When Michelle Bachelet, former United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for Human Rights, pointed to what she called “the reality of multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination” in December 2020, she also highlighted the importance of factoring them into any analysis and policymaking in the human rights space.  

“When we gloss over these differential impacts, when we pretend that health and other policies inevitably benefit all equally,” continued Bachelet, “we are failing in our human rights obligations, and we are failing in our commitment under the 2030 Agenda to leave no one behind.”

One key way to address such impacts is through the human rights monitoring mechanism known as the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), which was established in 2006 by the UN General Assembly to advance global human rights protection.

The UPR has resulted in thousands of recommendations that could potentially advance the protection of human rights. But could a tighter focus on what Bachelet noted were “intersecting forms of discrimination” improve this tool? A greater incorporation of an intersectional lens in these recommendations could further enhance their effectiveness by making them more inclusive and ensuring that no one is left behind in the efforts to safeguard human rights for all.

Where Does Intersectionality Fit In?

The Universal Periodic Review occurs over a four-and-a-half-year cycle during which the respective human rights record of each UN member state is examined. Notably, during this process, states under review receive recommendations from fellow states concerning measures that can be taken to address ongoing human rights violations. States are also expected to report on the progress made in implementing these recommendations during the subsequent review cycle. Since the process became operational in 2008, three UPR cycles have been completed. The fourth cycle is expected to end in 2027.

According to the UPR Info database, the first three cycles have resulted in over 90,000 recommendations that address more than 60 human rights issues. If implemented, these recommendations could potentially make meaningful contributions toward advancing women’s rights, children’s rights, civil and political rights, and migrant rights, as well as many others. Yet despite this significant number of recommendations, there has been little discussion concerning how these recommendations might better incorporate the intersectional lens that Bachelet and others see as essential.

Intersectionality has been described as “the interaction between gender, race, and other categories of difference in individual lives, social practices, institutional arrangements, and cultural ideologies and the outcomes of these interactions in terms of power.” It is a concept that emphasizes the idea that some groups of marginalized people face further marginalization and discrimination due to the interaction between the multiple identities they embody. For instance, while gender inequality exists in diverse forms, the discrimination experienced by a black woman is not the same as that experienced by a white woman due to racial differences between them. Similarly, the discrimination experienced by a disabled woman is not the same as that experienced by a woman without a disability.

Considered in this way, an intersectional lens makes it possible for lawmakers and policymakers to ensure that their policy and law-making efforts consider how the interaction between multiple forms of identity could result in heightened discrimination and marginalization.

The Power of an Intersectional Lens

Because the aim of the UPR mechanism is to advance global human rights protection, the recommendations generated by the process must be inclusive and address the needs of all individuals. Intersectional recommendations play a critical role in enhancing the inclusiveness of these recommendations.

Finding a path forward to improving the process in this way has been a challenge. At present, only one study—published in 2023—has examined the incorporation of intersectionality in UPR recommendations. This study found that the women’s rights recommendations issued to Sudan during the first three cycles contained a limited number of intersectional recommendations. Only 12 out of 129 of them incorporated an intersectional lens. Since this study focuses primarily on Sudan and women’s rights, it is not enough to conclude that this trend is present in all states and in recommendations addressing other human rights issues. But what it does suggest is that there has been a limited overall incorporation of intersectionality in UPR recommendations.

Yet evidence from the national reports submitted during the ongoing fourth UPR cycle suggests that some states have taken the intersectional recommendations issued during the third cycle seriously and have endeavored to implement them. For example, India reported that in response to a recommendation concerning employment opportunities for women in rural areas, it continues to implement the Deendayal Antyodaya Yojana: National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) program for women. Since 2014, 4,800 billion Indian rupees have been disbursed through this program.

Other nations are also taking up this cause. In response to a recommendation concerning victims of trafficking who are foreign nationals, South Africa launched a Combating of Trafficking in Persons National Policy Framework (NPF) in 2019. And Peru addressed a recommendation concerning health care, education, and employment-based discrimination against Afro-Peruvian women by establishing a National Policy for the Afro-Peruvian People to address the autonomy of this group of women.

These examples demonstrate that when states receive intersectional recommendations, they take steps to implement these recommendations. The lesson is that more such recommendations could potentially safeguard the rights of various subgroups of already marginalized groups.

How Can the UPR Better Incorporate Intersectionality?

A heightened intersectional lens in UPR recommendations requires a number of steps. First, member states must be well-informed of the various forms of discrimination in a given state to ensure that the recommendations issued to nations under review actually incorporate an intersectional lens. As stated in an earlier publication, stakeholders can assist with this process by ensuring that the stakeholder reports submitted as part of the UPR process highlight any ongoing issues of discrimination or identity-based rights violations. By so doing, UPR recommendations will be more inclusive and address the needs of various groups of people who are experiencing rights violations due to the intersecting identities they embody.

Additionally, an intersectional recommendations quota could be introduced as part of the broader UPR process to encourage states to be more intentional in issuing intersectional recommendations. This will ensure that others are not excluded from the policies and other measures that result from implementing UPR recommendations.

The goal of advancing global human rights protection will not be realized if efforts to promote human rights consistently exclude various groups of individuals who experience rights violations due to the intersection of the multiple identities they embody. Intersectional recommendations are critical to ensure that no one is left behind in the fight against human rights violations.