The 62nd session of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC)1 was held at a critical moment for human rights, feminist and queer movements everywhere. The summer session of 2026 in Geneva was held in parallel with the G7 meeting2 in Evian, France. As the leaders of the G7 stayed in Geneva, massive protests against the G7 meeting3 were held the day before the start of the HRC. The genocide in Gaza continued, while the colonial apartheid regime of Israel attacks and occupies the West Bank and Lebanon through massive military campaigns. Yet again, human rights mechanisms documented and presented violations against Palestinians by the Israeli Occupying Forces (IOF). The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel4 presented its report in this session. Building from its previous work, it details continuing violations and acts of aggression. Meanwhile the complicity in the genocide by member States in the Council remain unabated.
The Council session continued against the backdrop of the United States’ and Israel's aggression on Iran, whose impact was experienced by everyone. While people in the SWANA region face the most devastating impacts, ripples were felt across the Asia-Pacific, where disruptions to the supply chain of natural gas and oil were acute. The summer session also coincided with the first phase of one of the most significant heatwaves in Europe5. Heatwaves, floods and droughts have been ongoing in the world for years, while environmental and human rights movements have raised the alarm over the impacts of climate change for decades, to no avail, without action from states../
In response to these ongoing crises, the transformative potential of the human rights system and framework could have paved a concrete way forward for the world. Instead, what we witnessed at the Council mirrored larger crises facing activism, women human rights defenders and civil society, one manufactured by both state and non-state actors alike. The escalation of misogyny and toxic masculinity as an indicator of strength and dominance has meant that dissent or demands for accountability and change have been met with detention and torture, increased use of anti-terror laws to curb human rights work, extrajudicial executions, transnational repression, lynching and surveillance. This was further reinforced by deliberate reordering of priorities, with states increasingly spending on military and arms, while reducing or erasing social protections and defunding organisations and human rights-based civil society.
The June session of the HRC has been significant to feminist and queer groups as gender headlines multiple resolutions, and Special Procedures mandates, such as Special Rapporteurs on VAWG, trafficking in persons, Independent Expert on SOGI, the Working Group on Discrimination against Women and Girls and the Special Rapporteur on the right to health. The resolutions adopted at HRC62 included one on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women and girls in the context of care and support systems; promoting, protecting and respecting women’s and girls’ full enjoyment of human rights in humanitarian situations; and child, early and forced marriage.
HRC@20 meets UN80: reform amid a funding crisis
The 62nd session of the HRC also marked the 20th anniversary of the establishment of the HRC i.e. HRC@20. While this would have been a perfect opportunity to reflect upon the successes, challenges and future of the Human Rights Council - the Council instead adopted a resolution, mandating a high-level panel titled, “The twentieth anniversary of the Human Rights Council: building on its achievements and strengthening its effectiveness across the United Nations System.” The resolution invites the President of the Human Rights Council to consider this theme for the annual high-level panel discussion on human rights mainstreaming, to be held at the sixty-fourth session of the Council in March 2027. The resolution further requests the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) to prepare a summary report and present it at the 66th session.
What HRC@20 failed to do was make the UN80 process clearer, more transparent or accountable. The UN80 initiative is the United Nations' ambitious, system-wide reform effort, launched by Secretary-General António Guterres in March 2025 as the UN marked its 80th anniversary.” Yet, both UN80 and the HRC@20 should be time for reflection and review on the financial and liquidity crisis affecting every aspect of the human rights system.
Manufactured by States' refusal to pay their dues, the impact of UN80 has fallen disproportionately on the already underfunded human rights pillar. This pillar accounts for less than 1% cent of total UN expenditure, yet has absorbed deeper cuts than any other.6 The consequences run through the whole human rights system, from staffing and resourcing pressures at OHCHR to fewer treaty monitoring body sessions. In the Council, the liquidity crisis of recent years has already shortened sessions, narrowing the space for states, civil society and UN agencies to address pressing human rights issues. These UN80 cuts come against a backdrop of efficiency measures the HRC has adopted over the past few years, from shorter speaking slots to fewer General Debates and fewer country visits by Special Procedures. In the last few sessions, such efficiency measures have expanded further: presentations by Special Procedure mandate-holders to the General Assembly have been cut, and activities mandated by resolutions postponed.
Already, the potential merger between UNFPA and UN Women, and the sunsetting of UNAIDs among others have raised serious concerns by feminists. These processes have continued simultaneously, with little to no space or opportunity for civil society to meaningfully contribute to the process, and a misplaced emphasis on performative cost-saving measures rather than efficiency or effectiveness. A joint civil society response at the end of session also welcomed the decision by the General Assembly Fifth Committee to suspend the return of cash that is unspent, mainly due to late payments by Member States7, while highlighting that States must pay what they owe, including the United States and China.
Protectionism in the Council
In addition to the funding crisis, for feminists, the credibility of the Council was further challenged by the increasingly protectionist and paternalistic approach to women’s rights. In the UN Special Procedures, the clearest example was the report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls on violence against mothers8. The Special Rapporteur’s report insists on “the recognition of mothers as a specific category of rights holders, with distinct needs and contributions.”
As highlighted by a joint statement between NSWP, WHRIN, GATE, AWID and ICW living with HIV, “an essentialist and regressive view by defining women primarily through their sexual and reproductive roles departing from feminist and scientific understandings of “sex” as being socially constructed.”9 In doing so, the report continues to create hierarchies of rights holders and (in)advertently ensures that human rights are the purview of some groups of people and not universal - perpetuating discriminatory norms.
In the Council, technology has become a frontier of this protectionist turn, with language of child protection and protection of the family presented as a solution to online harms. Evidently, several side events by states, where the Special Rapporteur also participated as a panelist, were organised around digital safety for children.10 Some events drew on highly sensationalised examples, such as the consumption of pornography by children, including AI generated content, while others focused on the impact of AI generated disinformation and gaming. The most common solution proposed was to strengthen the role of the family and increase social media bans, and by age verification through methods such as facial biometric, among others.
It's no surprise that the influx of these events comes after the introduction of state laws and policies to ban teenagers from social media globally, while expanding their own access to people’s data. Close to 25 States, from Australia to Indonesia, Malaysia, France, Turkey and the United Kingdom, have introduced or are considering social media bans or restrictions for children and teenagers.11 It reflects a converging consensus that the answer to technological harm is to police who may be online, under the banner of protecting children, while also collecting data.12 Further, it attempts to normalise surveillance under the guise of protection, while restricting access to information and CSE. Most importantly, it hands more power to the very corporations causing harm and distracts from the bigger structural questions: who owns the data, who owns the technology and its infrastructure, and what are its structural impacts?
UN Special Procedure Recommendations
Technology, artificial intelligence and its impact on human rights
The report of the UN Working Group on Discrimination against Women and Girls, on women’s rights and artificial intelligence and related digital technologies responds to a topical issue within policy and multilateral spaces. During the last days of the Council, two AI related forums, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Forum 202613 and AI for good Summit14 were being held in Geneva. More importantly, it points towards a structural analysis of technology, human rights and gender, rather than solely focusing on symptoms of violence.
With the influx of deals by states to build data centres for the development of AI, particularly in the Global Majority, the report considers the impact of AI-driven water scarcity. It highlights that an estimated 9.5 per cent of the world's women and girls live under high or critical water stress, especially when experiencing drought - including on food security, education, political participation, economic security. The report acknowledges that AI-enabled abuse is driving out women’s participation in public life, through the exacerbation of rigid masculine norms, such as the rise in the “manosphere culture” and increasing economic insecurity.15 Women politicians and journalists16 are targeted through technology-facilitated gender-based violence and disinformation that seeks to shame, discredit, and silence them.
The report also traces how the deployment of AI has only accelerated armed conflict. For example, harms of lethal and autonomous weapons fall hardest on women and children,including human rights defenders17- from surveillance-enabled AI to generative AI weaponised for doxing, deepfakes and blackmail. The analysis and recommendations point towards the trend of ‘digital colonialism’ -a scenario where the Global Majority continues to pay the price for the technological advancement and comfort of the Global Minority. Women and girls in these regions, who are already exploited, are further vulnerable to replacement by AI and other technologies in many sectors. Crucially, the Working Group identifies the preconditions for substantive gender equality in the digital age and calls for feminist perspectives to be embedded in the emerging global debate on AI redlines with a structural response, not a protectionist one.
In her report addressing the impact of technologies and surveillance on human rights, the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association18 unmasked the chilling effects of digital surveillance, including on women’s rights and activism. The report shows how the normalisation of digital surveillance, frequently anchored in security and crime-prevention justifications, lacks empirical evidence regarding necessity or effectiveness. Instead, it has enabled states to adopt overly broad measures that expand surveillance while circumventing transparency, public oversight and human rights safeguards.”19
The report by OHCHR on human rights due diligence for AI and State obligations further expands on the disruption of the labour market by AI, including AI-driven monitoring changing the labour environment and increasing workplace surveillance affecting the right to work.20 The report recommends States to "systematically and continuously undertake human rights due diligence, including human rights impact assessments that also consider systemic and cumulative harms, across the full lifecycle of AI systems they design, develop, deploy, sell, obtain or operate, and that they do so through inclusive consultative processes involving civil society, technology companies and other relevant stakeholder.”21
Feminist digital rights organisations have long highlighted many of the same arguments. As APC's feminist principles for global AI governance highlighted, AI systems are not neutral. They are designed and deployed within racist, patriarchal and capitalist social, economic and political structures that profit and monetize violence, death and discrimination. These impacts are not felt equally by all. Any responsive approach to threats and its gendered impact of digital spaces, must address these larger structures.
Centering dignity in the right to health
The session had the last presentation of Dr.Tlaleng Mofokeng, the Special Rapporteur on right to health, who made a crucial call for action at a time of deep fissures in the system. Dr.Mofokeng has been a strong proponent of health and an ally to feminist and queer movements. She highlighted “It is the everyday day actions, the decisions in the everyday mundane, it is in those moments that dignity is promoted and protected[…]audre lorde said that when you live on the edge of any structure, you have to know that survival is not theoretical and for many of us survival is not theoretical.”22
It continues to be a reminder to state and non-state actors alike, that human rights are relevant when it centres the most disenfranchised. In her final report to the HRC, the Special Rapporteur examines and concludes that violations of dignity, including stigma, discrimination, criminalization, coercion, violence and exclusion from decision-making, as root causes of poor health outcomes. She further highlights the disproportionate impact on affected persons, groups and communities who have been systematically marginalized. She calls upon States and other stakeholders to place dignity at the centre of health legislation, policies and practices by removing structural barriers, strengthening participation and accountability, regulating the power of non-State actors. A new Special Rapporteur on the right to the health was appointed, Mariângela Simão, from Brazil.
Negotiations and recommendations
Promoting, protecting and respecting women's and girls' full enjoyment of human rights in humanitarian situations
The 62nd session of the HRC was also significant in its adoption of this resolution as it is the first time that a negotiated document recognised "reproductive violence" as a category of gender-based violence. As mentioned by International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), “This landmark recognition is an important step forward for women and girls in humanitarian crises. By naming reproductive violence, the Human Rights Council has made visible a distinct and devastating form of harm that has too often gone unrecognised.”23
Crucially, in a rare instance of reflecting the global and institutional context in a thematic resolution, it highlights, that the ongoing efforts and structural reforms within the UN system should not be at the expense of the humanitarian system’s capacity to deliver its mandate, including the protection and needs of women and girls.24 The structural reforms within the UN system in this text relates to the UN80 and the consequent changes in the system.
Elimination of all forms of discrimination against women and girls in care and support systems
The biannual resolution merging the discrimination discrimination against women and girls initiative with previous HRC resolutions on the right to care asks states to guarantee access to universal, accessible, adequate, available and comprehensive social protection throughout the life of women and girls.25 The resolution also asks States to increase investment in infrastructure, particularly in rural areas, to ensure universal access to affordable, acceptable and quality services for all, including early childhood education and care and health and support services, as well as paid maternity, paternity and parental leave and social protection for all workers, including both informal workers and those in non-standard forms of employment.26 The norms and standards in this specific resolution have also progressed in adopting the full iteration of sexual and reproductive health and rights, in the preambular and operative paragraphs.
Child, early and forced marriage (CEFM)27
The resolution encourages States to implement comprehensive, human rights-based, gender-responsive and multisectoral measures to prevent and eliminate child, early and forced marriage to address (among others) root causes including structural, institutional inequalities and discrimination. It also recognises the importance of providing sexual and reproductive health information in schools, including evidence-based comprehensive sexuality education. It is the first CEFM resolution to explicitly refer to comprehensive sexuality education.
Freedom of expression and opinion on technology facilitated gender based violence
In a move to establish the connection with and impact on gender, the resolution recognises technology facilitated gender based violence and its impact, including enabled or amplified by artificial intelligence and synthetic media. The resolution highlights how TGBV forces women and girls to self-censor, close digital accounts, and withdraw from online and offline spaces, and calls on states to protect their freedom of expression, counter technology-facilitated gender-based violence, ensure safe internet access, and dismantle gender stereotypes through laws, policies, and education.
Moving Forward
Arguably, advancement of norms and standards at the Human Rights Council is a consistent process that is impacted by multiple factors: state agendas, geopolitics, and civil society advocacy. However, that becomes more meaningful and complicated when accountability is prioritised along with the advancement of norms. Neither is complete without the other. International human rights law and the institutions deal with accountability with an individualist lens through criminal law and punishment, rather than addressing systems and structures.
As highlighted in a side event at HRC 62, the international human rights law needs to spend “less time on who violated, but on what made it predictable and recurring.”28 The many discussions and events at HRC 62 repeatedly highlighted that violations are indeed often recurring, that systemic and structural violations go unaddressed and often with impunity or redress. It is not the lack of information or knowledge that causes this gap, but rather a lack of political will, and a precondition of the current narrative of expectations and realism i.e. some problems are too big to fix. The institutions and systems that pursue and perpetuate this narrative are the ones that are not only enabling it, but actively pursuing the very same logic that they ostensibly purport to counter.
For example, the resolution of the Twentieth Anniversary of the Human Rights Council, highlighted “all participants and other stakeholders engaging with the Council and its mechanisms should refrain from acts of intimidation or harassment, whether online or offline."29 This paragraph assumes that everyone holds the same power and status at the HRC. In reality, a multilateral body built for and by states, and in a context where decisions of some states have led to global crisis - the first among equals will continue to hold strong. Inevitably, civil society becomes an afterthought.
Civil society organisations, while more coordinated and working towards a holistic response, have been hamstrung by a lack of adequate funding for organisations, activists and human rights defenders, especially for those from the Global Majority.
While it is necessary to have a coherent, broad-based approach, financial instability is costing a push for accountability and transparency. It is often repeated that defending and expanding spaces where civil society can actively hold states accountable for their human rights obligations is more urgent than ever.30 At the panel to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the HRC, a joint statement by civil society highlighted, “feminist and women’s rights organizations have been at the forefront of identifying emerging challenges, advancing solutions, and holding institutions, including this Council, accountable.31 Today, many of these organizations face devastating funding cuts, shrinking civic space, increasing reprisals, and coordinated attacks from movements that seek to roll back gender equality and human rights.”32 The threat of financial crisis for organisations has also increased censorship, which can sometimes lead to self-censorship. Penalising organisations for taking principled positions, or instilling fear of doing so, whether on genocide, self-determination, autonomy, and liberation of peoples, only serves to divide civil society and activism.
Further, the forced separation of issues means that universality and intersectionality are terms used without meaning. Consequently, GBV and SRHR are seen to be different from the impact of genocide, the same or different for sex workers. Insistence on sex-based discrimination means large groups of people are not only excluded, but also enables violation of rights. Exceptionalism of any issue can only serve to divide the collective and activism.
It is in this context that feminist and queer analysis and activism is essential. An analysis of power, status quo and structural barriers that are preconditions to understanding activism is essential. When the Human Rights Commission was reformed into the Human Rights Council, the new institution was formed with the active involvement of civil society; feminist activism was intrinsic to the institutions and mechanisms of HRC, including on the panel of gender integration - a one-of-a-kind self-evaluation process and panel. It is this kind of invocation that is needed to move from the current iteration of the institution and to make it fit for purpose and relevant to the world currently.
Thanks to Lisa Majumdar for the review and inputs.
-
https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/regular-sessions/session62/regular-session
-
https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/62/22
-
https://wmo.int/media/news/western-europe-has-hottest-june-record
-
https://ishr.ch/campaigns/reforming-the-un-human-rights-system-defenders-voices-matter/
-
https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc62-civil-society-presents-key-takeaways-from-the-session/
-
Please read at the full statement at https://events.ohchr.org/PublicEvent/DownloadOralStatement/47380?eventHeaderId=189
-
24 June 2026 HRC63 Side Event, Protecting children from emerging forms of harm in the digital era Responsibilities, Rights and Duties of Parents, Prevention and the Role of the Family, Communities and National Institutions. Organised by Malaysia, Family Watch International, Egypt, Indonesia,Ghana, Doha International Family Institute, the OIC, Turkiye, Saudi Arabia. The SR on Violence against Women attended the event as a speaker and “Protecting Children in the Digital Space”organised by the UAE on 25 June 2026
-
https://www.techpolicy.press/tracking-efforts-to-restrict-or-ban-teens-from-social-media-across-the-globe/
-
Women’s and girls’ rights and artificial intelligence and related digital technologies; Report of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, para 28, https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/62/48,
-
Women’s and girls’ rights and artificial intelligence and related digital technologies; Report of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, para 29 https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/62/48, Three-quarters of women journalists surveyed by UNESCO have experienced online violence, resulting in self-censorship, mental health issues, and, for one in four, offline attacks.
-
Women’s and girls’ rights and artificial intelligence and related digital technologies; Report of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls, para 35, https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/62/48,
-
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session62/advance-versions/a-hrc-62-33-auv-1-en.pdf
-
https://www.ippf.org/news/un-human-rights-council-adopts-first-negotiated-resolution-naming-reproductive-violence
-
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session62/advance-versions/a-hrc-62-33-auv-1-en.pdf
-
https://hrcmeetings.ohchr.org/HRCSessions/RegularSessions/62/DL_Resolution/2609729E.docx
-
https://hrcmeetings.ohchr.org/HRCSessions/RegularSessions/62/DL_Resolution/2609729E.docx
-
Side event organised by ISHR, Defending rights in unequal democracies: an analysis of the links between systemic discrimination and democratic backsliding, more can be seen at https://ishr.ch/events/defending-rights-in-unequal-democracies-an-analysis-of-the-links-between-systemic-discrimination-and-democratic-backsliding/
-
Resolution on Twentieth anniversary of the Human Rights Council, PP15 https://hrcmeetings.ohchr.org/HRCSessions/RegularSessions/62/DL_Resolution/A_HRC_62_L.19_Rev.1%20Oral%20rev.%20as%20received.docx
-
https://www.sexualrightsinitiative.org/news/2026-jul/did-you-miss-it-here-what-happened-hrc-62
-
https://reproductiverights.org/news/human-rights-council-20th-anniversary-barriers-breakthroughs-reproductive-rights/ and https://reproductiverights.org/resources/hrc62-human-rights-council-20th-anniversary-joint-statement/