Informal Consultations on UPR (September 8, 2006)

Statement by India

Mr. Chairman,

	Our views on various elements of the UPR have already been expressed in the last round of consultations and are available on the extranet. For now, I would like to emphasize the following two points:

	First, with regard to the preparatory stage, we support those delegations who have suggested that the review should be conducted on the basis of response of the country concerned to a standardized set of questions. While we do recognize the relevance and significance of information from other ‘objective’ and ‘reliable’ sources, a mere compilation of such information in a dossier would probably not be of much use because of its enormity. Therefore, the question of who should process this information would arise. Perhaps, it would be desirable to leave it to the participants in the interactive dialogue to refer to information from other ‘objective’ and ‘reliable’ sources during the interactive dialogue as they deem appropriate and make the response of the country under review to the standardized questionnaire the main background document for review. This will also help us in keeping the focus of the review on identifying areas for cooperation to address technical assistance and capacity building requirements.

	As regards the outcome, we support the view in favour of a consensual outcome. In our view, the UPR outcome should have three components:

a summary of deliberations in the interactive dialogue;
voluntary pledges/commitments announced by the country under review; and
concrete recommendations to address technical assistance and capacity building needs, if any, to be adopted by the Council with the full consent of the country concerned. This, Mr. Chairman, is of particular importance in order to preserve the cooperative character of the UPR and also keeping in mind the fact that a different approach would mean consideration of a large number of country-specific resolutions by the Council every year.

Thank you.