Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/C/131/D/2700/2015) and Bessis v. France (CCPR/C/131/D/2988/2017).

31.The Committee decided that the following communications were inadmissible: M.R. v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/129/D/2427/2014), D.S. v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/129/D/2445/2014), W.E.O. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/129/D/2741/2016), U.M.H. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/129/D/2742/2016), J.D.P. and K.E.P. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/129/D/2743/2016), B.A.E.W. and E.M.W. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/129/D/2744/2016), K.S. et al. v. New Zealand (CCPR/C/129/D/2769/2016), M.R.S. v. Spain (CCPR/C/129/D/2890/2016), L.M.A. and C.C. v. Canada (CCPR/C/129/D/2970/2017), J. v. Lithuania (CCPR/C/130/D/2674/2015), J. and A. v. Spain (CCPR/C/130/D/3599/2019), P.F. and M.F. v. France (CCPR/C/130/D/2780/2016), F.A. v. Denmark (CCPR/C/130/D/2671/2015), S.M. v. Denmark (CCPR/C/130/D/2752/2016), F.M. v. Denmark (CCPR/C/130/D/2946/2017), M.I. v. Sweden (CCPR/C/130/D/3246/2018), T. v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/130/D/2517/2014), A.G. v. Netherlands (CCPR/C/130/D/3052/2017), R. v. Spain (CCPR/C/130/D/3639/2019), B.B. et al. v. Spain (CCPR/C/130/D/3778/2020), P. v. Lithuania (CCPR/C/130/D/3786/2020), E. v. Spain (CCPR/C/130/D/3810/2020), A.P. v. Spain (CCPR/C/131/D/2558/2015), R. v. Uzbekistan (CCPR/C/131/D/2479/2014), V.S. v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/131/D/2433/2014), O.D. v. Russian Federation (CCPR/C/131/D/2578/2015), D.M. v. Serbia (CCPR/C/131/D/2869/2016), N.U. v. Belarus (CCPR/C/131/D/2960/2017) and J.M.T.C. v. Ecuador (CCPR/C/131/D/3141/2018).

4.Follow-up on Views

32.During the period under review, the Special Rapporteur for follow-up on Views submitted two reports, at the 130th session.

33.At the time of the conclusion of the 131st session, the Committee had determined that there had been a violation of the Covenant in 1,289 of the 1,737 Views adopted since 1977. The Committee has continued the practice, initiated at its 109th session (14 October–1 November 2013), of including in its reports on follow-up to Views an assessment of the replies received from or action taken by States parties; the assessment uses the criteria established for the follow-up procedure to the concluding observations. At its 118th session (17 October–4 November 2016), the Committee decided to revise its assessment criteria. At its 121st session (16 October–20 November 2017), on 9 November 2017, the Committee decided to further revise its methodology and procedure for monitoring follow-up to Views. The Committee continues to note and regrets that many States parties fail to implement the Views adopted under the first Optional Protocol.

I.General comments under article 40 (4) of the Covenant

34.At its 129th session, the Committee held the second reading of its draft general comment No. 37 (2020) on the right of peaceful assembly (art. 21 of the Covenant). The Committee adopted the final text on 23 July 2020.

J.Staff resources and translation of official documents

35.In accordance with article 36 of the Covenant, the Secretary-General has a duty to provide the Committee with the necessary staff and facilities for the effective performance of its functions. The Committee reiterates its concern regarding the shortage of staff resources and emphasizes once again the importance of allocating adequate staff resources to service its sessions, which includes preparing documents on the implementation of the Covenant and the first Optional Protocol. The Committee reiterates the fact that, unless there is a significant increase in the staff capacity of the Petitions Unit that would allow it to prepare a greater number of communications for consideration by the Committee in the coming years than it has in the past, the Committee’s ability to address its backlog will continue to be seriously compromised. In turn, this situation will have a serious impact on victims’ rights.

36.The Committee regrets once again the strict word limits imposed under General Assembly resolution 68/268 on key documents, such as general comments, rules of procedure and Views. It also regrets the lack of capacity for some documents to be translated, as the absence of translations continues to have a negative impact on the Committee’s work.

K.Outreach on the work of the Committee

37.At its ninety-fourth session, the Committee adopted a paper on a strategic approach to public relations with the media. Since then, the Committee has continued to develop its media strategy, which has included, inter alia, holding press conferences at the end of each session, issuing press statements on relevant individual communications and tweeting.

38.During the 129th, 130th and 131st sessions, OHCHR provided a full webcast of the public parts of all the Committee’s sessions, including the examination of all States parties’ reports. The webcast may be viewed at https://webtv.un.org.

L.Submission of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly

39.On 13 October 2020, during the 130th session, the Chair attended the online interactive dialogue with the General Assembly, during which he presented the Committee’s annual report.

M.Adoption of the report

40.At its 3778th meeting, held on 26 March 2021, the Committee considered the draft of its sixty-third annual report, covering its activities at its 129th, 130th and 131st sessions, held in 2020 and 2021. The report, as amended in the course of the discussion, was adopted unanimously. By virtue of its decision 1985/105 of 8 February 1985, the Economic and Social Council authorized the Secretary-General to transmit the Committee’s annual report directly to the General Assembly.

II.Methods of work of the Committee under article 40 of the Covenant and cooperation with other United Nations bodies

41.The present section contains a summary and an explanation of the modifications introduced by the Committee to its working methods under article 40 of the Covenant during the past year.

A.Recent developments and decisions on procedures

42.During the 130th session, the Committee decided to resume, at its 131st session and in spite of the COVID-19 pandemic, its constructive dialogue with States parties under its reporting procedure, and devised a methodology for reviewing countries on an online platform while ensuring that its interaction with all country-specific stakeholders concerned, including United Nations entities, national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations, would not be hampered. Two States parties were reviewed online at the Committee’s 131st session, strictly on a trial and exceptional basis due to the situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee is very clear about its desire to move back to holding in-person sessions as soon as possible.

B.Links to other bodies

43.On 26 October 2020, at its 130th session, the Committee held an online colloquium with judges from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. A judge of the Court and a member of the Committee gave presentations on each of the following topics: the impact of COVID-19 on substantive and procedural work; the right of peaceful assembly; and mechanisms for following up on Views and judgments. Referring to the emergency measures taken in response to the pandemic by an increasing number of jurisdictions, the representatives of both mechanisms agreed on the long-term foreseeable need for the application of broader interpretations of the positive obligations of States and a stricter approach to avoid States derogating from their obligations in respect of the full spectrum of human rights. Moreover, both mechanisms should focus more on the rights of vulnerable groups, given the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on them due to intersectional forms of discrimination and marginalization. The representatives of both mechanisms underscored the link between the right of peaceful assembly and basic rights related to participation in democratic and plural societies and the value of international solidarity and cooperation for reaching successful conclusions, in particular, by the follow-up mechanisms. The President of the Court and the Chair of the Committee stressed that interactions and dialogues among the two mechanisms should continue to take place regularly, with the support of their respective secretariats. A press release on the colloquium has been issued by the Court. In an effort to strengthen the relationship with other treaty bodies and regional human rights mechanisms, the Committee appointed the following focal points: Marcia V.J. Kran for the Committee against Torture and the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; Carlos Gómez Martínez for the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Kobauyah Tchamdja Kpatcha for the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women; Mahjoub El Haiba for the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination; Wafaa Ashraf Moharram Bassim for the Committee on the Rights of the Child; Gentian Zyberi for the Committee on Migrant Workers; Imeru Tamerat Yigezu for the African human rights system; Carlos Gómez Martínez for the European Court of Human Rights and Hernán Quezada Cabrera for the inter-American human rights system.

III.Submission of reports by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant

A.Reports submitted to the Secretary-General between 17 July 2020 and 26 March 2021

44.Between 17 July 2020 and 26 March 2021, nine reports were submitted to the Secretary-General, by the following States parties: Burundi (third periodic report), Colombia (eighth periodic report), Cyprus (fifth periodic report), Kuwait (fourth periodic report), Republic of Korea (fifth periodic report), Somalia (initial report), State of Palestine (initial report), Uganda (second periodic report) and United States of America (fifth periodic report).

B.Overdue reports and non-compliance by States parties with their obligations under article 40

45.The Committee wishes to reiterate that States parties to the Covenant must submit the reports referred to in article 40 of the Covenant on time so that the Committee can duly perform its functions under that article. Regrettably, serious delays have been noted since the establishment of the Committee. The Committee notes with concern that the failure of States parties to submit reports hinders the performance of its monitoring functions under article 40 of the Covenant. The Committee reiterates that States with overdue reports are in default of their obligations under that article.

46.During the reporting period, the Committee continued its practice of reviewing States parties with long overdue reports and in the absence of a report.

C.Periodicity with respect to States parties’ reports examined during the period under review

47.The dates of examination of the State party reports considered during the period under review and the due date for the subsequent reports are indicated in the table below.

State party	Date of examination	Due date for next report
Finland	March 2021	2028
Kenya	March 2021	2028

Annex

Members of the Human Rights Committee, 2020–2021

Name	Country of nationality a	Term ends 31 December
129th and 130th sessions
Tania María Abdo Rocholl	Paraguay	2020 b
Yadh Ben Achour	Tunisia	2022 c
Arif Bulkan	Guyana	2022 c
Ahmed Amin Fathalla	Egypt	2020 b
Furuya Shuichi	Japan	2022 c
Christof Heyns	South Africa	2020 b
Bamariam Koita	Mauritania	2020 b
Marcia V.J. Kran	Canada	2020 b
David H. Moore	United States of America	2020 e
Duncan Laki Muhumuza	Uganda	2022 c
Photini Pazartzis	Greece	2022 c
Hernán Quezada Cabrera	Chile	2022 c
Vasilka Sancin	Slovenia	2022 c
José Manuel Santos Pais	Portugal	2020 b
Yuval Shany	Israel	2020 b
Hélène Tigroudja	France	2022 c
Andreas Zimmermann	Germany	2020 d
Gentian Zyberi	Albania	2022 c
131st session
Tania María Abdo Rocholl	Paraguay	2024 f
Wafaa Ashraf Moharram Bassim	Egypt	2024 f
Yadh Ben Achour	Tunisia	2022 c
Arif Bulkan	Guyana	2022 c
Mahjoub el-Haiba	Morocco	2024 f
Furuya Shuichi	Japan	2022 c
Carlos Gómez Martínez	Spain	2024 f
Marcia V.J. Kran	Canada	2024 f
Duncan Laki Muhumuza	Uganda	2022 c
Photini Pazartzis	Greece	2022 c
Hernán Quezada Cabrera	Chile	2022 c
Vasilka Sancin	Slovenia	2022 c
José Manuel Santos Pais	Portugal	2024 f
Changrok Soh	Republic of Korea	2024 f
Kobauyah Tchamdja Kpatcha	Togo	2024 f
Hélène Tigroudja	France	2022 c
Imeru Tamerat Yigezu	Ethiopia	2024 f
Gentian Zyberi	Albania	2022 c

Note : Information on current and past membership of the Committee can be found at www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CCPR/Pages/Membership.aspx.

a In accordance with article 28 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the members of the Committee shall be elected and shall serve in their personal capacity.

b Member elected during the 35th meeting of States parties, held in New York on 23 June 2016.

c Member elected during the 36th meeting of States parties, held in New York on 14 June 2018.

d Member elected during the 37th meeting of States parties to replace Anja Seibert- Fohr . His term expired on 31 December 2020.

e Member elected during the 38th meeting of States parties, held in New York on 17 September 2020, to replace Ilze Brands Kehris . His term expired on 31 December 2020. He served as member of the Committee during the 130th session only.

f Member elected during the 38th meeting of States parties.