URGENT ACTION
1. A State Party may at any time declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals within its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights set forth in this Convention. No communication shall be received by the Committee if it concerns a State Party which has not made such a declaration.
2. Any State Party which makes a declaration as provided for in paragraph I of this article may establish or indicate a body within its national legal order which shall be competent to receive and consider petitions from individuals and groups of individuals within its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation of any of the rights set forth in this Convention and who have exhausted other available local remedies.
3. A declaration made in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article and the name of any body established or indicated in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article shall be deposited by the State Party concerned with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall transmit copies thereof to the other States Parties. A declaration may be withdrawn at any time by notification to the Secretary-General, but such a withdrawal shall not affect communications pending before the Committee.
4. A register of petitions shall be kept by the body established or indicated in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article, and certified copies of the register shall be filed annually through appropriate channels with the Secretary-General on the understanding that the contents shall not be publicly disclosed.
5. In the event of failure to obtain satisfaction from the body established or indicated in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article, the petitioner shall have the right to communicate the matter to the Committee within six months.
6.
(a) The Committee shall confidentially bring any communication referred to it to the attention of the State Party alleged to be violating any provision of this Convention, but the identity of the individual or groups of individuals concerned shall not be revealed without his or their express consent. The Committee shall not receive anonymous communications;
(b) Within three months, the receiving State shall submit to the Committee written explanations or statements clarifying the matter and the remedy, if any, that may have been taken by that State.
7.
(a) The Committee shall consider communications in the light of all information made available to it by the State Party concerned and by the petitioner. The Committee shall not consider any communication from a petitioner unless it has ascertained that the petitioner has exhausted all available domestic remedies. However, this shall not be the rule where the application of the remedies is unreasonably prolonged;
(b) The Committee shall forward its suggestions and recommendations, if any, to the State Party concerned and to the petitioner.
8. The Committee shall include in its annual report a summary of such communications and, where appropriate, a summary of the explanations and statements of the States Parties concerned and of its own suggestions and recommendations.
9.The Committee shall be competent to exercise the functions provided for in this article only when at least ten States Parties to this Convention are bound by declarations in accordance with paragraph I of this article.
This final section briefly outlines an alternative mechanism developed by CERD. From 1993, CERD adopted an early warning and urgent action procedure as part of its regular agenda.393 Although the mechanism is not strictly speaking an individual communications mechanism, it does operate in a similar way in allowing individuals or groups to petition the Committee in relation to an individual situation of alleged breach outside of the reporting cycle. As a result, its impact in the realm of minority and Indigenous rights may be briefly considered.
The mechanism is not optional and may be triggered in relation to any of ICERD’s 182 States Parties. It is aimed at preventing existing situations escalating into conflicts, and responding to problems requiring immediate attention to prevent or limit the scale or number of serious violations of the Convention.394 The mechanism has a clear relevance to minorities and Indigenous peoples, who are referred to expressly in the documents underlying its use, a 1993 working paper supplemented by 2007 guidelines.395 Thus, the 1993 working paper discussed the need for a commitment to human rights ‘with a special sensitivity to the rights of minorities’, as well as preventive measures ‘[i]n situations of tension related to minorities’.396 The 2007 guidelines noted that since 1993, the Committee had addressed the presence of serious, massive, or persistent patterns of violations which included acts of extreme violence ‘committed against minorities and Indigenous peoples’.397 One of the indicators for use of the mechanism is: ‘Encroachment on the traditional lands of Indigenous peoples or forced removal of these peoples from their lands, in particular for the purpose of exploitation of natural resources.’398 Recommendations for action under the mechanism are to be addressed inter alia to the Special Rapporteur on Minority Issues and the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.399
There are many examples of its use to protect minorities. For example, in June 2020 CERD issued a Statement in which it expressed alarm at ‘the horrific killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on 25 May 2020’, as well as ‘the recurrence of killings of unarmed African Americans by police officers and individuals over the years’.400 The Statement expressly referenced minority rights in urging the Government of the US ‘to publicly recognize the existence of structural racial discrimination in the society, as well as to unequivocally and unconditionally reject and condemn racially motivated killings of African Americans and other minorities’.401 In 2022, CERD used the procedure to highlight serious human rights violations including mass incarceration against the Uyghur minority in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China (XUAR).402 It called on China to ‘immediately release all individuals arbitrarily deprived of their liberty in the XUAR’, as well as cease intimidation and reprisals against Uyghur and other ethnic Muslim communities, the diaspora and those who speak out in their defence.403 It sought a ‘full review of [China’s] legal framework governing national security, counter terrorism and minority rights in the XUAR’, to ensure compliance with ICERD.404
The mechanism has also been extensively used to protect Indigenous peoples. In the Philippines, the Committee triggered the mechanism in support of the Indigenous Subanon people opposing the destruction of the sacred Mount Canatuan by a Canadian gold mining company.405 In relation to India, CERD engaged the procedure to raise the situation of Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs) in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.406 The context was the development of two mega projects - the “Holistic Development of Great Nicobar Island” and the “Sustainable Development of Little Andaman Island Vision Document” - which would have a harmful impact on five PVTGs that inhabit Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Great Andamanese, Jarawas, Onges, Shompens and Sentinelese).407 The Committee has also engaged the mechanism in relation to the arbitrary depravation of citizenship of Bengali-speaking Muslims in Assam State, reflective of how ethno-religious groups come under the scope of the Convention.408 The Committee expressed concern at the ‘discriminatory approach applied by the Citizenship Amendment Act against Bengali-speaking Muslims on the grounds of their descent, ethno-religious and ethnicity’, as well as incidents of violent attacks perpetuated by civilians and organized groups against members of Bengali-speaking Muslims.409
Urgent procedures exist also before the Committee on Enforced Disappearance, as noted. In its recent report in 2025, CED registered an urgent action request relating to Chile which noted in relation to the alleged victim: ‘Ms. Chunil Catricura is a member of the Mapuche Indigenous community, a human rights defender and an older person’, with the Committee requesting the State party ‘ensure that the search and investigation strategy followed a differential approach, with a gender and intersectionality perspective, and that all stages of the search were conducted in full respect of her requirements.’410
As with all UN treaty body mechanisms, concerns and recommendations under urgent action mechanisms are not legally binding. Nevertheless, they offer a crucial route for minority and Indigenous peoples to raise and defend their rights where these are being urgently threatened. It may be noted that none of the States Parties in the CERD examples above - the US, China, the Philippines and India - have opted in to the individual communications mechanism under Article 14 ICERD. As a result, the mechanism is an important tool for the protection of minority and Indigenous rights at the international level, particularly in Asia where no regional human rights complaints mechanism exists and many States have not opted in to individual communications mechanisms.
393 CERD, ‘Early-Warning Measures and Urgent Procedures’ <https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CERD/Pages/EarlyWarningProcedure.aspx#about>
394 Ibid.
395UN Doc. A/48/18 (1994) ‘Prevention of racial discrimination, including early warning and urgent procedures: Working paper adopted by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination’ Annex III p. 126-130; and A/62/18 (2007) ‘Guidelines for the early warning and urgent action procedure’ Annex III p. 115-120.
396 Ibid (1994) paras 2-3.
397 Ibid (2007) para 7.
398 Ibid para 12(h).
399 Ibid para 14(c)(ii). Three UN special procedures are referenced in total - the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia and related intolerance, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, as well as the Independent Expert [now Special Rapporteur] on minority issues.
400 CERD, Statement 1 (2020).
401 Ibid.
402 CERD Decision 1(108) (2022).
403 Ibid.
404 Ibid.
405 CERD, ‘Letter to H.E. Ms. Erlinda F. Basilio’ 7 March 2008 (early warning and urgent procedure).
406 UN Doc. CERD/EWUAP/111th Session/2023/MJ/CS/ks (2023).
407 Ibid.
408 UN Doc. CERD/EWUAP/115thsession/2025/CS/BJ/ks (2025).
409 Ibid.
410 UN Doc. CED/C/28/3 (2025), paras 41-43.
