Country Reports on Human Rights Practices

The first of the year's annual reports was Human Rights Watch's World Report. In the introduction, Ken Roth laments the "challenged credibility" of the U.S. as a promoter of human rights: "Quite apart from the fallout of its ill-fated Iraq invasion, its credibility as a proponent of human rights has been tarnished by the abuses it practices in the name of fighting terrorism. Few US ambassadors dare to protest another government’s harsh interrogations, detention without trial, or even 'disappearances,' knowing how easily an interlocutor could turn the tables and cite US misconduct as an excuse for his government’s own abuses."

On March 6th, the U.S. State Department announced the release of its own human rights survey, the 2006 edition of the annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. See reactions from Amnesty International USA, Human Rights First and the U.S. Human Rights Network to both past and present editions of these reports.

The Country Reports are regularly consulted for country of origin information during the refugee status determination process, and they have long been considered to be reliable and credible. The recent criticism highlights the importance of evaluating information sources in any research exercise, and particularly when undertaking country of origin research. See this manual and this report for questions to ask and criteria to consider when selecting reliable COI sources. A general rule of thumb is to consult multiple sources, rather than rely on just one, and corroborate information across those sources. And as UNHCR advises, "information sources should be regularly re-evaluated as changing circumstances can affect the accuracy and reliability of information."

Posted in Publications.