The impending election of Egypt and Vietnam to the United Nations Human Rights Council is a glaring indictment of the Council’s integrity and the systemic failures of the international community. On October 14, 2025, the UN General Assembly will cast noncompetitive votes to fill seats on this supposedly prestigious body, permitting these oppressive regimes to join its ranks despite their appalling human rights records.
The current configuration of candidates reveals an unsettling trend: 14 nations vying for a mere six seats, with Egypt and Vietnam among those positioned to seize power in a council that should champion human rights. This is not simply an oversight; it is a deliberate act of complicity from the global community, allowing rights violators to masquerade as defenders of human dignity.
Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch, succinctly encapsulated the issue: “Noncompetitive UN votes permit abusive governments like Egypt and Vietnam to become Human Rights Council members, threatening to make a mockery of the Council.” The legislative framework established by General Assembly Resolution 60/251, which created the Human Rights Council, insists that states should consider candidates’ contributions to the promotion and protection of human rights. Yet, the reality is stark — abusive regimes like Egypt and Vietnam are set to join a body that should serve as a bulwark against such violations.
Egypt is a case study in systemic repression. Under President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the government has escalated its crackdown on dissent, employing widespread measures to silence activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens. The state’s security forces operate with impunity, committing acts of violence against peaceful protesters and subjecting detainees to torture — actions that unequivocally amount to crimes against humanity. The state’s efforts to stifle engagement with international human rights mechanisms further exemplify its disregard for global norms. Egyptian authorities have actively obstructed citizens from interfacing with the Human Rights Council, subjecting those who attempt to do so to severe reprisals.
Similarly, Vietnam’s ruling Communist Party maintains a stranglehold on political expression, effectively quashing any dissenting voices. Basic rights, including freedom of speech, assembly, and religion, are systematically curtailed, with rights activists facing relentless intimidation and harassment. Such environments breed systemic inequality, undermining the very principles of justice and accountability that the Human Rights Council purports to uphold.
Across the globe, the candidates vying for seats on the Council reflect a troubling pattern. Countries like Angola and South Africa, while pledging respect for human rights, have been complicit in abuses against political dissenters. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has perpetuated a climate of hostility against minorities, where the marginalization of Muslims and Christians is sanctioned tacitly by the state. Pakistan’s draconian laws against free expression and the persecution of critics signal a regime unwilling to embrace accountability.
Furthermore, Iraq’s recent criminalization of same-sex relations and the ongoing persecution of LGBTQ+ individuals highlight a blatant disregard for human rights, while Ecuador’s government has undermined judicial independence amidst a backdrop of violence and systemic oppression. In the UK, authorities have increasingly cracked down on peaceful protests, signaling a shift towards authoritarianism under the guise of national security.
These realities expose the farce that the Human Rights Council has become — a platform that allows governments with questionable commitments to human rights to secure seats that should be reserved for true advocates of equality and justice. There is a moral imperative for member states to reject the normalization of abusive regimes within this body. The simple majority required for election must not translate into an endorsement of human rights violators.
The Council has been a critical mechanism in investigating abuses in conflict zones and holding perpetrators accountable. Its recent initiatives, including investigations into atrocities in Syria, Myanmar, and Ukraine, underscore its potential to save lives and deter future abuses. However, for the Council to maintain its credibility, it must be fortified with credible members who genuinely uphold human rights.
The international community must collectively confront the reality that allowing abusive regimes to infiltrate the Human Rights Council undermines the very foundation of human rights advocacy. As Charbonneau rightly states, “The Human Rights Council has been able to save countless lives,” but this is contingent upon its ability to function without the taint of hypocrisy.
It is time for UN member states to stand firm against the encroachment of tyranny within the Council. To safeguard the principles of social justice, equality, and human rights, countries must prioritize accountability and ensure that only those who demonstrate a genuine commitment to these ideals are granted the privilege to serve on this vital body. The stakes could not be higher — the integrity of the Human Rights Council and the future of human rights depend on it.
This article highlights the importance of IN RIGHTS COUNCIL.
