^{Category: International Human Rights}

---

Although it was once a force to be reckoned with, the U.N. Human Rights Council now enjoys very little credibility in the international community. Chaired at one point by the notoriously despotic Libya, the committee has also embraced the dubious wisdom of other infamous human rights abusers such as Cuba, Sierra Leone, the Sudan, and Togo. As a result, the HRC has become about as toothless as you might expect, better known for not investigating human rights abuses than anything else.

But as Globalization Guide Keith Porter explains, the HRC is about to get a whole lot more exclusive:

U.N. reforms spearheaded by Secretary-General Kofi Annan are starting to take hold. As early as today, the United Nations General Assembly will vote to dissolve the CHR and replace it with a greatly improved Human Rights Council (HRC).

A chart comparing the old group with the new one is here. The most basic differences are:

• An absolute majority of all 191 U.N. member states is required to elect members to the HRC.
• All members of the HRC will be subject to mandatory human rights reviews.
• The HRC will meet several times throughout the year and be available for emergency sessions as well.

What does this mean for human rights? It means that, without the self-serving leadership of totalitarian states, the HRC might finally be free to return to its roots as a legitimate and powerful human rights watchdog organization representing the best interests of the international community--and the world will finally hear the powerful voice of the HRC, a voice that has been silenced for far too long.