|
" Comparing Peer Reviews: "
Edward R. McMahon, Kojo Busia, Marta Ascherio, et al.
| Document Type
|
:
|
AL
|
| Record Number
|
:
|
1063452
|
| Doc. No
|
:
|
LA107081
|
| Call No
|
:
|
10.1163/15692108-12341265
|
| Language of Document
|
:
|
English
|
| Main Entry
|
:
|
Edward R. McMahon
|
|
|
:
|
Kojo Busia
|
|
|
:
|
Marta Ascherio
|
| Title & Author
|
:
|
Comparing Peer Reviews: [Article] : The Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council and the African Peer Review Mechanism\ Edward R. McMahon, Kojo Busia, Marta Ascherio, et al.
|
| Publication Statement
|
:
|
Leiden: Brill
|
| Title of Periodical
|
:
|
African and Asian Studies
|
| Date
|
:
|
2013
|
| Volume/ Issue Number
|
:
|
12/3
|
| Page No
|
:
|
266–289
|
| Abstract
|
:
|
The Universal Periodic Review Mechanism (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council and the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) reflect a growing trend in international organizations to utilize peer review processes to assess and improve member state governance and human rights performance. The two mechanisms are distinct in many ways. For example, the APRM undertakes a more in-depth and rigorous examination of a broader range of issues. Both review mechanisms, however, also have similarities e.g. they emphasize follow-up and actions to be taken as a result of the reviews and are products of a consensus decision-making process based on voluntary engagement. They represent an evolutionary process by which international norms can be integrated in a national context. The Universal Periodic Review Mechanism (UPR) of the UN Human Rights Council and the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) reflect a growing trend in international organizations to utilize peer review processes to assess and improve member state governance and human rights performance. The two mechanisms are distinct in many ways. For example, the APRM undertakes a more in-depth and rigorous examination of a broader range of issues. Both review mechanisms, however, also have similarities e.g. they emphasize follow-up and actions to be taken as a result of the reviews and are products of a consensus decision-making process based on voluntary engagement. They represent an evolutionary process by which international norms can be integrated in a national context.
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
Globalization
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
Human rights
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
National sovereignty
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
Peer reviews
|
| Descriptor
|
:
|
United Nations
|
| Location & Call number
|
:
|
10.1163/15692108-12341265
|
| |