Improving communication and visibility of decisions 

HRIC research found that specific processes need to be triggered if the decisions of human rights bodies are to be implemented. It may not always be a lack of willingness but rather a lack of clear processes for implementation or defined lines of responsibility. Other factors, such as the visibility of a given decision, were also found to be crucial in how State authorities respond, together with a consistent flow of communication between the international and national stakeholders. Consequently, the research demonstrated the need for a more coordinated approach and for practical tools to respond to decisions.  

Closer monitoring of judgements, decisions and recommendations  

The visibility, legitimacy and credibility of the supranational bodies and the lack of clarity surrounding their own role were also found to be crucial factors in the implementation of human rights decisions. While treaty bodies may have a number of procedures in place to monitor implementation of their own decisions, HRIC research found that some, such as holding hearings, may have particular impact, but many are not used fully. The role of the victims themselves can also be influential and the telling of real stories can make a difference in implementation of decisions. 

HRIC’s research has resulted in far-reaching reforms, not only on the strategic direction of treaty bodies’ work but also on their practical operations. 

The research findings also led Rachel Murray to develop a strategy for civil society organisations outlining practical ways to facilitate the implementation of human rights. Murray was the Vice Chair on the Board of the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) and the Institute used this strategy to craft the reparations in a case where people were massacred in Kilwa.