ILLUSTRATING THE FRAMEWORK INDICATORS FOR SOME RIGHTS

In today’s world where we are continuously facing the challenge of investigating and analysing human rights abuses in complex contexts, statistics can help enormously towards an understanding of the scope and magnitude of these phenomena as well as, and this is very important, to prevent future atrocities. Without statistics, we will be condemned most probably to a partial vision and under-standing of our reality.” Fernando Castañon Alvarez1

1. Director, International Judicial Support, United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, and Executive Secretary, Guatemalan Commission for Historical Clarification, in his address at the Montreux Conference on “Statistics, Development and Human Rights”, September 2000.

ILLUSTRATING THE FRAMEWORK

INDICATORS FOR SOME RIGHTS

The chapter illustrates the application of the concep-tual and the methodological framework, outlined in the earlier chapters of the Guide, to draw up tables of indicators for different human rights. It focuses on the common considerations that have shaped the different tables and provides examples of the

reasoning behind the selection of attributes of a human right and the corresponding cluster of indicators. Since the procedure followed is identical for all civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, only few representative tables of illustrative indicators are discussed in some detail.

What are the preliminary steps in contextualizing and building ownership of the indicators at country level?

4

What are the steps in selecting the relevant indicators for each attribute of a right?

3

What are the steps in identifying attributes of a right or a theme of human rights relevance?

2

What are the considerations in preparing the tables of indicators?

1

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

HUMAN RIGHTS INDICATORS 71

1 Use of a standard format

Given the framework adopted for identifying indica-tors, the use of a standardized template is inevita-ble and also desirable. The indicators have been developed in a matrix format, where the normative standard as captured in the attributes of a right are placed on the horizontal axis and the different cat-egories of indicators, namely the configuration of structural, process and outcome indicators (defined in chap. II, sect. B) on the vertical axis (under each attribute) to permit a more systematic coverage of the realization of the right.

For analytical convenience, in drawing up a table of indicators for a human right, the reference normative framework is the one directly related to that right. In other words, the attributes and indicators are anchored in the specific treaty provisions related to that right and the clarifications and elaboration of those provisions by the relevant treaty body and human rights mecha-nisms. For instance, for the right to life, indicators on the “health and nutrition” attribute (table 14) have been identified with reference to the normative content of the right to life and not in the light of the normative content of the right to health (table 3). Similarly, some aspects related to the entitlements of an individual to control one’s health and body and to be free from interference are developed as a part of the indica-tors on the right not to be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punish-ment (table 4) and not in the context of the right to health. Some indicators appear in more than one table, because some human rights, such as the right to life, the right to health or the right to adequate food, share similar attributes. In each instance, the

selected indicators essentially capture the norma-tive content of that right. Such an approach, which may be seen as conservative from a human rights perspective, apparently overlooking the notion of the indivisibility of rights, aims to avoid overlaps, repeti-tion and reduce the number of indicators, generally a central concern in any initiative on indicators.

It could be argued that selecting structural, process and outcome indicators for the different attributes of a right may lead to a large number of indicators being identified. While this is potentially true, it can be overcome, firstly, by excluding indicators that do not rigorously meet the conceptual, methodological and empirical criteria outlined in chapters II and III, and, secondly, by applying some additional consid-erations in the final selection of indicators for each right. For instance, sometimes a single indicator may be adequate to cover more than one attribute of a right; in other cases several may be required to cover just one attribute. In such instances, to the extent that substantive conceptual requirements are met, indicators that capture more than one attribute of a right could be selected with a view to limiting their total number (e.g., the literacy rate will be relevant to more than one attribute of the right to education). Moreover, not all illustrative indica-tors developed for a right in this Guide need to be used. For example, the actual choice of indicators to monitor treaty compliance could be made by a State party in consultation with the treaty body concerned while taking into account the country’s context, its implementation priorities and statistical considerations on data availability.

A. Considerations in preparing tables of indicators

IV. >> Illustrating the Framework - Indicators for Some Rights >> Considerations in preparing tables of indicators

72 HUMAN RIGHTS INDICATORS


A generic formulation has been adopted for articulating indicators reflected in the tables. Where applicable, an alternative or a specific formula-tion relevant to a given context, such as the level of country development or for specific regions and demographic groups, has been indicated in the relevant metadata sheet for the indicator concerned (for details, see annex I). Similarly, a general termi-nology of “target group” has been adopted to refer to specific population groups, like women, children, ethnic or religious minorities or vulnerable and marginal segments of the population that the duty bearer may have to focus its attention on, in keep-ing with the country’s context, while implementing its human rights obligations.

Finally, the tabular format shows the range of indi-cators that are relevant to capturing the normative content and the corresponding obligations of human rights standards. At the same time, it enables stake-holders to select those indicators that they may like to monitor. In other words, the selection of a few indicators, at any given point in time, to monitor the implementation of human rights is more informed and likely to be more meaningful than would other-wise be the case.

2 Selection of human rights for developing indicators in this Guide

The selection of human rights for which indicators have been developed and reflected in this publica-tion was guided by a panel of experts drawn from the treaty bodies and human rights practitioners who assisted in this work. The principal consideration was to have a set of rights that between them could cover a large number of provisions for most of the core human rights instruments (see chap. I). The

provisions laid out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were a starting point in this choice. Care was also taken to select substantive, procedural (right to fair trial) and cross-cutting rights (right to non-discrimination and equality), as well as to include an equal number of rights from the two Covenants, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Such an approach enables an informed choice to be made in putting together the set of indicators to monitor a human rights treaty, for instance, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child or the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights or for that matter a human rights issue like violence against women. The indicators developed on different human rights can be brought together selectively, based on the provisions of a convention or the conceptualization of an issue, as well as country- specific considerations (sect. C below). While not all attributes of a right may find equal emphasis in the provisions of different conventions or in the conceptualization of a human rights issue, for those that are acknowledged, the relevant indicators can be selected from the tables to arrive at a basket of indicators. Furthermore, contextual considerations (sect. D below) also play an important role in the actual choice of indicators to monitor the issue at hand.

3 Relevance of common and background statistical information

In the case of compliance monitoring by treaty bodies, the human rights indicators have to be



seen against the background statistical information that each State party to the international treaties is expected to provide as a part of the general reporting guidelines.2 Such information is also relevant to human rights assessments undertaken in any other context. The background information reflected through appropriate statistical indicators covers population and general demographic trends, the social, economic and political situation, and general information on the administration of justice and the rule of law. The indicators have to be inter-preted against this information. At the same time, information on certain structural indicators like the proportion of international human rights instruments ratified by the State (from a list of selected human rights treaties, protocols, relevant articles, conven-tions of the International Labour Organization (ILO), etc.), the existence of a domestic bill of rights in the constitution or other forms of superior law, the type of accreditation of national human rights institu-tions by the rules of procedure of the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions, the number of NGOs and personnel (employees and volunteers) formally involved in the protection of human rights at the domestic level, is relevant to monitoring the implementation of all human rights. Some of these indicators have been reflected in the tables and metadata sheets provided in the Guide to provide a comprehensive and self-standing reference list. However, they need to be considered for monitoring the implementation of all human rights and related issues.

4 Importance attached to disaggregation of information

In general, it is essential for most indicators to go beyond national averages and seek disaggregated

information related to the human rights situation of the relevant target groups vis-à-vis the rest of the population. All tables include a reference to the need for disaggregating all indicators by prohibited grounds of discrimination consistent with the recommendations of the treaty bodies and other international human rights monitoring mechanisms (see also box 22).3 Moreover, in several instances, alternative formulations of indicators at the disaggre-gated level of information have been included in the metadata sheet on those indicators (see examples provided in annex I). Guidance for using and analysing trends and gaps reflected by disaggre-gated indicators is provided in chapter V (sect. B).

5 Focus on the role of primary duty bearer and indicators on remedies

In developing the indicators for human rights, the focus has been on identifying measures that the duty bearer needs to take in implementing its obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights (chap. I, sect. A). This is reflected in the choice of both structural as well as process indicators. In this context, besides indicators that reflect the scope and recourse to judicial remedy such as those related to access to legal aid and due process of law, the framework identifies indicators on the role of quasi-judicial (e.g., some national human rights institutions) and non-judicial (executive / administrative) actors and their activities in implementing human rights. An important structural indicator that appears in most tables relates to State policy and strategy on specific human rights attributes. A policy statement of the State on a given issue outlines its position on it and, in a sense, binds the State to undertake the measures outlined in its policy document or policy framework. It is an instrument for translating the

2. See “Compilation of guidelines on the form and content of reports to be submitted by States parties to the international human rights treaties” (HRI/GEN/2/Rev.6, paras. 12–15, 26 and appendix 3).

3. General comment No. 19 (2007) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provides an illustrative listing of prohibited grounds of discrimination which may require the disaggregation of data. The Covenant prohibits any discrimination, whether in law or in fact, whether direct or indirect, on the grounds of race, colour, sex, age, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, physical or mental disability, health status (including HIV/AIDS), sexual orientation, and civil, political or other status, which has the intention or effect of nullifying or impairing the equal enjoyment or exercise of a human right.



normative standards into an operational framework of public policies and programmes. It helps in making the State accountable and constitutes an important reference for the justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights. The tables also reflect the role of non-State actors, including corporations

and NGOs, international cooperation (e.g., official development assistance (ODA)) and human rights mechanisms (e.g., communications with special procedures mandate holders) in furthering the implementation of human rights through suitable structural and process indicators.

Box 22 Statistics on gender and human rights of women

Gender statistics go beyond statistics disaggregated by sex. Sex relates to biological and physiological char-acteristics that define men and women. Gender refers to the relationship between women and men based on socially or culturally constructed and defined identities, status, roles and responsibilities that are assigned to one or the other sex. Gender is not static or innate but acquires socially and culturally constructed meaning over time.a Gender is “the social meaning given to biological sex differences. It is an ideological and cultural construct, but is also reproduced within the realm of material practices; in turn it influences the outcomes of such practices. It affects the distribution of resources, wealth, work, decision-making and political power, and enjoyment of rights and entitlements within the family as well as public life. Despite variations across cultures and over time, gender relations throughout the world entail asymmetry of power between men and women as a pervasive trait. Thus, gender is a social stratifier, and in this sense it is similar to other stratifiers such as race, class, ethnicity, sexuality and age. It helps us understand the social construction of gender identities and the unequal structure of power that underlies the relationship between the sexes”.b

The human rights normative framework, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the recommendations adopted by its Committee, provides the legal basis and practical guidance for promoting and developing gender statistics. In addition to disaggregating commonly compiled statistics by sex (e.g., proportion of women in senior civil servants positions), making women more visible in statistics and monitoring gender equality require women-specific statistics (e.g., maternal morbidity and mortality statistics), expanding statistics in critical areas, such as poverty (e.g., the distribution of resources within households or the amount of unpaid work carried out by women), access to assets (e.g., ownership of land, housing), exposure to violence (e.g., domestic violence, early or forced marriage) and harmful traditional practices (e.g., female genital mutilation, honour killings), empower-ment and decision-making (e.g., proportion of women elected to parliament), and on societal attitudes (e.g., perceived role and contribution of women vis-à-vis men to family and social life). It also calls for the compilation of information on men that was traditionally collected only for women (e.g., contraceptive use).

All the indicators identified in the tables below can potentially be disaggregated by sex and are relevant to monitoring gender equality and the human rights of women. In addition, there are tables (on non-discrimina-tion and equality, violence against women), attributes of rights (e.g., sexual and reproductive health in the table on the right to health) and several indicators (e.g., access of women and girls to adequate food within households) that address gender concerns more specifically.

a. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Guidelines on international protection: Gender-Related Persecution within the context of article 1A(2) of the 1951 Convention and/or its 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees” (HCR/GIP/02/01), para. 3.

b. 1999 World Survey on the Role of Women in Development: Globalization, Gender and Work (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.99.IV.8), p. ix.

Sources: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and World Bank Institute, Developing Gender Statistics: A Practical Tool (United Nations, 2010). Available from www.unece.org. Platform for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women, Report of the Fourth World Conference on Women; and Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, general recommendations No. 9 (1989) on statistical data concerning the situation of women and No. 25 (2004) on temporary special measures.


IV. >> Illustrating the Framework - Indicators for Some Rights >> Identifying the attributes

B. Identifying the attributes

Expert validation of attributes

STEP III. Together, attributes present the unique focus and content of the human right standard

Reviewing the identified attributes

Fig. VIII Identifying attributes

STEP I.

STEP II.

Up to 4 or 5 attributes, more if required

Reading of the normative framework, as applicable

Mutually exclusive

Exhaustive reflection of human rights standard

Operational articulation

Development of standards by human rights mechanisms

Human rights practice and experience at country level

Complementary inputs, e.g., regional human rights instruments, constitution, domestic law

Attributes are identified for each human right with a view to making its normative content concrete, which then helps in identifying the relevant indicators for that right. Taken together the attributes are expected to present the essence of the standard fairly well. Thus, the selection of attributes is based on an exhaustive reading of the legal standard of the right. As described earlier in the Guide (chap. II, sect. B 1), since

attributes provide the link between the narrative of the legal standard on the one hand and indicators on the other, to the extent feasible, they have to be identified in a mutually exclusive (non-overlapping) manner. This ensures that the selected indicators are non-repetitive and limited in number. Ultimately, well-articulated attributes help towards the identification of relevant indicators.


IV. >> Illustrating the Framework - Indicators for Some Rights >> Selecting the indicators

The development of attributes for human rights standards, such as the rights and themes included in this Guide, have been reviewed and validated by experts. Therefore, it may not be necessary to iden-tify them afresh since, once identified, attributes of a right will be equally applicable to most contexts as the underlying human rights standards are universal. However, in those countries where domestic law improves on international human rights treaty provi-sions, it may be desirable to rework the attributes in conformity with the applicable national and inter-

national human rights standards. The contextualiza-tion of human rights standards should essentially be carried out in the selection of indicators for the attributes. The steps for identifying attributes are outlined in figure VIII. The steps are also relevant to identifying the attributes of a human rights issue, such as violence against women (see the next section for details). In that case, instead of the treaty provisions, the conceptualization of the issue along with the applicable human rights standards will guide the process of identifying the attributes.

C. Selecting the indicators

In selecting indicators, the conceptual link with human rights attributes or the human rights standards that these attributes reflect is of prime importance. At the same time, the available empirical evidence on the performance of the identified indicators is an equally important consideration in the selection. In the context of the Guide, the metadata sheet on an identified indi-cator helps in clarifying this selection. The metadata highlight key information on the indicator, including terminology and common formulation of the indicator, standard international or national definitions, data sources, availability, level of disaggregation, and infor-mation on other related and proxy indicators.

1 Steps in selecting structural, process and outcome indicators

It is useful to keep the following considerations in mind when selecting indicators in each of the three cat-egories (fig. IX). Given an attribute of a right, the first step is to identify a structural indicator. It is necessary

to study and compare the prevalent legal framework related to that right in the country with the correspond-ing international human rights standards. An indicator is then formulated to help monitor and in some cases even expedite the incorporation of relevant human rights provisions into the country’s legal framework.4 Thus, an indicator like the “date of entry into force and coverage of the right to non-discrimination and equality, including the list of prohibited grounds of dis-crimination in the constitution or other forms of superior law” is useful in assessing a State party’s commitment to meeting its obligations arising from having signed and ratified core international human rights treaties. The other important consideration in formulating a structural indicator is to seek information that shows how the State’s commitment, as reflected in the enact-ment of domestic human rights law, is translated into an enforceable programme of action stemming from that standard. Such information is captured in struc-tural indicators on public policy documentation, for instance, by the indicator “time frame and coverage of policy or programme against workplace harassment”.

4. For States with dualist legal systems, international law is not directly applicable. It must be translated into national law and existing national law that contradicts international law must be modified or eliminated. However, for States that follow a monist legal system, ratification of international law immediately incorporates it into national law.



Fig. IX Selecting indicators

Identifying duty bearers and their roles; mandated activities of relevant institutions

Identifying policies and programmes related to desired outcomes

Identifying national or global best practices and domestic gaps in the implementation of the right

Review / validation of indicators and levels of disaggregation based on country-specific evidence

STEP III. Outcome indicators

Can easily be related to the enjoyment of a right

Indicators cumulating impact of processes

“Stock” indicators, few in number could be common for attributes

Process indicators

Physical indicators preferred to financial

“Flow” preferred to “stock” indicators

Indicators that link institutional mandates to results / outcomes

STEP II.

Structural indicators

Constitutional and domestic legal provisions on the right in force

Declared public policies and policy gaps related to the right

Institutional framework to implement obligations for the right

STEP I.

Identifying desired outcomes associated with the implementation of human rights obligations and the enjoyment of rights and relating them to the required processes



The second step relates to the selection of process indicators. It is vital as process indicators are a critical element of the framework for monitoring human rights. The basic objective here is to identify all the measures, by way of policies and programmes, to attain outcomes that can be related to the realization and enjoyment of rights. It helps therefore to keep such outcomes in mind, when identifying the duty bearers and their roles, the institutions and the activities that the State mandates them to carry out when accepting its human rights obligations, and the nature of ongoing public programmes (and their short-comings), as well as gaps in public policy that if addressed could help in realizing human rights. Based on this analysis, a set of process indicators is identified. Ideally, good process indicators provide a link between the structural and outcome indicators, are “flow indicators” (see chap. II, sect. B 2) and relate to physical rather than financial variables (output from an activity or programme instead of the public resources spent on it, e.g., increase in immunization coverage instead of budgetary allocations to the immunization pro-gramme, or proportion of persons imprisoned in accommodation meeting legally stipulated requirements instead of the budget for prison upkeep). Detailed information on process indicators is provided in chapter II.

The third step involves the articulation of outcome indicators. It is important that the selected outcome indicators can be easily related to the enjoyment of the attribute of the right or the right in general and to the selected process indicators. Moreover, as outcome indicators are more like summary indicators (reflecting the cumulation of multiple processes, e.g., the overall or age-specific literacy rate is a summary measure of the process to improve school enrolment,

public incentives and support for attending schools for the target population groups), they could be few in number and common across several attributes of a right. Finally, the selection of indicators also involves a review and validation of the selected indicators and their levels of disaggregation based on country evidence.

2 Some further considerations in selecting indicators

The consideration of linkage or implicit causality between the structural-process-outcome categories of indicators is important in the selection of indicators. Once a structural indicator has been identified to capture a duty bearer’s human rights commitment, it is desirable to identify a process indicator that captures the efforts under way to meet that commitment and also an outcome indicator that consolidates the results of those efforts over time. Thus, for instance, a structural indicator on the right to education like “time frame and coverage of the plan of action adopted by the State to implement the principle of compulsory primary education free of charge for all” can be linked to a process indicator like “proportion of primary schoolteach-ers fully qualified and trained” and to an outcome indicator like “proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach grade 5” or “literacy rate”. Even a loose causality between the selected indicators, across the three categories, could make monitoring more effective and help in improving accountability of the duty bearer.

It is also possible that in certain instances there is no obvious link between different categories of indicators and yet they are included. This is true, for instance, for the right to health, where some



outcome indicators may not be directly dependent on efforts within the framework of State obligations. Thus, improved longevity or lower infant mortality is known to be correlated with lifestyle practices, eating habits, education and some environmental parameters. It is worthwhile including indicators that reflect such concerns because of their importance to the realization of that right and to facilitate priority-setting and effort-targeting by the duty bearer.

The articulation of indicators, where feasible, is influenced by the need to highlight the “accessibility” rather than merely the “availabi-lity” dimension. Thus, for instance, for the right to adequate food, a process indicator has been formulated as “proportion of targeted population that was brought above the poverty line” and not in terms of the “public resources allocated to poverty alleviation”. Similarly, a right-to-fair-trial indicator seeks information on “the proportion of juveniles in custody receiving education / vocational training by trained teachers for the same number of hours as students of that age at liberty”.

In selecting and formulating the indicators, it is necessary to keep the State’s obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights in mind.5 An appropriate combination of structural, process and outcome indicators, along with the use of multiple data sources, helps in assessing the implementation of these three obligations. So while an outcome indicator like “infant mortality rate” based on administrative data may reveal an overall failure of the State party to meet the three obligations, it may not be able to distinguish which of the three are indeed violated. However, for the process indicators it may be easier to have a formulation that helps in identifying the specific obligations

that may or may not have been met. Moreover, the use of events-based data on human rights violations, given their nature and the methodology for collecting relevant information, makes it relatively easy to derive indicators that relate specifically to the obligations to respect, protect or fulfil.

The indicators identified in the tables are primarily based on two types of data-generating mechanisms: (a) indicators that are or can be compiled by official statistical systems using censuses, statistical surveys and/or administrative records; and (b) indicators or standardized information more generally com-piled by national human rights institutions and civil society sources focusing on alleged violations reported by victims, witnesses or NGOs. The inten-tion has been to explore and exhaust the use of commonly available information, particularly from objective data sets that can be easily quantified for tracking human rights implementation. Some examples for formulating the tables are set out below.

3 Some illustrations

Table on the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health

The attributes of the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health are primar-ily based on a reading of the normative content of the right, as enshrined in article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and reflected in general comment No. 14 (2000) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.6 The five attributes

5. The three obligations are defined in chap. I, sect. A.6. See also general recommendation No. 24 (1999) of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, and

general comments Nos. 3 (2003) and 4 (2003) of the Committee on the Rights of the Child. Article 6 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 5 (e) (iv) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, articles 12 and 14 (2) (b) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,



article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, articles 28 and 43 (1) (e) of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, article 25 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the work of the Special Rapporteur on the right to health, Paul Hunt, were also useful in identifying the attributes and the indicators on the right to health.

are “sexual and reproductive health”, “child mor-tality and health care”, “natural and occupational environment”, “prevention, treatment and control of diseases”, and “accessibility to health facilities and essential medicines”. These attributes relate to provisions under article 12 (2) and the emphasis in general comment No. 14 (2000) on the need to address some topics of broad application. After ensuring that these attributes collectively reflect the normative content of the right, two types of structural indicators have been identified. These relate to the legal and the attendant institutional set-up and the relevant policy framework and policy statements for implementing the human rights obligations of the State. An indicator on civil society organizations has also been identified to reflect their important role in the implementation of the right to health. This is fol-lowed by the identification of process indicators prin-cipally covering the measures that could be taken by the State through its administrative agencies in fulfill-ing its obligations to implement the right to health. Thus, there are indicators related to the extension of medical services and essential medication, aware-ness-raising and providing public health services. There are also indicators identified on judicial and quasi-judicial remedies and the role of international cooperation in realizing the right. Finally, there are negative and positive outcome indicators that allow a summary assessment of the realization of the right to health, or its specific attributes. The normative as well as the empirical basis for including some of the indicators is developed in the corresponding meta-data sheet.

Table on the right to non-discrimination and equality

Non-discrimination and equality are cross-cutting human rights or principles which are invoked in all international human rights instruments, starting with articles 1, 2 and 7 of the Universal Declaration. There are difficulties in translating the normative narrative on the right to non-discrimination and equality into a set of mutually exclusive and exhaustive attributes and corresponding indicators. Discrimination or non-discrimination may often not be directly observable and may not be easily isolated from the realization of other human rights either. While different methods and sources can be used to measure discrimination (see box 23), common socioeconomic statistics that may reveal patterns of discrimination only indirectly are often relied upon. The realization of the right to non-discrimination may also be easier to define in the context of other human rights. For instance, appropri-ately disaggregated statistics on the labour markets (e.g., unemployment rates disaggregated by sex or ethnic origin and level of qualification) can provide useful information on possible discrimination in the realization of the right to work. Also, methods for directly measuring systemic discrimination, impairing population groups’ enjoyment of their right to work, have been developed and implemented in a number of countries (see box 24).



Box 23 Measuring discrimination

Measuring discrimination is not easy. A different treatment or outcome is not necessarily the result of clearly identified acts of discrimination, but the result of complex processes involving multiple and cumula-tive discrimination, or simply due to other factors. Moreover, victims are sometimes unable to identify the discrimination that they are subjected to. Certain social and cultural practices create high tolerance levels for discrimination among certain population groups, which results in the acts of discrimination being frequently overlooked. Also, they are often unaware of the available legal remedies or unable to use them. Thus, the number of convictions for discrimination in court is not a good indicator for assessing discrimination in a country. Given these limitations in using the events-based information in monitoring discrimination, statistical techniques, as well as direct surveys, are vital for assessing the prevalence of discriminatory practices in a country. Some useful statistical tools in this context are:

Socioeconomic statistics disaggregated by prohibited grounds of discrimination (e.g., life expectancy, age-specific sex ratios and unemployment rates broken down by ethnic origin) measure disparities and differential outcomes that are often the result of multiple and accumulative discrimination;

Econometric models based on multiple regression analysis help in estimating the portion of differences in outcomes attributable to discrimination as opposed to observable variables (e.g., percentage of the wage differential between women and men that cannot be explained by “observable” criteria, such as the number of working hours or socioprofessional characteristics, etc.);

Population surveys measuring experiences, perceptions and attitudes regarding discrimination (e.g., percentage of members of ethnic minorities reporting racially motivated victimization and discrimi-nation by public/private personnel);a and

Discrimination or situation-testing surveys to measure directly discrimination in specific instances, such as those related to access to work, housing, health care, private educational institutions or other public services (see box 24).

It may be desirable to use any of these procedures to assess periodically the extent of discrimination in a country, especially where multicultural, racial, religious and linguistic communities are seen to be competing for scarce resources and opportunities. Concrete evidence in support of discriminatory practices in different social spaces of human engagement, including the political space, could facilitate the strengthening of legal and administrative remedial measures in such instances.

a. See, for instance, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, EU-MIDIS: European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (2009). Available from www.fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/minorities/minorities_en.htm.



In selecting the attributes and indicators on this right, consideration has to be given to the form and manifestation of discrimination, the circum-stances under which discrimination occurs, the consequences for the individual, and the availability and access to redress and compliance mechanisms. A starting point is the definition of discrimination. In general, the term “discrimination”, as used in various international human rights instruments, is understood to imply any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference or other differential

treatment that is directly or indirectly7 based on the prohibited grounds of discrimination and which has the intention or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by all persons, on an equal footing, of all civil, cultural, economic, political and social human rights.8 In identifying attributes and selecting indicators on non-discrimination and equality, it is therefore essential to adequately capture the elements highlighted in this definition.

7. Direct discrimination occurs where one person is treated less favourably than another for a reason related to one of the prohibited grounds and with no reasonable and objective justification (e.g., an individual with equal or superior qualifications was not interviewed because of her/his ethnic origins). Indirect discrimination occurs when a priori neutral laws, procedures, policies or programmes treat certain population groups less favourably with no reasonable justification (e.g., a minimum height criterion for joining the police force that excludes more individuals from one population group than from another).

8. See, for instance, article 1 in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, and general comments No. 18 (1989) of the Human Rights Committee and No. 20 (2009) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Measuring discrimination in access to workBox 24

In 2006, a discrimination survey on access to employment on grounds of foreign origin was carried out in several French cities under ILO guidance. The survey measured the discriminatory treatment by employers of two applications submitted for low-/medium-skilled job vacancies in several economic sectors. The profiles of the two applicants were rigorously equivalent (i.e., same educational background and working experience, both born in France and French citizens, etc.), except for one criterion: their North African, sub-Saharan or “metropolitan French” origin, as revealed by their first and family names. The surveys tested each of the three principal ways in which applicants make contact with employers: by telephone, by posting or e-mailing a CV, or by going to the place of work in person and leaving their CV. In all, 2,400 tests were undertaken. The employers selected the “metropolitan French” applicant nearly four times out of five.

Source: E. Cediey and F. Foroni, “Discrimination in access to employment on grounds of foreign origin in France: A national survey of discrimination based on the testing methodology of the International Labour Office” (Geneva, International Labour Office, 2008). Available from www.ilo.org/public/english/protection/migrant/download/imp/imp85e.pdf (accessed 30 May 2012).



Furthermore, in terms of circumstances under which discrimination normally occurs, one could formulate attributes that reflect an individual’s access to an adequate standard of living, health and education and to livelihood opportunities. Equal access to public services, including access to justice, and to relevant services provided by private actors is vital for undoing the injustice of historical inequalities and discrimination that some segments of the population, such as women, ethnic groups, minorities, migrants and persons with disabilities, may have been subjected to. Violence, whether physical, sexual or psychological, targeting specific population groups is an extreme form of discrimination and also needs to be measured in this context.

Moreover, the right to non-discrimination and equality recognizes the need for temporary special measures (sometimes referred to as affirmative action or positive discrimination) as enforcing the right in itself is not always sufficient to guarantee true equality.9 Temporary special measures may be needed to accelerate de facto equality. In women’s employment, for instance, a number of government agencies have adopted administrative instructions on the recruitment, promotion and placement of women, aiming at achieving a better gender distribution at all levels, and particularly at the higher echelons.

Accordingly, four attributes have been identified: “equality before the law and protection of the person”, “direct or indirect discrimination by public and private actors nullifying or impairing access to education and health services”, “direct or indirect discrimination by public and private actors nullifying or impairing equality of livelihood opportunities” and “special measures including for participation in decision-making”.

The use of the cluster of structural-process-outcome indicators for each of the identified attributes helps in reflecting the de jure and de facto aspects of the realization of the right. In selecting the indicators it is important for the information implicit in the indicator to be able to establish the fact that the treatment meted out to the discriminated person is different from that of others in a similar position (e.g., prevalence/incidence of crimes, includ-ing hate crime and domestic violence by target population groups), puts the person concerned at a disadvantage (e.g., proportion of public buildings with facilities for persons with disabilities), can be related to one or more of the identified prohibited grounds of discrimination and there are no valid reasons for such a differential treatment in the first place (e.g., time frame and coverage of policy or programme for equal access to education or the proportion of employers rejecting job applicants only on the grounds of their colour or ethnic origins). Given the cross-cutting nature of discrimination in the realization of all human rights, it is important to read and use the table of illustrative indicators on the right to non-discrimination in conjunction with the tables of indicators on the other human rights, as well as the table on violence against women.

Table on violence against women

Violence against women or gender-based violence is a form of discrimination that seriously inhibits wom-en’s ability to enjoy rights and freedoms on a basis of equality with men.10 Violence against women is a human rights issue cutting across civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. Human rights mechanisms, including international11 and regional ones,12 have addressed it from a normative human rights perspective. Following the approach outlined in this Guide, a life cycle perspective is used to

9. The formulation “temporary special measures” is taken from article 4 (1) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and described in general recommendation No. 25 (2004) of its Committee.

10. See general recommendation No. 19 (1992) of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.11. See, for instance, “In-depth study on all forms of violence against women: Report of the Secretary-General” (A/61/122/Add.1).12. See, for instance, the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa.


IV. >> Illustrating the Framework - Indicators for Some Rights >> Putting indicators into context and building country ownership

13. The table of illustrative indicators on violence against women was developed using the work on statistical indicators carried out by UNECE (http://live.unece.org/stats/gender/vaw/about.html (accessed 30 May 2012)), the former United Nations Division for the Advancement of Women (www.unwomen.org/focus-areas/?show=Violence against Women (accessed 30 May 2012)), the United Nations Statistics Division (http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/meetings/vaw/default.htm (accessed 30 May 2012)) and the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Yakin Ertürk (A/HRC/7/6).

14. The Universal Human Rights Index (www.universalhumanrightsindex.org/) is a database that has been developed by OHCHR to provide an easy access to all the recommendations from the United Nations human rights mechanisms. Following the inclusion of the recommendations from the treaty bodies and special procedures mandate holders, those from the universal periodic review are also being added.

identify the attributes of violence against women. The predominant phases, events and situations in the life of a woman during which she is more likely to experience violations of her physical or mental integrity are considered so as to identify the follow-ing attributes: “sexual and reproductive health and harmful traditional practices”, “domestic violence”, “violence at work, forced labour and trafficking”,

“community violence and abuse by law enforcement officials” and “violence in (post-)conflict and emer-gency situations”. Once the attributes have been identified, the relevant normative standards from the human rights instruments can also be invoked and applied to help select and formulate the required indicators.13

D. Putting indicators into context and building country ownership

Statistics and indicators have to meet national or local needs if they are to be accepted and used as effective tools in human rights assessment and monitoring. Moreover, good statistics are difficult to get and they cannot be simply imported and thrust in an alien context. Their use in any assessment process is optimized when they are meaningful for the context to which they are applied and when countries have ownership of their application. These considerations require local capacity for the adaptation and articulation of indicators, the collection of the required information and interpreting that information. While capacity-building for the use of indicators in human rights assessments is taken up in chapter V, this section outlines briefly some of the steps that need to be considered to put indicators into context and build country ownership.

There are three steps to putting indicators into a

national context (see fig. X), corresponding to each of the three categories of indicators. However, the need for contextualizing structural and outcome indicators is limited given their nature. For the struc-tural indicators, the focus has to be on identifying the gaps in the domestic human rights framework in comparison to international standards. In doing so, observations made by human rights monitoring mechanisms, such as the treaty bodies, the special procedures mandate holders and the universal peri-odic review of the Human Rights Council, should be used.14 In putting the table of indicators into national context, the recommendations from these human rights mechanisms constitute an authoritative reference and direct source of information for iden-tifying the human rights challenges, the populations concerned as well as possible indicators. Most of the recommendations contain underlying references to, but also often explicit mentions of, information that relates to structural, process and outcome



indicators.15 The focus also has to be on factoring in the customary practices and institutions unique to the country while formulating the structural indi-cators. Similarly, for the outcome indicators, the illustrative formulation may have to be custom-ized to reflect the local focus on certain target population groups or overcome the capacity and data constraints. The main task of contextualiza-tion relates to the process indicators. For them, the country’s level of socioeconomic development, its population groups identified as being vulnerable, marginalized or at risk of discrimination and, hence, targeted through public interventions, the nature of its public policies and programmes and its capacity constraints on data collection will deter-mine the contextually appropriate formulation.

In using the framework of structural, process and outcome indicators, the objective has been to cover consistently and comprehensively indicators that can reflect the commitment-effort-result aspects of the

realization of human rights. In the final analysis, it may not matter if an indicator is identified as a process or outcome indicator so long as it captures relevant aspect(s) of an attribute of a right or the right in general. Working with such a configuration of indicators simplifies the selection of indicators, encourages the use of contextually relevant information, facilitates a more comprehensive coverage of the human rights standards, can help in organizing the collection of information among national stakeholders and minimize the overall number of indicators required to monitor the realization of a right in any context. Finally, the framework enables the potential users to make an informed choice on the type of indicator and level of disaggregation that best reflect the contextual requirements for implementing a human right or some attributes of a right, while recognizing the full scope of obligations on the relevant human right standards.

15. For instance, when the Human Rights Committee is concerned “about the low level of participation of women in public affairs, and that women continue to have a disproportionately low presence in the political and economic life of the State party, particularly in senior positions of public administration (arts. 2, 3 and 26)” and states that the “State party should take immediate steps to change public attitude towards the suitability of women for positions in public affairs and consider adopting a policy of positive action” and should take “appropriate measures to ensure the effective participation of women in political, public and other sectors of the State party” (CCPR/CO/82/ALB, para. 11), the use of some outcome indicators (e.g., proportion of relevant positions in the public and private sectors held by women), structural indicators (e.g., date of entry into force of special and temporary measures to ensure or accelerate equality in the enjoyment of rights by women) and process indicators (e.g., budget spent on an awareness campaign for promoting the participation of women in public affairs) becomes meaningful.



Fig. X Contextualizing indicators

Review / validation of indicators based on the requirement for follow-up to recommendations from human rights mechanisms and country-specific evidence

Structural indicators

Identify gaps in domestic law vis-à-vis international human rights law and obligations of State party to human rights treaties;

Identify gaps in public policy documentation on the issue under consideration with respect to international best practices;

Identify customary practices and domestic institutions seen as being relevant to the implementation of human rights obligations

Outcome indicators

Standard formulations of indicators are universally relevant but may need to be customized to specific target population groups

Process indicators

Process indicators should be contextually relevant and locally driven;

Unlike structural or outcome indicators, multiple process indicators may be desirable, if feasible;

Focus on administrative data for process indicators; and

Devise additional process indicators and interventions for implementing human rights based on global best practices

Identify target groups, e.g., minorities, indigenous peoples, women, to articulate specific indicators

Refine illustrative indicators for ongoing local programmes contributing to human rights implementation

Focus on national and local budgetary processes for mainstreaming human rights

STEP I.

STEP III.

STEP II.


IV. >> Illustrating the Framework - Indicators for Some Rights

Tab

le 1

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

lib

ert

y a

nd

se

curi

ty o

f p

ers

on

(U

niv

ers

al

De

cla

rati

on

of

Hu

ma

n R

igh

ts,

art

. 3

)

Arr

est

an

d d

ete

ntio

n b

ase

d

on

cri

min

al ch

arg

es

Ad

min

istr

ative

dep

riva

tio

n

of

lib

ert

yEff

ect

ive r

evi

ew

by

cou

rt

Secu

rity

fro

m c

rim

e a

nd

ab

use

b

y la

w e

nfo

rcem

en

t o

ffic

ials

Str

uct

ura

lad

min

istra

tive

grou

nds

(e.g

., im

mig

ratio

n, m

enta

l im

pairm

ent,

educ

atio

nal p

urpo

ses,

vag

ranc

y)

befo

re b

eing

bro

ught

to o

r ha

ving

the

case

revi

ewed

by

an a

utho

rity

exer

cisi

ng ju

dici

al p

ower

, and

for

the

trial

dur

a-tio

n of

a p

erso

n in

det

entio

n

fra

mew

ork

on s

ecur

ity, h

andl

ing

of c

rimin

ality

and

abu

se b

y la

w e

nfor

cem

ent o

ffici

als

Pro

cess

mec

hani

sms

and

the

prop

ortio

n of

thes

e re

spon

ded

to e

ffect

ivel

y by

the

Gov

ernm

ent

or

pun

ishm

ent

or e

ntrie

s in

to d

eten

tion

(pre

trial

and

pen

ding

tria

l) on

the

basi

s of

a c

ourt

orde

r or

act

ion

take

n di

rect

ly b

y ex

ecut

ive

auth

oriti

es in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

de

fend

ants

rele

ased

from

pr

etria

l and

tria

l det

entio

n in

ex

chan

ge fo

r ba

il or

ow

ing

to n

on-fi

ling

of c

harg

es in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

or e

ntrie

s in

to d

eten

tion

unde

r na

tiona

l adm

inis

trativ

e pr

ovis

ions

(e.

g., s

ecur

ity,

imm

igra

tion

cont

rol,

men

tal

impa

irmen

t and

oth

er m

edic

al

grou

nds,

edu

catio

nal p

urpo

ses,

dr

ug a

ddic

tion,

fina

ncia

l ob

ligat

ions

) in

the

repo

rting

pe

riod

from

adm

inis

trativ

e de

tent

ion

in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

arre

sted

or

deta

ined

per

sons

bef

ore

bein

g in

form

ed o

f the

reas

ons

for

the

arre

st,

befo

re re

ceiv

ing

notic

e of

the

char

ge

(in a

lega

l sen

se)

or b

efor

e be

ing

info

rmed

of t

he re

ason

s fo

r th

e ad

min

istra

tive

dete

ntio

n ex

ceed

ed th

e le

gally

stip

ulat

ed ti

me

limit

pe

titio

ns fi

led

in c

ourt

in th

e re

porti

ng

perio

d

by th

e co

urt i

n th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

give

n ac

cess

to a

law

yer

or le

gal a

id

a

high

er c

ourt

or a

ppel

late

bod

y

dete

ntio

ns e

xcee

ded

the

lega

lly s

tipul

ated

tim

e lim

it in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

phys

ical

and

non

-phy

sica

l abu

se o

r cr

ime,

incl

udin

g ar

bitra

ry

arre

st a

nd d

eten

tion

(bas

ed o

n cr

imin

al o

r ad

min

istra

tive

grou

nds)

resu

lting

in d

isci

plin

ary

actio

n or

pro

secu

tion

in th

e re

porti

ng

perio

d

offic

ials

with

vis

ible

Gov

ernm

ent-p

rovi

ded

iden

tifica

tion

(e.g

., na

me

or n

umbe

r)

sent

ence

for

viol

ent c

rime

(incl

udin

g ho

mic

ide,

rape

, ass

ault)

per

10

0,0

00

pop

ulat

ion

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

the

repo

rting

per

iod

licen

ces

with

draw

n in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

surv

ey)

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

Ou

tco

me

a

cour

t ord

er o

r ac

tion

by e

xecu

tive

auth

oriti

es a

t the

end

of t

he

repo

rting

per

iod

(e

.g.,

as re

porte

d to

the

Wor

king

Gro

up o

n A

rbitr

ary

Det

entio

n)

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

decl

ared

unl

awfu

l by

natio

nal c

ourts

com

pens

ated

afte

r ar

rest

or

dete

ntio

n de

clar

ed u

nlaw

ful b

y ju

dici

al a

utho

rity

afte

r da

rk o

r be

ing

alon

e at

hom

e at

nig

ht)

or c

rime,

incl

udin

g by

law

enf

orce

men

t offi

cial

s on

dut

y, p

er

100

,00

0 p

opul

atio

n, in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets



Tab

le 2

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

ad

eq

ua

te f

oo

d (

Un

ive

rsa

l D

ecl

ara

tio

n o

f H

um

an

Rig

hts

, a

rt.

25

)

Nu

tritio

nFo

od

sa

fety

an

d

con

sum

er

pro

tect

ion

Foo

d a

vaila

bility

Foo

d a

ccess

ibility

Str

uct

ura

lpo

licy

on n

utrit

ion

and

nutri

tion

adeq

uacy

nor

ms

polic

y on

food

saf

ety

and

cons

umer

pr

otec

tion

soci

ety

orga

niza

tions

wor

king

on

food

sa

fety

and

con

sum

er p

rote

ctio

n

av

aila

bilit

y

man

agem

ent

Pro

cess

an

d th

e pr

opor

tion

of th

ese

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

was

bro

ught

abo

ve th

e m

inim

um le

vel

of d

ieta

ry e

nerg

y co

nsum

ptio

n* in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

cove

red

unde

r pu

blic

nut

ritio

n su

pple

men

t pr

ogra

mm

es

publ

ic p

rogr

amm

es o

n nu

tritio

n ed

ucat

ion

and

awar

enes

s

exte

nded

acc

ess

to a

n im

prov

ed d

rinki

ng

wat

er s

ourc

e* in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

ad

judi

cate

a c

ase

regi

ster

ed in

a

cons

umer

cou

rt

on fo

od s

afet

y an

d co

nsum

er p

rote

ctio

n ad

voca

cy, e

duca

tion,

rese

arch

and

im

plem

enta

tion

of la

ws

and

regu

latio

ns

rele

vant

to th

e rig

ht to

ade

quat

e fo

od

dist

ribut

ing

esta

blis

hmen

ts in

spec

ted

for

food

qua

lity

stan

dard

s an

d fre

quen

cy o

f in

spec

tions

food

saf

ety

and

cons

umer

pro

tect

ion

law

in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

or ta

rget

ed p

opul

atio

n w

ith le

gal t

itle

to

agric

ultu

ral l

and

serv

ices

st

reng

then

ing

dom

estic

agr

icul

tura

l pr

oduc

tion

(e.g

., ag

ricul

tura

l ext

ensi

on,

irrig

atio

n, c

redi

t, m

arke

ting)

m

ajor

food

item

s so

urce

d th

roug

h do

mes

tic p

rodu

ctio

n, im

port

and

food

aid

repo

rting

per

iod

food

item

s fo

r ta

rget

ed p

opul

atio

n gr

oups

m

et th

roug

h pu

blic

ly a

ssis

ted

prog

ram

mes

of ta

rget

ed s

egm

ents

of l

abou

r fo

rce

was

bro

ught

abo

ve th

e po

verty

line

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

targ

et g

roup

adeq

uate

food

with

in h

ouse

hold

acce

ss to

pro

duct

ive

reso

urce

s fo

r ta

rget

gr

oups

Ou

tco

me

child

ren

unde

r fiv

e ye

ars

of a

ge*

(BM

I) <

18.5

inci

denc

e of

food

poi

soni

ng re

late

d to

ad

ulte

rate

d fo

odfo

r lo

cal c

onsu

mpt

ion

leve

l of d

ieta

ry e

nerg

y co

nsum

ptio

n* /

pr

opor

tion

of u

nder

nour

ishe

d po

pula

tion

for

the

botto

m th

ree

deci

les

of p

opul

atio

n or

targ

eted

pop

ulat

ion

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 3

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

th

e e

njo

ym

en

t o

f th

e h

igh

est

att

ain

ab

le s

tan

da

rd o

f p

hy

sica

l a

nd

me

nta

l h

ea

lth

(U

niv

ers

al

De

cla

rati

on

of

Hu

ma

n R

igh

ts,

art

. 2

5)

Sexu

al a

nd

re

pro

du

ctiv

e h

ea

lth

Ch

ild

mo

rta

lity

an

dh

ea

lth

ca

reN

atu

ral a

nd

occ

up

atio

na

l en

viro

nm

en

tPre

ven

tio

n,

trea

tmen

t a

nd

co

ntr

ol o

f d

isea

ses

Acc

ess

ibility

to h

ea

lth

fa

cilities

an

dess

en

tia

l m

ed

icin

es

Str

uct

ura

l

of n

atio

nal p

olic

y on

sex

ual

and

repr

oduc

tive

heal

th

natio

nal p

olic

y on

abo

rtion

an

d fo

etal

sex

det

erm

inat

ion

natio

nal p

olic

y on

chi

ld h

ealth

an

d nu

tritio

nge

neric

sub

stitu

tion

Pro

cess

prop

ortio

n of

thes

e re

spon

ded

to e

ffect

ivel

y by

the

Gov

ernm

ent

by s

kille

d he

alth

per

sonn

el*

(a

t lea

st o

ne v

isit

and

at le

ast

four

vis

its)*

wom

en o

f rep

rodu

ctiv

e ag

e us

ing,

or

who

se p

artn

er is

us

ing,

con

trace

ptio

n (C

PR)*

pl

anni

ng*

pr

egna

ncy

as a

pro

porti

on

of li

ve b

irths

of g

enita

l mut

ilatio

n, ra

pe

and

othe

r vi

olen

ce re

stric

ting

wom

en’s

sex

ual a

nd

repr

oduc

tive

freed

om

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by

the

Gov

ernm

ent

educ

ated

on

heal

th a

nd

nutri

tion

issu

es

unde

r pr

ogra

mm

e fo

r re

gula

r m

edic

al c

heck

-ups

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

excl

usiv

ely

brea

stfe

d du

ring

the

first

6 m

onth

s

unde

r pu

blic

nut

ritio

n su

pple

men

t pro

gram

mes

imm

uniz

ed a

gain

st

vacc

ine-

prev

enta

ble

dise

ases

(e

.g.,

mea

sles

*)

po

pula

tion

that

was

ext

ende

d ac

cess

to a

n im

prov

ed

drin

king

wat

er s

ourc

e*

popu

latio

n th

at w

as e

xten

ded

acce

ss to

impr

oved

sa

nita

tion*

2 e

mis

sion

s pe

r ca

pita

*

dete

riora

tion

of w

ater

sou

rces

br

ough

t to

just

ice

hous

ehol

ds li

ving

or

wor

king

in

or

near

haz

ardo

us

cond

ition

s re

habi

litat

ed

dom

estic

law

on

natu

ral o

r w

orkp

lace

env

ironm

ent

with

draw

n fo

r br

each

es o

f ro

ad r

ules

-er

ed u

nder

aw

aren

ess-r

aisi

ng

prog

ram

mes

on

trans

mis

sion

of

dis

ease

s (e

.g.,

HIV

/AID

S*)

(abo

ve a

ge 1

) im

mun

ized

ag

ains

t vac

cine

-pre

vent

able

di

seas

es

appl

ying

effe

ctiv

e pr

even

tive

mea

sure

s ag

ains

t dis

ease

s (e

.g.,

HIV

/AID

S, m

alar

ia*

)

dete

cted

and

cur

ed

(e.g

., tu

berc

ulos

is*

)

abus

ing

subs

tanc

es, s

uch

as

drug

s, c

hem

ical

and

psy

cho-

activ

e su

bsta

nces

, bro

ught

un

der

spec

ializ

ed tr

eatm

ent

faci

litie

s in

spec

ted

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

prim

ary

heal

th c

are

and

med

icin

es

para

med

ical

per

sonn

el, h

ospi

tal b

eds

and

othe

r pr

imar

y he

alth

-car

e fa

cilit

ies

ex

tend

ed a

cces

s to

affo

rdab

le h

ealth

ca

re, i

nclu

ding

ess

entia

l dru

gs,*

on

a s

usta

inab

le b

asis

-su

mer

pric

e ra

tio o

f 30

sel

ecte

d es

sent

ial

med

icin

es in

pub

lic a

nd p

rivat

e he

alth

fa

cilit

ies

insu

ranc

e

by ta

rget

gro

up (

disc

rimin

atio

n te

stin

g su

rvey

s)

acce

ssin

g as

sist

ive

devi

ces

med

icin

es m

et th

roug

h in

tern

atio

nal a

id

Ou

tco

me

low

birt

hwei

ght

rate

s*

child

ren

unde

r fiv

e ye

ars

of

age*

dise

ases

and

dis

abili

ties

caus

ed b

y un

safe

nat

ural

and

oc

cupa

tiona

l env

ironm

ent

no

n-co

mm

unic

able

dis

ease

s (e

.g.,

HIV

/AID

S, m

alar

ia, t

uber

culo

sis*

)

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 4

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t n

ot

to b

e s

ub

ject

ed

to

to

rtu

re o

r to

cru

el,

in

hu

ma

n o

r d

eg

rad

ing

tre

atm

en

t o

r p

un

ish

me

nt

(Un

ive

rsa

l D

ecl

ara

tio

n o

f H

um

an

Rig

hts

, a

rt.

5)

Phys

ica

l a

nd

men

tal in

teg

rity

of

deta

ined

or

imp

riso

ned

pers

on

sC

on

ditio

ns

of

dete

ntio

nU

se o

f fo

rce b

y la

w e

nfo

rcem

en

t o

ffic

ials

ou

tsid

e d

ete

ntio

nC

om

mu

nity

an

d d

om

est

ic v

iole

nce

Str

uct

ura

l

on

hum

an b

eing

s

of

arr

este

d, d

etai

ned

and

impr

ison

ed p

erso

ns

and

pris

ons

by in

depe

nden

t ins

pect

ion

inst

itutio

ns

le

gisl

atio

n on

com

mun

ity a

nd d

omes

tic v

iole

nce

viol

ence

, inc

ludi

ng w

omen

and

chi

ldre

n

Pro

cess

an

d th

e pr

opor

tion

of th

ese

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

arre

st, d

eten

tion,

inte

rrog

atio

n or

pun

ishm

ent

pers

ons

in fa

cilit

ies

insp

ecte

d by

an

inde

pend

ent b

ody

in th

e re

porti

ng

perio

d

inve

stig

ated

for

phys

ical

and

non

-ph

ysic

al a

buse

or

crim

e on

det

aine

d or

impr

ison

ed p

erso

ns (

incl

udin

g to

rture

and

dis

prop

ortio

nate

use

of

forc

e) in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

cust

odia

l sta

ff re

sulti

ng in

dis

cipl

inar

y ac

tion

or p

rose

cutio

n

pr

opor

tion

of p

rison

cap

acity

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith re

leva

nt U

nite

d N

atio

ns in

stru

men

ts o

n pr

ison

co

nditi

ons

im

pris

oned

per

sons

in a

ccom

mo-

datio

n m

eetin

g le

gally

stip

ulat

ed

requ

irem

ents

(e.

g., d

rinki

ng w

ater

, cu

bic

cont

ent o

f air,

min

imum

floo

r sp

ace,

hea

ting)

rele

vant

sta

ff pe

r in

mat

e

pris

ons

with

faci

litie

s to

seg

rega

te

pers

ons

in c

usto

dy (

by s

ex, a

ge,

accu

sed,

sen

tenc

ed, c

rimin

al c

ases

, m

enta

l hea

lth, i

mm

igra

tion-

rela

ted

or o

ther

)

offic

ials

form

ally

inve

stig

ated

for

phys

ical

and

non

-phy

sica

l abu

se

or c

rime

(incl

udin

g to

rture

and

di

spro

porti

onat

e us

e of

forc

e) in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

law

enf

orce

men

t offi

cial

s re

sulti

ng in

di

scip

linar

y ac

tion

or p

rose

cutio

n

of a

ppre

hend

ing

pers

ons

whe

re

a fir

earm

was

dis

char

ged

by la

w

enfo

rcem

ent o

ffici

als

aw

aren

ess

cam

paig

ns o

n vi

olen

ce a

gain

st w

omen

an

d ch

ildre

n (e

.g.,

viol

ence

by

intim

ate

partn

ers,

gen

ital

mut

ilatio

n, ra

pe)

pr

ofes

sion

als

train

ed in

han

dlin

g do

mes

tic v

iole

nce

issu

es

phys

ical

vio

lenc

e ag

ains

t chi

ldre

n

actio

n, p

rose

cute

d fo

r ph

ysic

al a

nd n

on-p

hysi

cal a

buse

of

chi

ldre

n

(phy

sica

l, se

xual

or

psyc

holo

gica

l) ag

ains

t the

mse

lves

or

thei

r ch

ildre

n in

itiat

ing

lega

l act

ion

or s

eeki

ng h

elp

from

po

lice

or c

ouns

ellin

g ce

ntre

s

or s

ervi

ng s

ente

nce

for

viol

ent c

rime

(incl

udin

g ho

mic

ide,

ra

pe, a

ssau

lt) p

er 1

00

,00

0 p

opul

atio

n in

the

repo

rting

pe

riod

Ou

tco

me

non-

com

mun

icab

le d

isea

ses

(e.g

., H

IV/A

IDS,

mal

aria

and

tube

rcul

osis

,* m

enta

l im

pairm

ent)

in c

usto

dy

prol

onge

d so

litar

y co

nfine

men

t

sent

ence

d to

dea

th /

inca

rcer

ated

in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

inju

ry re

sulti

ng fr

om a

rres

ts o

r ot

her

acts

of a

ppre

hend

ing

pers

ons

by la

w

enfo

rcem

ent o

ffici

als

in th

e re

porti

ng

perio

d

patie

nts

who

exp

erie

nced

cor

pora

l pun

ishm

ent i

n sc

hool

s an

d m

edic

al in

stitu

tions

to c

omm

unity

and

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e (in

clud

ing

hom

icid

e,

rape

, ass

ault)

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

tole

ranc

e or

acq

uies

cenc

e, b

ut w

ithou

t any

or

due

judi

cial

pro

cess

(e.

g., a

s re

porte

d to

the

Spec

ial R

appo

rteur

s on

tortu

re/

viol

ence

aga

inst

wom

en),

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets



Tab

le 5

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

pa

rtic

ipa

te i

n p

ub

lic

aff

air

s (U

niv

ers

al

De

cla

rati

on

of

Hu

ma

n R

igh

ts,

art

. 2

1)

Exe

rcis

e o

f leg

isla

tive

,exe

cutive

an

d a

dm

inis

tra

tive

po

wers

Un

ivers

al a

nd

eq

ua

l su

ffra

ge

Acc

ess

to

pu

blic

serv

ice p

osi

tio

ns

Str

uct

ura

l

and

asse

mbl

y

to th

e rig

ht to

par

ticip

ate

in p

ublic

affa

irs a

t nat

iona

l and

loca

l lev

els

guar

ante

eing

acc

ess

to p

ublic

ser

vice

pos

ition

s w

ithou

t di

scrim

inat

ion

tribu

nals

or

dedi

cate

d ju

dici

al re

dres

s m

echa

nism

for

publ

ic s

ervi

ce m

atte

rs

Pro

cess

mec

hani

sms

and

the

prop

ortio

n of

thes

e re

spon

ded

to e

ffect

ivel

y by

the

Gov

ernm

ent

re

fere

ndum

) he

ld d

urin

g th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

legi

slat

ures

dur

ing

the

repo

rting

per

iod

elec

ted

bodi

es h

eld

as p

er th

e sc

hedu

le la

id d

own

by

cons

titut

iona

l or

stat

utor

y bo

dies

and

subn

atio

nal l

evel

s m

et th

roug

h pu

blic

fund

ing

w

as in

terr

upte

d, b

y ty

pe o

f int

erru

ptio

n

mem

bers

hip

of n

atio

nal p

oliti

cal p

artie

s or

pre

sent

ed

as c

andi

date

for

elec

tion

inte

rfer

ence

) w

ith re

gist

ratio

n, m

aint

enan

ce a

nd re

view

of

elec

tora

l rol

ls

addr

esse

d in

the

elec

tion

proc

ess

by n

atio

nal a

nd

subn

atio

nal e

lect

oral

aut

horit

ies

su

bnat

iona

l ele

ctio

ns s

pent

on

vote

r ed

ucat

ion

and

regi

stra

tion

cam

paig

ns

at n

atio

nal l

evel

po

litic

al p

artie

s

natio

nal a

nd s

ubna

tiona

l lev

els

fille

d th

roug

h se

lect

ion

of

wom

en a

nd c

andi

date

s fro

m ta

rget

pop

ulat

ion

grou

ps

dedi

cate

d ju

dici

al re

dres

s m

echa

nism

for

publ

ic s

ervi

ce

mat

ters

adj

udic

ated

dur

ing

the

repo

rting

per

iod

natio

nals

or

citiz

ens

Ou

tco

me

bodi

es a

t sub

natio

nal a

nd lo

cal l

evel

s he

ld b

y w

omen

an

d m

embe

rs o

f tar

get g

roup

s

by

sex

and

targ

et g

roup

to

nat

iona

l and

sub

natio

nal l

egis

latu

res

or

pos

ition

on

acco

unt o

f dis

crim

inat

ion

an

d m

embe

rs o

f tar

get g

roup

s

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 6

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

ed

uca

tio

n (

Un

ive

rsa

l D

ecl

ara

tio

n o

f H

um

an

Rig

hts

, a

rt.

26

)

Un

ivers

al p

rim

ary

ed

uca

tio

nA

ccess

ibility

to s

eco

nd

ary

an

d

hig

her

ed

uca

tio

nC

urr

icu

la a

nd

ed

uca

tio

na

l re

sou

rces

Ed

uca

tio

na

l o

pp

ort

un

ity

an

d f

reed

om

Str

uct

ura

l

educ

atio

nal i

nstit

utio

ns b

arrie

r-fre

e an

d in

clus

ive

educ

atio

n (e

.g.,

child

ren

with

dis

abili

ties,

chi

ldre

n in

det

entio

n, m

igra

nt c

hild

ren,

indi

geno

us c

hild

ren)

plan

of

act

ion

adop

ted

by S

tate

par

ty to

im

plem

ent t

he p

rinci

ple

of c

ompu

lsor

y pr

imar

y ed

ucat

ion

free

of c

harg

e fo

r al

l

educ

atio

n an

d m

inim

um a

ge fo

r s

choo

l ad

mis

sion

(e.g

., w

orki

ng a

nd s

treet

chi

ldre

n)

Pro

cess

th

e pr

opor

tion

of th

ese

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

of p

ublic

exp

endi

ture

on

educ

atio

n*

grou

p, in

clud

ing

child

ren

with

dis

abili

ties

grad

e fo

r ta

rget

gro

ups

prim

ary

scho

ols

co

vere

d un

der

publ

icly

sup

porte

d pr

ogra

mm

es o

r in

cent

ives

for

prim

ary

educ

atio

n

char

ges

for

serv

ices

oth

er th

an tu

ition

fe

es

fully

qua

lified

and

trai

ned

in

thei

r m

othe

r to

ngue

at

tend

ed p

resc

hool

targ

et g

roup

high

er e

duca

tion

by ta

rget

gro

up

grad

e fo

r ta

rget

gro

ups

seco

ndar

y an

d hi

gher

edu

catio

n in

stitu

tions

educ

atio

n pe

r ch

ild e

nrol

led

in p

ublic

se

cond

ary

scho

ol o

r hi

gher

edu

catio

n-

ing

publ

ic s

uppo

rt or

gra

nt fo

r se

cond

ary

educ

atio

n

teac

hers

fully

qua

lified

and

trai

ned

educ

atio

n pr

ogra

mm

es a

t sec

onda

ry a

nd

post

-seco

ndar

y le

vel

conf

orm

ing

to n

atio

nal r

equi

rem

ents

on

acad

emic

and

phy

sica

l fac

ilitie

s

leve

ls

leve

l rec

ogni

zed

or d

erec

ogni

zed

by

regu

lato

ry b

ody

durin

g th

e re

porti

ng

perio

d

perc

enta

ge o

f reg

ulat

ed m

inim

um w

age

com

plet

ing

man

dato

ry in

-serv

ice

train

ing

durin

g re

porti

ng p

erio

d

seco

ndar

y, p

ublic

and

priv

ate

educ

atio

n

enga

ged

in “

activ

e le

arni

ng”

by b

asic

edu

catio

n pr

ogra

mm

es

in d

ista

nce

and

cont

inui

ng e

duca

tion

prog

ram

mes

min

ority

and

relig

ious

pop

ulat

ion

grou

ps

reco

gniz

ed o

r gi

ven

publ

ic s

uppo

rt

enha

ncin

g sk

ills

at p

ublic

or

subs

idiz

ed

inst

itutio

ns

enjo

ying

man

ager

ial a

nd a

cade

mic

au

tono

my

10

0 p

opul

atio

n*

Ou

tco

me

ed

ucat

ion*

by

grad

e fo

r ta

rget

gro

ups

1

who

reac

h gr

ade

5 (

prim

ary

com

plet

ion

rate

)*

atte

ndin

g pr

imar

y sc

hool

educ

atio

n* b

y gr

ade

educ

atio

n (s

econ

dary

com

plet

ion

rate

)

degr

ee)

per

100

0 p

opul

atio

n

seco

ndar

y an

d hi

gher

edu

catio

n fa

cilit

ies

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

dpo

pula

tion

with

pro

fess

iona

l or

univ

ersi

ty

qual

ifica

tion

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 7

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

ad

eq

ua

te h

ou

sin

g (

Un

ive

rsa

l D

ecl

ara

tio

n o

f H

um

an

Rig

hts

, a

rt.

25

)

Ha

bita

bility

Acc

ess

ibility

to s

erv

ices

Ho

usi

ng

aff

ord

ab

ility

Secu

rity

of

ten

ure

Str

uct

ura

l

for

targ

et g

roup

s, fo

r th

e rig

ht to

ade

quat

e ho

usin

g at

diff

eren

t lev

els

of g

over

nmen

t

of le

gisl

atio

n on

sec

urity

of t

enur

e, e

qual

in

herit

ance

and

pro

tect

ion

agai

nst

forc

ed e

vict

ion

Pro

cess

and

the

prop

ortio

n of

thes

e re

spon

ded

effe

ctiv

ely

to b

y th

e G

over

nmen

t

villa

ges)

bro

ught

und

er th

e pr

ovis

ions

of

bui

ldin

g co

des

and

by-la

ws

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

or c

omm

unity

hou

sing

recl

amat

ion,

incl

udin

g of

haz

ardo

us s

ites

and

chan

ge in

land

-use

pat

tern

, in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

ea

rmar

ked

for

soci

al o

r co

mm

unity

ho

usin

g du

ring

the

repo

rting

per

iod

and

mai

nten

ance

of s

anita

tion,

wat

er

supp

ly, e

lect

ricity

and

oth

er s

ervi

ces

of h

omes

was

ext

ende

d su

stai

nabl

e ac

cess

to a

n im

prov

ed w

ater

sou

rce,

* im

prov

ed

sani

tatio

n,*

ele

ctric

ity a

nd w

aste

dis

posa

l in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

publ

ic h

ousi

ng a

ssis

tanc

e, in

clud

ing

thos

e liv

ing

in s

ubsi

dize

d re

ntal

and

sub

sidi

zed

owne

r-occ

upie

d ho

usin

g

in s

quat

ter

settl

emen

ts re

habi

litat

ed in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

used

pub

lic o

r co

mm

unity

-bas

ed s

helte

rs

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

re

late

d to

hou

sing

and

land

rig

hts

in c

ourts

an

d tri

buna

ls

aim

ed a

t pre

vent

ing

plan

ned

evic

tions

or

dem

oliti

ons

orde

red

by c

ourts

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

seek

ing

com

pens

atio

n fo

llow

ing

evic

tions

in

the

repo

rting

per

iod,

by

resu

lt af

ter

adju

dica

tion

evic

ted

pers

ons

reha

bilit

ated

or

rese

ttled

in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

Ou

tco

me

liv

ing

spac

e (p

erso

ns p

er ro

om o

r ro

oms

per

hous

ehol

d) o

r av

erag

e nu

mbe

r of

pe

rson

s pe

r ro

om a

mon

g ta

rget

ho

useh

olds

pe

rman

ent s

truct

ure

in c

ompl

ianc

e w

ith

build

ing

code

s an

d by

-law

s

haza

rdou

s co

nditi

ons

in

slu

ms*

impr

oved

drin

king

wat

er (

publ

ic /

priv

ate)

so

urce

, san

itatio

n fa

cilit

y, e

lect

ricity

and

w

aste

dis

posa

l

popu

latio

n gr

oups

spe

nt o

n w

ater

sup

ply,

sa

nita

tion,

ele

ctric

ity a

nd w

aste

dis

posa

l

than

“X”

per

cen

t of t

heir

mon

thly

inco

me

or e

xpen

ditu

re o

n ho

usin

g or

ave

rage

re

nt o

f bot

tom

thre

e in

com

e de

cile

s as

a

prop

ortio

n of

the

top

thre

e

per

100

,00

0 p

opul

atio

n

(“X”

bei

ng d

efine

d no

rmat

ivel

y fo

r th

e na

tiona

l con

text

)

(e

.g.,

as re

porte

d to

the

spec

ial

proc

edur

es),

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

enfo

rcea

ble,

con

tract

ual,

stat

utor

y or

oth

er

prot

ectio

n pr

ovid

ing

secu

rity

of te

nure

or

prop

ortio

n of

hou

seho

lds

with

acc

ess

to

secu

re te

nure

prop

erty

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 8

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

wo

rk (

Un

ive

rsa

l D

ecl

ara

tio

n o

f H

um

an

Rig

hts

, a

rt.

23

)

Acc

ess

to

dece

nt

an

d p

rod

uct

ive w

ork

Just

an

d s

afe

wo

rkin

g c

on

ditio

ns

Tra

inin

g,

skill u

pg

rad

ing

an

d

pro

fess

ion

al d

eve

lop

men

tPro

tect

ion

fro

m f

orc

ed

la

bo

ur

an

d

un

em

plo

ymen

t

Str

uct

ura

l

disc

rimin

atio

n as

wel

l as

(tem

pora

ry)

spec

ial m

easu

res

for

targ

et g

roup

s (e

.g.,

wom

en, c

hild

ren,

indi

geno

us p

erso

ns, m

igra

nts)

heal

thy

wor

king

con

ditio

ns, i

nclu

ding

an

envi

ronm

ent f

ree

of s

exua

l har

assm

ent,

and

esta

blis

h-in

g an

inde

pend

ent m

onito

ring

body

and

prop

ortio

n of

wag

es p

aid

in c

over

ed p

erio

d

polic

y on

voc

atio

nal e

duca

tion

and

skill

up

grad

ing

spec

ializ

ed p

ublic

age

ncie

s to

ass

ist

indi

vidu

als

in fi

ndin

g em

ploy

men

t

rais

ing

prog

ram

me

on la

bour

sta

ndar

ds

the

elim

inat

ion

of fo

rced

labo

ur, i

nclu

d-in

g w

orst

form

s of

chi

ld la

bour

, dom

estic

w

ork

and

wor

k of

mig

rant

s an

d hu

man

tra

ffick

ing

Pro

cess

om

buds

pers

on o

r ot

her

mec

hani

sms

(e.g

., IL

O p

roce

dure

s, tr

ade

unio

ns)

and

the

prop

ortio

n of

thes

e re

spon

ded

to e

ffect

ivel

y by

the

Gov

ernm

ent

ef

fect

ive

supp

ort t

o (r

e)en

ter

the

labo

ur m

arke

t

rate

s), b

y ed

ucat

ion

leve

l

fam

ily c

are

wor

k as

wel

l as

on u

npai

d w

ork

in

fam

ily b

usin

ess

by w

omen

, men

and

chi

ldre

n

for

certi

fied

child

care

arr

ange

men

ts

(e.g

., ki

nder

garte

n) re

view

ed a

nd m

et in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

bein

g in

vite

d to

an

inte

rvie

w, b

y ta

rget

gro

up

(e.g

., IL

O d

iscr

imin

atio

n te

stin

g su

rvey

s)

insp

ecte

d fo

r co

nfor

mity

with

labo

ur

stan

dard

s an

d pr

opor

tion

of

insp

ectio

ns re

sulti

ng in

adm

inis

trativ

e ac

tion

or p

rose

cutio

n

dom

estic

wor

kers

, who

se s

alar

y le

vel

is c

over

ed b

y le

gisl

atio

n (e

.g.,

min

imum

w

age)

and

/or

nego

tiatio

n in

volv

ing

soci

al p

artn

ers

(uni

ons)

prec

ario

us to

sta

ble

cont

ract

s du

ring

the

repo

rting

per

iod

jo

b tra

inin

g

invo

lved

in s

kill

upgr

adin

g an

d ot

her

train

ing

prog

ram

mes

, inc

ludi

ng p

ublic

ly

finan

ced

jobs

enro

lmen

t rat

ios

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

shift

ed to

form

al s

ecto

r em

ploy

men

t in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

activ

ity

the

info

rmal

sec

tor

rece

ivin

g so

me

publ

ic

supp

ort

pe

rson

s co

vere

d by

une

mpl

oym

ent /

so

cial

sec

urity

ben

efits

Ou

tco

me

targ

et g

roup

and

edu

catio

n le

vel

tota

l par

t-tim

e em

ploy

ed p

opul

atio

n

in th

e no

n-ag

ricul

tura

l sec

tor*

em

ploy

men

t (e.

g., s

hort-

, fixe

d-te

rm, c

asua

l, se

ason

al w

orke

rs)

incl

udin

g ac

ts o

f vio

lenc

e, p

erso

nal

inju

ry, d

isea

se o

r de

ath

(o

r ot

her

targ

et g

roup

s), b

y se

ctor

(e.g

., se

nior

offi

cial

s, m

anag

eria

l pos

i-tio

ns in

pub

lic/p

rivat

e se

rvic

e) h

eld

by

wom

en a

nd m

embe

rs o

f oth

er ta

rget

gr

oups

sk

ill u

pgra

ding

and

oth

er tr

aini

ng

prog

ram

mes

, inc

ludi

ng p

ublic

ly

finan

ced

jobs

or m

ore

of u

nem

ploy

men

t), b

y se

x,

targ

et g

roup

or

regi

on

educ

atio

n

grou

p an

d le

vel o

f edu

catio

n (la

bour

fo

rce

surv

ey (

LFS)

/reg

iste

red)

wor

st fo

rms

of c

hild

labo

ur, d

omes

tic

wor

k an

d w

ork

of m

igra

nts

and

hum

an

traffi

ckin

g

right

to w

ork,

incl

udin

g fo

rced

labo

ur,

disc

rimin

atio

n an

d un

law

ful t

erm

inat

ion

of e

mpl

oym

ent a

nd p

ropo

rtion

of v

ictim

s w

ho re

ceiv

ed a

dequ

ate

com

pens

atio

n

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 9

Illu

stra

tiv

e i

nd

ica

tors

on

th

e r

igh

t to

so

cia

l se

curi

ty (

Un

ive

rsa

l D

ecl

ara

tio

n o

f H

um

an

Rig

hts

, a

rt.

22

)

Inco

me s

ecu

rity

fo

r w

ork

ers

Aff

ord

ab

le a

ccess

to

hea

lth

ca

reFa

mily,

ch

ild

an

d

dep

en

den

t-ad

ult s

up

po

rtTa

rgete

d s

oci

al a

ssis

tan

ce s

chem

es

Str

uct

ura

l

mat

erni

ty, p

ater

nity

, dis

abili

ty o

r in

valid

ity, s

urvi

vors

and

orp

hans

, hea

lth c

are

(incl

udin

g re

prod

uctiv

e he

alth

car

e), a

nd fa

mily

and

chi

ld s

uppo

rt

in

sura

nce

or ta

x-ba

sed

soci

al s

ecur

ity s

chem

e

cont

ribut

ion,

dur

atio

n (e

.g.,

leng

th o

f mat

erni

ty

leav

e) a

nd ra

te o

f ben

efits

und

er d

iffer

ent

sche

mes

inte

rnat

iona

l agr

eem

ents

on

expo

rt of

soc

ial

secu

rity

bene

fits

(incl

udin

g on

dou

ble

taxa

tion)

to

cou

ntry

of o

rigin

for

mig

rant

wor

kers

an

d fa

mili

es

re

gula

tion

on m

anda

tory

hea

lth in

sura

nce

heal

th a

nd a

cces

s to

hea

lth c

are,

incl

udin

g fo

r re

prod

uctiv

e he

alth

and

for

pers

ons

with

dis

abili

ties

on d

rugs

, inc

ludi

ng o

n ge

neric

dru

gs

of p

ublic

sup

port

for

fam

ilies

, in

clud

ing

sing

le-p

aren

t fam

ilies

, ch

ildre

n an

d de

pend

ent a

dults

rate

of c

ontri

butio

n, d

urat

ion

and

rate

of

allo

wan

ces

assi

stan

ce p

rogr

amm

es a

nd

non-

cont

ribut

ory

sche

mes

for

pers

ons

in s

peci

fic s

ituat

ions

of n

eed

(e.g

., ID

Ps, r

efug

ees,

war

vic

tims,

lo

ng-te

rm u

nem

ploy

ed p

erso

ns,

hom

eles

s pe

rson

s)

polic

y on

une

mpl

oym

ent

Pro

cess

m

echa

nism

s an

d th

e pr

opor

tion

of th

ese

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

parti

cipa

nt in

the

soci

al s

ecur

ity s

chem

e in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

(e

.g.,

unem

ploy

men

t ben

efit,

pens

ion)

re

view

ed a

nd m

et in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

soci

al s

ecur

ity o

blig

atio

ns o

f ent

erpr

ises

ef

fect

ivel

y re

spon

ded

to b

y G

over

nmen

t or

rele

vant

soc

ial s

ecur

ity a

genc

y

dom

estic

soc

ial s

ecur

ity re

gula

tions

and

pr

opor

tion

ther

eof s

ubje

cted

to a

dmin

istra

tive

actio

n or

pro

secu

tion

heal

th fa

cilit

ies

(incl

udin

g fo

r re

prod

uctiv

e he

alth

car

e) a

nd e

ssen

tial m

edic

ines

re

gist

ered

as

parti

cipa

nt in

the

heal

th

insu

ranc

e sy

stem

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

heal

th g

oods

and

ser

vice

s co

vere

d by

hea

lth

insu

ranc

e /

publ

ic s

uppo

rt

pers

onne

l*

of m

edic

al a

nd p

aram

edic

al p

erso

nnel

and

re

leva

nt h

ealth

-car

e fa

cilit

ies

and

depe

nden

t-adu

lt al

low

ance

or

bene

fit s

chem

es p

er b

enefi

ciar

y

(food

, hea

lth, d

ay c

are,

edu

catio

n,

hous

ing)

on

child

ren

and

depe

nden

t ad

ults

cov

ered

by

publ

ic s

uppo

rt

child

care

cen

tres

and

nurs

ing

hom

es

for

the

targ

eted

pop

ulat

ion

or re

gion

s in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

assi

stan

ce s

chem

es p

er b

enefi

ciar

y

adm

inis

trativ

e of

fices

and

per

sonn

el

prov

idin

g ta

rget

ed s

ocia

l ass

ista

nce

assi

stan

ce (

e.g.

, inc

ome

trans

fer,

subs

idiz

ed h

ousi

ng, d

isas

ter

relie

f) re

view

ed a

nd m

et

Ou

tco

me

soci

al s

ecur

ity s

chem

e(s)

secu

rity

who

requ

este

d an

d re

ceiv

ed s

ocia

l se

curit

y be

nefit

s in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

insu

ranc

e (p

ublic

or

priv

ate)

heal

th-c

are

serv

ices

dur

ing

the

past

12

mon

ths

for

econ

omic

reas

ons,

by

serv

ice

(e.g

., de

ntal

ca

re, m

edic

al c

onsu

ltatio

n, d

rugs

, sur

gery

)

ch

ildre

n an

d de

pend

ent a

dults

re

ceiv

ing

publ

ic s

uppo

rtsi

tuat

ions

of n

eed

rece

ivin

g so

cial

as

sist

ance

for

food

, hou

sing

, hea

lth

care

, edu

catio

n, e

mer

genc

y or

relie

f se

rvic

es

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 1

0Th

e r

igh

t to

fre

ed

om

of

op

inio

n a

nd

ex

pre

ssio

n (

Un

ive

rsa

l D

ecl

ara

tio

n o

f H

um

an

Rig

hts

, a

rt.

19

)

Freed

om

of

op

inio

n a

nd

to

im

pa

rt in

form

atio

nA

ccess

to

in

form

atio

nSp

eci

al d

uties

an

d r

esp

on

sib

ilitie

s

Str

uct

ura

l

to

rest

rict i

t

of th

e m

edia

, inc

ludi

ng d

ecrim

inal

izat

ion

of li

bel,

defa

mat

ion

and

slan

der

of jo

urna

lists

and

any

oth

er m

edia

per

sons

, inc

ludi

ng p

rote

ctio

n ag

ains

t dis

clos

ure

of s

ourc

es

acce

ss to

radi

o co

nces

sion

s an

d TV

bro

adca

st fr

eque

ncie

s

prov

isio

ns fo

r te

mpo

rary

spe

cial

mea

sure

s fo

r ta

rget

gro

ups,

hum

an r

ight

s cu

rric

ula

and

“act

ive

lear

ning

”

acce

ss to

info

rmat

ion

mec

hani

sm (

e.g.

, inf

orm

atio

n co

mm

issi

oner

)

legi

slat

ion

to p

rote

ct in

depe

nden

ce a

nd q

ualit

y of

of

ficia

l sta

tistic

s

acce

ss to

info

rmat

ion

tech

nolo

gy

co

vera

ge o

f dom

estic

law

pr

ohib

iting

pro

paga

nda

for

war

co

vera

ge o

f dom

estic

law

(s)

proh

ibiti

ng a

dvoc

acy

of n

atio

nal,

raci

al, r

elig

ious

or

sexi

st h

atre

d co

nstit

utin

g in

cite

men

t to

disc

rimin

atio

n, h

ostil

ity o

r vi

olen

ce

Pro

cess

m

echa

nism

s an

d th

e pr

opor

tion

of th

ese

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

owne

rshi

p (p

ublic

or

priv

ate)

and

aud

ienc

e fig

ures

and

refu

sed

by a

n in

depe

nden

t com

petit

ion

com

mis

sion

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

or c

enso

red

by re

gula

tory

aut

horit

ies

adju

dica

ted

and

appr

oved

by

cour

ts o

r ot

her

com

pete

nt m

echa

nism

s

grou

ps re

cogn

ized

or

give

n pu

blic

sup

port

-tie

s

to e

xpre

ss th

emse

lves

free

ly

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

mai

n re

gion

al n

ewsp

aper

s

broa

dcas

ts

acce

ss p

er 1

00

pop

ulat

ion*

10

00

pop

ulat

ion

alle

ged

libel

, def

amat

ion

and

slan

der

inve

stig

ated

and

resu

lting

in

con

vict

ion

agai

nst p

ropa

gand

a fo

r w

ar

inve

stig

ated

and

resu

lting

in

con

vict

ion

agai

nst a

dvoc

acy

of n

atio

nal,

raci

al, r

elig

ious

or

sexi

st h

atre

d in

vest

igat

ed a

nd re

sulti

ng

in c

onvi

ctio

n

Ou

tco

me

po

litic

al o

r co

rpor

ate

pres

sure

for

the

publ

icat

ion

of in

form

atio

nar

chiv

es a

nd a

dmin

istra

tive

or c

orpo

rate

dat

a of

pub

lic

inte

rest

(e.

g., j

ustic

e re

cord

s, a

rms

expo

rts,

envi

ronm

enta

l dat

a, a

sylu

m s

eeke

rs)

-in

g ac

cess

to m

edia

bro

adca

sts

in th

eir

own

lang

uage

de

fam

atio

n or

sla

nder

who

re

ceiv

ed c

ompe

nsat

ion

and

reha

bilit

atio

n

pe

rpet

rate

d by

an

agen

t of t

he S

tate

or

any

othe

r pe

rson

act

ing

unde

r its

aut

horit

y or

with

its

com

plic

ity, t

oler

ance

or

acqu

iesc

ence

, but

with

out a

ny o

r du

e ju

dici

al p

roce

ss (

e.g.

, rep

orte

d to

Uni

ted

Nat

ions

spe

cial

pro

cedu

res)

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 1

1Il

lust

rati

ve

in

dic

ato

rs o

n t

he

rig

ht

to a

fa

ir t

ria

l (U

niv

ers

al

De

cla

rati

on

of

Hu

ma

n R

igh

ts,

art

s. 1

0-1

1)

Acc

ess

to

an

d

eq

ua

lity

befo

re c

ou

rts

an

d t

rib

un

als

Pu

blic

hea

rin

g b

y co

mp

ete

nt

an

d

ind

ep

en

den

t co

urt

s

Pre

sum

ptio

n o

f in

no

cen

ce a

nd

g

ua

ran

tees

in t

he d

ete

rmin

atio

n

of

crim

ina

l ch

arg

es

Sp

eci

al p

rote

ctio

n f

or

child

ren

Revi

ew

b

y a

hig

her

cou

rt

Str

uct

ura

lof

legi

slat

ion

guar

ante

eing

non

-di

scrim

inat

ory

acce

ss to

cou

rts (

e.g.

, fo

r un

acco

mpa

nied

wom

en, c

hild

ren

and

mig

rant

s), i

nclu

ding

pro

visi

on o

f le

gal a

id

of re

view

of c

ivil

and

crim

inal

pr

oced

ure

code

s

polic

y on

judi

cial

ser

vice

s, in

clud

ing

on

stre

ngth

enin

g co

urts

, aga

inst

ext

ortio

n,

brib

ery

or c

orru

ptio

n

of re

gula

tory

bod

ies

for

judi

cial

and

le

gal p

rofe

ssio

n

guid

e pr

etria

l and

tria

l sta

ges

in th

e de

term

inat

ion

of c

harg

es a

gain

st a

pe

rson

polic

y on

the

prov

isio

n of

lega

l aid

to

spec

ific

popu

latio

n gr

oups

-ag

e of

juve

nile

cou

rt

cove

rage

of r

ehab

ilita

tion

syst

ems

for

child

ren

invo

lved

in c

rime

re

spon

sibi

lity

and

cove

rage

of t

he r

ight

to

app

eal t

o a

high

er

cour

t and

full

revi

ew

of le

gal a

nd m

ater

ial

aspe

cts

of p

erso

n’s

conv

ictio

n an

d se

nten

ce

Pro

cess

of th

ese

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

hour

(s)

of a

fully

func

tioni

ng c

ourt

or

num

ber

of p

erso

ns w

ith ju

dici

al

func

tions

per

10

0,0

00

pop

ulat

ion

as

sist

ance

and

free

inte

rpre

ters

bei

ng

met

(cr

imin

al a

nd c

ivil

proc

eedi

ngs)

an

nual

ly

alte

rnat

ive

disp

ute

reso

lutio

n

phys

ical

ass

aults

, dom

estic

vio

lenc

e)

repo

rted

to th

e po

lice

(vic

timiz

atio

n su

rvey

)

to c

ourt

by p

olic

e w

ho c

onfir

m c

harg

es

or a

ppea

r at

pro

ceed

ings

with

the

cour

t or

pro

secu

tors

fu

nctio

ns (

e.g.

, jud

ges

and

pros

ecut

ors)

form

ally

inve

stig

ated

for

brea

ch o

f dut

y, ir

regu

larit

y, a

buse

(e.

g.,

corr

uptio

n)

pers

ons

with

judi

cial

func

tions

resu

lting

in

dis

cipl

inar

y ac

tion

or p

rose

cutio

n

mili

tary

cou

rts o

r sp

ecia

l cou

rts

com

plet

ed b

y pe

rson

with

judi

cial

fu

nctio

ns a

t diff

eren

t lev

els

of ju

dici

ary

and

pros

ecut

ion

syst

em

func

tions

as

perc

enta

ge o

f reg

ulat

ed

min

imum

wag

es

arre

sted

per

sons

bef

ore

rece

ivin

g no

tice

of th

e ch

arge

(in

a le

gal s

ense

an

d in

lang

uage

they

und

erst

and)

ex

ceed

ed s

tatu

tory

or

man

date

d lim

it

who

rate

ser

vice

s an

d co

urt a

s hi

ghly

ac

cess

ible

in th

eir

own

lang

uage

(co

urt

user

sur

vey)

to a

dequ

ate

faci

litie

s, a

law

yer

or le

gal

aid

for

thei

r de

fenc

e

aver

age

dura

tion

of c

rimin

al tr

ials

arre

st a

nd tr

ial e

xcee

ded

stat

utor

y or

m

anda

ted

limit

and

arbi

trary

dis

mis

sal o

f per

sons

with

ju

dici

al fu

nctio

ns

de

fenc

e la

wye

rs w

orki

ng o

n ju

veni

le c

ases

with

spe

cial

ized

tra

inin

g in

juve

nile

just

ice

prov

ided

with

free

lega

l as

sist

ance

with

in

24

hou

rs o

f the

sta

rt of

cus

tody

rece

ivin

g ed

ucat

ion/

voca

tiona

l tra

inin

g by

trai

ned

teac

hers

for

sam

e ho

urs

as s

tude

nts

that

age

at

libe

rty

to h

andl

ing

juve

nile

cas

es

sent

ence

d to

impr

ison

men

t

reha

bilit

atio

n se

rvic

es a

fter

rele

ase

for

serio

us o

ffenc

es in

w

hich

the

pers

on

conv

icte

d re

ceiv

ed le

gal

assi

stan

ce to

con

side

r se

ekin

g re

view

by

high

er

cour

t/tri

buna

l

appe

aled

by

defe

ndan

ts o

r by

pr

osec

utor

s

whe

re th

e rig

ht to

ap

peal

is e

xclu

ded

or re

stric

ted

to s

peci

fic

issu

es o

f law

Ou

tco

me

prov

ided

with

lega

l rep

rese

ntat

ion

as

a pr

opor

tion

of c

onvi

ctio

n ra

tes

for

defe

ndan

ts w

ith la

wye

r of

thei

r ow

n ch

oice

ph

ysic

al a

ssau

lts)

brou

ght b

efor

e ju

dici

al a

utho

ritie

s

gene

ral p

ublic

whi

ch a

t lea

st o

ne ir

regu

larit

y in

the

pret

rial d

eter

min

atio

n of

cha

rges

was

no

ted

by th

e co

urts

abse

ntia

(in

who

le o

r in

par

t)

guilt

and

pre

judg

emen

t by

a co

urt o

r pu

blic

aut

horit

ies

(e.g

., ad

vers

e pu

blic

st

atem

ents

)

deta

ined

per

10

0,0

00

chi

ld

popu

latio

nco

nvic

tions

in w

hich

se

nten

ce w

as re

duce

d or

a c

rimin

al c

onvi

ctio

n va

cate

d or

retu

rned

for

retri

al o

r re

sent

enci

ng

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets



Tab

le 1

2Il

lust

rati

ve

in

dic

ato

rs o

n v

iole

nce

ag

ain

st w

om

en

(U

niv

ers

al

De

cla

rati

on

of

Hu

ma

n R

igh

ts,

art

s. 1

-5 a

nd

16

)

Sexu

al a

nd

rep

rod

uct

ive

hea

lth

an

d h

arm

ful tr

ad

itio

na

l p

ract

ices

Do

mest

ic v

iole

nce

Vio

len

ce a

t w

ork

, fo

rced

la

bo

ur

an

d t

raff

icki

ng

Co

mm

un

ity

vio

len

ce a

nd

ab

use

by

law

en

forc

em

en

t o

ffic

ials

Vio

len

ce a

nd

(p

ost

-)co

nfl

ict

an

d e

merg

en

cy s

itu

atio

ns

Str

uct

ura

lel

imin

ate

harm

ful t

radi

tiona

l pra

ctic

es,

incl

udin

g fe

mal

e ge

nita

l mut

ilatio

n,

early

or f

orce

d m

arria

ge, h

onou

r ki

lling

or m

aim

ing

and

foet

al se

x de

term

inat

ion

mar

riage

of le

gisla

tion

crim

inal

izin

g m

arita

l rap

e an

d in

cest

of le

gisla

tion

prot

ectin

g ge

nder

equ

ality

an

d w

omen

’s ab

ility

to le

ave

abus

ive

rela

tions

hips

(e.g

., eq

ual i

nher

itanc

e,

asse

t ow

ners

hip,

div

orce

)

prog

ram

me

agai

nst s

exua

l har

assm

ent

in th

e w

orkp

lace

com

bat t

raffi

ckin

g, se

xual

exp

loita

tion

and

forc

ed la

bour

and

pro

vide

pr

otec

tion

and

acce

ss to

rem

edy

for

vict

ims

legi

slatio

n de

finin

g ra

pe in

rela

tion

to a

la

ck o

f con

sent

rath

er th

an u

se o

f for

ce

com

bat c

omm

unity

vio

lenc

e an

d ab

use

by

polic

e fo

rces

polic

y or

pro

gram

me

to p

reve

nt o

r ad

dres

s sex

ual v

iole

nce

in c

onfli

ct,

post-

confl

ict o

r em

erge

ncy

situa

tions

mea

sure

s for

par

ticip

atio

n of

w

omen

in p

eace

pro

cess

es

Pro

cess

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

scho

ol c

urric

ulum

(b

y ty

pe o

f sen

tenc

e)

age

usin

g or

who

se p

artn

er is

usin

g co

ntra

cept

ion

and

effe

ctiv

e pr

even

tive

mea

sure

s aga

inst

sexu

ally

tran

smitt

ed

dise

ases

(e.g

., H

IV/A

IDS)

*

per 1

,000

wom

en o

f rep

rodu

ctiv

e ag

e

mar

riage

is b

elow

18

year

s**

lead

er p

ositi

ons (

e.g.

, rel

igio

us le

ader

) oc

cupi

ed b

y w

omen

dom

estic

vio

lenc

e to

law

enf

orce

men

t of

ficia

ls or

initi

atin

g le

gal a

ctio

n

and

refu

ges p

er 1

000

popu

latio

n (u

rban

and

rura

l)

thin

k th

at a

buse

or v

iole

nce

agai

nst

wom

en is

acc

epta

ble

or to

lera

ble

orga

niza

tions

insp

ecte

d fo

r con

form

ity

with

labo

ur st

anda

rds

sex

indu

stry

(e.g

., do

mes

tic w

orke

rs) s

hifte

d to

fo

rmal

sect

or e

mpl

oym

ent

soci

al w

ork,

psy

chol

ogy,

hea

lth (d

octo

rs,

nurs

es a

nd o

ther

s), e

duca

tion

(teac

hers

) co

mpl

etin

g a

core

cur

ricul

um o

n al

l for

ms o

f vi

olen

ce a

gain

st w

omen

acce

ss to

em

erge

ncy

cont

race

ptio

n or

safe

ab

ortio

n, p

roph

ylax

is fo

r sex

ually

tran

smit-

ted

infe

ctio

ns/H

IV

repo

rted

to th

e po

lice

(pop

ulat

ion

surv

ey)

enfo

rcem

ent o

ffici

als f

or c

ases

of v

iole

nce

agai

nst w

omen

resu

lting

in d

iscip

linar

y ac

tion

or p

rose

cutio

n

med

ical

man

agem

ent a

nd su

ppor

t fo

r vic

tims o

f sex

ual a

nd o

ther

vi

olen

ce

othe

r vio

lenc

e ac

cess

ing

appr

opria

te m

edic

al, p

sych

osoc

ial

and

lega

l ser

vice

s

sexu

al o

r oth

er v

iole

nce

whe

re

vict

ims (

or re

late

d th

ird p

artie

s)

initi

ated

lega

l act

ion

and

emer

genc

y as

sista

nce

devo

ted

to w

omen

and

chi

ld w

elfa

re

Ou

tco

me

fem

ale

geni

tal m

utila

tion*

*

-tio

n of

dea

ths d

ue to

uns

afe

abor

tions

-en

ced

phys

ical

and

/or s

exua

l vio

lenc

e by

cur

rent

or f

orm

er p

artn

er in

the

past

12 m

onth

s / d

urin

g lif

etim

e**

ps

ycho

logi

cal a

nd/o

r eco

nom

ic

viol

ence

by

thei

r int

imat

e pa

rtner

**

vict

ims o

f tra

ffick

ing

(with

in a

nd a

cros

s co

untri

es),

sexu

al e

xplo

itatio

n or

forc

ed

labo

ur

have

bee

n vi

ctim

s of s

exua

l abu

se/

hara

ssm

ent i

n th

e w

orkp

lace

-in

g un

safe

in p

ublic

pla

ces o

r lim

iting

thei

r ac

tiviti

es b

ecau

se o

f saf

ety

or h

aras

smen

t-

ence

d ph

ysic

al v

iole

nce

or ra

pe /

sexu

al

assa

ult d

urin

g th

e pa

st ye

ar [l

ifetim

e]**

(atte

mpt

ed o

r com

plet

ed) a

nd o

ther

in

cide

nts o

f vio

lenc

e ag

ains

t wom

en

that

occ

urre

d in

con

flict

, po

st-co

nflic

t or e

mer

genc

y sit

uatio

ns

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs*

* U

NEC

E in

dica

tor



Tab

le 1

3Il

lust

rati

ve

in

dic

ato

rs o

n t

he

rig

ht

to n

on

-dis

crim

ina

tio

n a

nd

eq

ua

lity

(U

niv

ers

al

De

cla

rati

on

of

Hu

ma

n R

igh

ts,

art

s. 1

, 2

an

d 7

)

Eq

ua

lity

befo

re t

he la

w a

nd

p

rote

ctio

n o

f p

ers

on

Dir

ect

or

ind

irect

dis

crim

ina

tio

n b

y p

ub

lic

an

d p

riva

te a

cto

rs n

ullif

yin

g o

r im

pa

irin

g

Sp

eci

al m

ea

sure

s,

incl

ud

ing

fo

r p

art

icip

atio

n

in d

eci

sio

n-m

aki

ng

acc

ess

to

an

ad

eq

ua

te s

tan

da

rd

of

livi

ng

, h

ea

lth

an

d e

du

catio

neq

ua

lity

of

live

lih

oo

d o

pp

ort

un

itie

s

Str

uct

ura

l

prog

ram

mes

to e

nsur

e eq

ual p

rote

ctio

n, s

ecur

ity

and

hand

ling

of c

rimes

(in

clud

ing

hate

crim

es

and

abus

e by

law

enf

orce

men

t offi

cial

s)

dom

estic

law

s en

surin

g eq

ual a

cces

s to

just

ice

and

treat

men

t inc

ludi

ng fo

r m

arrie

d, u

nmar

ried

coup

les,

sin

gle

pare

nts

and

othe

r ta

rget

gro

ups

prog

ram

me

for

equa

l acc

ess

to e

duca

tion

at a

ll le

vels

prog

ram

mes

to p

rovi

de p

rote

ctio

n fro

m

disc

rimin

ator

y pr

actic

es in

terf

erin

g w

ith

acce

ss to

food

, hea

lth, s

ocia

l sec

urity

an

d ho

usin

g

acce

ss to

dec

ent w

ork

el

imin

atio

n of

forc

ed la

bour

and

oth

er a

buse

at

wor

k, in

clud

ing

dom

estic

wor

k

impl

emen

t spe

cial

and

tem

pora

ry m

ea-

sure

s to

ens

ure

or a

ccel

erat

e eq

ualit

y in

th

e en

joym

ent o

f hum

an r

ight

s

of q

uota

s or

oth

er s

peci

al m

easu

res

for

targ

eted

pop

ulat

ions

in le

gisl

ativ

e,

exec

utiv

e, ju

dici

al a

nd o

ther

app

oint

ed

bodi

es

Pro

cess

dire

ct a

nd in

dire

ct d

iscr

imin

atio

n in

vest

igat

ed a

nd a

djud

icat

ed b

y th

e na

tiona

l hum

an r

ight

s in

stitu

tion,

hum

an r

ight

s om

buds

pers

on o

r ot

her

mec

hani

sms

(e.g

., eq

ual o

ppor

tuni

ty c

omm

issi

on)

and

the

prop

ortio

n re

spon

ded

to e

ffect

ivel

y by

the

Gov

ernm

ent

bi

as-d

riven

vio

lenc

e pr

ovid

ed w

ith le

gal a

id

offic

ials

) ar

rest

ed, a

djud

icat

ed, c

onvi

cted

or

serv

ing

sent

ence

for

disc

rimin

atio

n an

d bi

as-

driv

en v

iole

nce

per

100

,00

0 p

opul

atio

n

agai

nst t

hem

selv

es o

r th

eir

child

ren

initi

atin

g le

gal a

ctio

n or

see

king

hel

p fro

m p

olic

e or

co

unse

lling

cen

tres

free

inte

rpre

ters

bei

ng m

et (

crim

inal

and

civ

il pr

ocee

ding

s)

wom

en a

ppea

r in

per

son

or th

roug

h co

unse

l as

plai

ntiff

or

resp

onde

nt

in

the

rele

vant

pop

ulat

ion

grou

p in

pr

imar

y an

d hi

gher

edu

catio

n* a

nd b

y ki

nd o

f sch

ool (

e.g.

, pub

lic, p

rivat

e, s

peci

al

scho

ol)*

[la

ndlo

rds]

han

dlin

g re

ques

ts fr

om

pote

ntia

l pat

ient

s [te

nant

s] in

a n

on-

disc

rimin

ator

y m

anne

r (s

ourc

e: d

iscr

imin

atio

n te

stin

g su

rvey

)

for

pers

ons

with

phy

sica

l dis

abili

ties

was

ext

ende

d su

stai

nabl

e ac

cess

to

an im

prov

ed w

ater

sou

rce,

san

itatio

n,*

el

ectri

city

and

was

te d

ispo

sal

co

ntra

ctor

s) th

at c

onfo

rm w

ith c

ertifi

ed

disc

rimin

atio

n-fre

e bu

sine

ss a

nd w

orkp

lace

pra

ctic

es

(e.g

., no

HIV

test

requ

irem

ents

)

that

am

ong

equa

lly q

ualifi

ed (

or c

ompa

rabl

e) c

an-

dida

tes

a pe

rson

from

a ta

rget

ed p

opul

atio

n gr

oup

will

be

sele

cted

(e.

g., w

omen

, min

ority

)

cand

idat

es in

a n

on-d

iscr

imin

ator

y m

anne

r (e

.g.,

ILO

dis

crim

inat

ion

test

ing

surv

ey)

repo

rting

dis

crim

inat

ion

and

abus

e at

wor

k w

ho

initi

ated

lega

l or

adm

inis

trativ

e ac

tion

wor

k an

d ca

regi

ving

by

wom

en

grou

ps a

cces

sing

pos

itive

act

ion

or

pref

eren

tial t

reat

men

t mea

sure

s ai

min

g to

pro

mot

e de

fact

o eq

ualit

y (e

.g.,

finan

cial

ass

ista

nce,

trai

ning

)

all l

evel

s te

achi

ng h

uman

rig

hts

and

prom

otin

g un

ders

tand

ing

amon

g po

pula

tion

grou

ps (

e.g.

, eth

nic

grou

ps)

and

polit

ical

par

ties

who

are

wom

en o

r fro

m o

ther

targ

eted

pop

ulat

ion

grou

ps

and

the

prop

ortio

n th

ereo

f pre

sent

ed a

s ca

ndid

ates

for

elec

tion

Ou

tco

me

crim

e an

d do

mes

tic v

iole

nce,

by

targ

et

popu

latio

n gr

oup

disa

ppea

ranc

e an

d to

rture

from

pop

ulat

ion

grou

ps o

rdin

arily

sub

ject

to r

isk

of d

iscr

imin

ator

y tre

atm

ent

pr

ovid

ed w

ith le

gal r

epre

sent

atio

n as

a

prop

ortio

n of

con

vict

ion

rate

s fo

r de

fend

ants

with

la

wye

r of

thei

r ow

n ch

oice

adul

t lite

racy

rate

s), b

y ta

rget

ed

popu

latio

n gr

oup*

disa

ggre

gate

d by

targ

eted

pop

ulat

ion

grou

p

popu

latio

n gr

oup

(e.g

., m

anag

eria

l) in

the

publ

ic a

nd

priv

ate

sect

ors

held

by

targ

eted

po

pula

tion

grou

ps

appo

inte

d bo

dies

at s

ubna

tiona

l and

lo

cal l

evel

hel

d by

targ

eted

pop

ulat

ion

grou

ps*

soci

al tr

ansf

ers*

dire

ct a

nd in

dire

ct d

iscr

imin

atio

n an

d ha

te c

rimes

and

pro

porti

on o

f vic

tims

(or

rela

tives

) w

ho re

ceiv

ed c

ompe

nsat

ion

and

reha

bilit

atio

n in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs



Tab

le 1

4Il

lust

rati

ve

in

dic

ato

rs o

n t

he

rig

ht

to l

ife

(U

niv

ers

al

De

cla

rati

on

of

Hu

ma

n R

igh

ts,

art

. 3

)

Arb

itra

ry d

ep

riva

tio

n o

f life

Dis

ap

pea

ran

ces

of

ind

ivid

ua

lsH

ea

lth

an

d n

utr

itio

nD

ea

th p

en

alty

Str

uct

ura

lex

amin

er)

and

caus

e of

dea

th c

ertifi

catio

n sy

stem

go

vern

ing

insp

ectio

n of

pol

ice

cells

, det

entio

n ce

ntre

s an

d pr

ison

s by

inde

pend

ent i

nspe

ctio

n ag

enci

es

cove

rage

of h

abea

s co

rpus

pr

ovis

ion

in th

e co

nstit

utio

nna

tiona

l pol

icy

on h

ealth

and

nu

tritio

n

en

titie

s th

at h

ave

abol

ishe

d de

ath

pena

lty

safe

guar

ds fo

r th

ose

faci

ng d

eath

pen

alty

(in

clud

ing

min

imum

age

, pre

gnan

cy,

mot

her

of y

oung

chi

ldre

n, d

isab

ilitie

s)

Pro

cess

th

e pr

opor

tion

of th

ese

resp

onde

d to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t

extra

judi

cial

, sum

mar

y or

arb

itrar

y ex

ecut

ions

resp

onde

d to

ef

fect

ivel

y by

the

Gov

ernm

ent i

n th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

train

ed in

rul

es o

f con

duct

con

cern

ing

prop

ortio

nal u

se o

f fo

rce,

arr

est,

dete

ntio

n, in

vest

igat

ion

and

treat

men

t of p

erso

ns

in c

usto

dy

phys

ical

or

non-

phys

ical

abu

se o

r cr

ime

that

cau

sed

deat

h or

th

reat

ened

life

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

offic

ials

resu

lting

in d

isci

plin

ary

actio

n or

pro

secu

tion

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

enfo

rcem

ent a

utho

ritie

s (i.

e., s

uspe

cted

, arr

este

d or

cau

tione

d)

for

alle

ged

arbi

trary

dep

rivat

ion

of li

fe /

hom

icid

es (

inte

ntio

nal

and

non-

inte

ntio

nal)

to n

umbe

r of

repo

rted

case

s

enfo

rcem

ent a

utho

ritie

s fo

r al

lege

d de

priv

atio

n of

life

/

hom

icid

es (

inte

ntio

nal a

nd n

on-in

tent

iona

l) w

ho a

re c

onvi

cted

arbi

trary

dep

rivat

ion

of li

fe p

rose

cute

d, a

rres

ted,

adj

udic

ated

, co

nvic

ted

or s

ervi

ng s

ente

nce

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d

from

the

Wor

king

Gro

up

on E

nfor

ced

or In

volu

ntar

y D

isap

pear

ance

s re

spon

ded

to

effe

ctiv

ely

by th

e G

over

nmen

t in

the

repo

rting

per

iod

pret

rial d

eten

tion

exce

eded

the

lega

lly s

tipul

ated

tim

e lim

it

sim

ilar

petit

ions

file

d in

cou

rts in

th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d, p

er

100

0 p

erso

ns d

etai

ned

into

form

al c

onta

ct w

ith la

w

enfo

rcem

ent a

utho

ritie

s fo

r al

lege

d di

sapp

eara

nce

/ ab

duct

ion

to n

umbe

r of

re

porte

d ca

ses

into

form

al c

onta

ct w

ith la

w

enfo

rcem

ent a

utho

ritie

s fo

r al

lege

d di

sapp

eara

nce

/ ab

duct

ion

who

are

con

vict

ed

an im

prov

ed d

rinki

ng w

ater

so

urce

*

by s

kille

d he

alth

per

sonn

el*

belo

w m

inim

um le

vel o

f die

tary

en

ergy

con

sum

ptio

n*

popu

latio

n co

vere

d by

pu

blic

nut

ritio

n su

pple

men

t pr

ogra

mm

es

an im

prov

ed s

anita

tion

faci

lity*

imm

uniz

ed a

gain

st

vacc

ine-

prev

enta

ble

dise

ases

(e

.g.,

mea

sles

*)

dete

cted

and

cur

ed

(e.g

., tu

berc

ulos

is*

)

row

in th

e re

porti

ng p

erio

d, o

n a

spec

ified

da

te, i

nclu

ding

by

age,

sex

(pr

egna

ncy,

m

othe

rhoo

d st

atus

) an

d na

tiona

lity

on d

eath

row

capi

tal p

unis

hmen

t pro

vide

d w

ith a

cces

s to

a la

wye

r or

lega

l aid

capi

tal p

unis

hmen

t exe

rcis

ing

the

right

to

have

thei

r se

nten

ce re

view

ed b

y a

high

er

cour

t

expu

lsio

n of

per

sons

to a

cou

ntry

whe

re

they

may

face

the

deat

h pe

nalty

Ou

tco

me

10

0,0

00

pop

ulat

ion

pers

ons,

by

caus

e of

dea

th (

e.g.

, illn

ess,

sui

cide

, hom

icid

e)

(e.g

., as

repo

rted

to th

e Sp

ecia

l Rap

porte

ur o

n ex

traju

dici

al,

sum

mar

y or

arb

itrar

y ex

ecut

ions

)

-an

ce (

e.g.

, as

repo

rted

to th

e W

orki

ng G

roup

on

Enfo

rced

or

Invo

lunt

ary

Dis

appe

aran

ces)

di

sapp

eara

nce

clar

ified

, by

stat

us o

f per

son

at th

e da

te o

f cl

arifi

catio

n (a

t lib

erty

, in

dete

ntio

n or

dea

d)

rate

s*

age

1

asso

ciat

ed w

ith c

omm

unic

able

an

d no

n-co

mm

unic

able

di

seas

es (

e.g.

, HIV

/AID

S,

mal

aria

and

tube

rcul

osis

*)

(u

nder

dea

th p

enal

ty)

All in

dic

ato

rs s

ho

uld

be d

isa

gg

reg

ate

d b

y p

rohib

ited

gro

un

ds

of

dis

crim

ina

tio

n,

as

ap

plica

ble

an

d r

efl

ect

ed

in

meta

da

ta s

heets

* M

DG

-rela

ted

indi

cato

rs


ILLUSTRATING THE FRAMEWORK INDICATORS FOR SOME RIGHTS

Documents

Transcript of ILLUSTRATING THE FRAMEWORK INDICATORS FOR SOME RIGHTS