Inside The UN Human Rights Council

Sign up for the Humanists International Newsletter

Welcome to Freedom of Thought, the podcast by Humanists International.

This week the roles reverse. Instead of interviewing a guest, Leon Langdon becomes the policymaker explaining how Humanists International works inside the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Leon walks through how the Council functions, why the Universal Periodic Review matters, and what actually happens during a typical session, from negotiating resolutions and delivering statements to meeting diplomats and civil society partners. The episode also explores the growing pressures on the UN system and why civil society organisations remain essential to documenting abuses and defending universal human rights.

In this episode we cover

• What the UN Human Rights Council is and how it works
• Why the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) holds every state to account
• The role of Special Rapporteurs and independent human rights experts
• How Humanists International supports members engaging the UN
• Freedom of religion or belief debates at the Council
• What actually happens during a Human Rights Council session in Geneva

Further reading and references

• UN Human Rights Council overview:  https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/about-council
• Universal Periodic Review explained: https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/upr-home
• Special Rapporteurs and UN Special Procedures: https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures-human-rights-council
• Freedom of religion or belief mandate:  https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-religion-or-belief
• Freedom of Thought Report:  https://humanists.international/what-we-do/freedom-of-thought-report/

Follow Humanist International

• Sign up for our free Newsletter
• Support Humanists International
• Follow our Campaigns
• About - Humanists International 
• Join us at the World Humanists Congress 2026

This podcast is produced by Humanise Live.

Start your podcast today, visit: humanise.live

🎶Music: Horizon by Simon Folwar

Podcast transcripts are AI-generated and may contain errors or omissions. They are provided to make our content more accessible, but should not be considered a fully accurate record of the conversation.

Transcript

Intro and Context

Gary McLelland 0:41

Welcome to Freedom of Thought. I'm Gary McClelland. And I'm Leon Langdon. Each week we'll be bringing you Humanists International's perspective on the world and conversations with humanists, activists, leaders, and policymakers from across the world. Today, you're the policymaker, Leon. This came out of a conversation that we had many months ago about the work that Humanists International does at the United Nations and other international institutions. And basically, the idea was that we have so many interesting conversations about what goes on at these institutions that we wanted to share them with our members and supporters around the world.

Leon Langdon 1:16

Yeah, I actually remember that conversation. I think we had like our usual kind of weekly check-in. It's maybe like October or so. And I think we were about 90 minutes into a 30-minute meeting, give or take, and we were really in the weeds of something or other, some sort of strategic planning around the UN or something or other. And I remember you sort of almost expressing a frustration that our members couldn't be flies on the wall. And I feel like the podcast idea started rolling, at least in some part of your brain at that point. Well, there was that and the whole midlife crisis thing.

What is The Human Rights Council?

How the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) Holds States Accountable

Gary McLelland 1:48

That's right. Yeah. I mean, I think that for me, that's one of the most crucial things is obviously one of the things that Humanist International was set up to do was to be the voice of humanism at the United Nations, United Nations and its associated bodies. And our members know that that's what we do. They engage with us. But there's so much more qualitative information about what goes on in these meetings and the informal side of them. And it's very difficult to communicate that unless you go to Geneva or you know have a long conversation like we do every week. It's very difficult to communicate the importance of that, the nuance of it, aside from some of the technical aspects of it. So hopefully that's what we'll do in this podcast today. So I guess first of all, let's just start with a bit of a scene setting. So we're going to be talking about the UN Human Rights Council. And in fact, you've just literally landed in Geneva to be there for this session. So the United Nations Human Rights Council is a body that sits underneath the General Assembly of the United Nations. So if we think of, in terms of Humanists International for our members and associates, we have the General Assembly, which is a meeting of all of our members and associates every year. And that's supplemented by the work of the staff and the boards, different committees and working groups and so on. So if you think of that in the same way, the Human Rights Council is a subsidiary body which reports to the General Assembly. It's made up of about 47 members, which is elected by the members of the UN General Assembly, which of course is the full 193 member organizations. And the Human Rights Council is effectively the political forum for monitoring and reporting on human rights around the world. Anything you'd like to add to that, Leon?

Leon Langdon 3:26

I will correct you and say that it's actually ECOSOC that elects members of the Human Rights Council. But other than that, you're right on that. Yeah, so there are six principal organs of the UN, General Assembly being one of them, ECOSOC, that's the Economic and Social Council I just mentioned, Trusteeship Council, International Court of Justice, and the UN Security Council, which is where I used to work, but also where we kind of hear probably some of the most news about the UN, and then you know the equivalent of the Humanist International Staff, as you say, the Secretariat. And so the Human Rights Council is a subsidiary body, like you say, of the of the General Assembly.

Gary McLelland 4:05

And one of the important jobs that the Human Rights Council does is the UPR process, the universal periodic review process. So give us a quick summary of what that process is, Leon.

Funding Cuts And Fragile Human Rights Systems

Leon Langdon 4:19

It's one of the biggest things for us at Humanists International, and I can explain why. But the um the UPR is different from other elements of the UN because every single member state is subject to review in theory. We can talk a bit more about that later. But whereas the Human Rights Council has investigative mechanisms and it has special procedures, they often focus on sort of the worst offenders, or at least the ones that are most maybe politically advantageous to go after, or at least there's maybe political consensus on them being human rights abusers. That's of course subject to interpretation at times. The Universal Periodic Review, the UPR, uh is all 193 member states of the UN. There's also a very clear element or a clear way for civil society to be involved in that, which is really helpful for our members, of course. And given that Humanist International has members in over 60 countries and about 130 of those members, give or take, it's a really useful and fruitful opportunity for them to be involved. And so that's why we pour so many resources into offering trainings on the EPR, but also drafting assistances for the written portion of that. But also it's a really great opportunity for us to raise the voices of our members at the Human Rights Council and sort of to add that prestige to domestic advocacy campaigns as well. Excellent.

Gary McLelland 5:40

And many of our members, of course, will be familiar with the trainings that we do every year on how to engage with the UPR process. So hopefully that can join some of those dots together in people's heads of how these kind of bodies all interact with each other. Moving on now, just to think broadly in terms of the United Nations as it is at the moment. We've talked in previous podcasts about the stresses on the multilateral system, the crisis in the multilateral system. You've mentioned before about some of the efficiency measures and cuts and pressures on space for NGOs at the United Nations. How is this showing up in the Human Rights Council in Geneva?

Reform Versus Shrinking Civil Society Space

Leon Langdon 6:18

It's showing up in everything but from the small to the big ways. I remember being here, I think, two years ago and the escalators weren't working. And a friend who worked here over the winter, basically one of the buildings, was effectively turned off because heating it was too difficult and too expensive. And so people were told to work from home for the winter kind of thing. So it's showing up in those ways. And while they are sort of almost like humorous in, you know, people having to walk up and up and down the escalators rather than actually having them moving, they point to the bigger issues, which is that the funding is lacking. For example, special rapporteurs, which as I mentioned, are part of the sort of investigative mechanisms of the United Nations. Some of them have thematic areas. So for example, there's a special rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief, on cultural rights, on freedom of expression. They are meant to go and do country visits. Many of them are doing fewer country visits. Usually they try to get several in a year. I know at least one mandate only had several mandates, sorry, only had one visit this year, which means that there's just less investigating happening. There's less reporting of human rights issues, also less reporting of good practices, of course, as well. And the same is true for potentially getting rid of some special rapporteur mandates or consolidating them as part of, as you mentioned, this sort of efficiency, efficiency saving, efficiency measures. Some people are sort of okay with that, and some special rapporteurs have written themselves on these issues. So there's just generally a lot of funding there. I also know from speaking to special rapporteurs that their staffing is pretty minimal. Often they get funded by universities or or think tanks as well, which is not how it's meant to work, but it also means that there's uh discrepancy with how much funding different people and different things get. And then even several reports won't be presented at this council, meetings are being cut short. All of these feel small in and of themselves. They point to the fact that the human rights architecture is in a point of fragility and and they are looking to cut corners, which, while unfortunately understandable given the funding crisis, is really unideal when we are talking about a body that's meant to be there for setting norms around human rights, for documenting abuses and good practices, and trying to improve the human rights situation of people ultimately around the world.

Gary McLelland 8:36

That's helpful. And I wonder as well, may it be worth just pausing and expanding for a second on the this idea of reform and efficiency and so on, because it seems to me that to put it maybe too simply, there's obviously at least two sides to this. You and I have had discussions before, and it's probably a fairly commonly held view that the international system, the UN system, can be kind of slow and bureaucratic and but needs to be able to adapt to this changing international order, issue judgments and opinions more quickly and things like that. So in some cases, that sounds like reform would be good, but in many of the conversations we've had, and I'm sure that you've had with other NGOs, the way that this reform is being done is to squeeze out NGOs to kind of minimize the space available to have criticism and so on. So I guess what do you think about that?

Tension Between States And Accountability

Leon Langdon 9:27

The UN is incredibly flawed. And I think anyone who works in the system will tell you that. From the Security Council, which is often seen as sort of more effective because it can, you know, put peacekeeping troops on the ground, for example, the permanent five members, so the US, UK, France, China, and Russia all have vetoes. Um, there have been calls to reform that alone for years and years, either to open up vetoes to other states or to change how vetoes work. There's also maybe an institutionalized problem in that Global South voices are marginalized often at the UN. Even look at what headquarters are. They're in Geneva and New York, respectively, two of the most expensive cities in the world. There are these long-held institutional issues to do with what gets focused on, what issues get focused on, and consequently what don't, what ones don't. And also then these sort of issues of whose voices are actually at the table. These are long-standing issues, and they're ones that Humanist International has commented on long before the kind of current zeitgeist. So there is definitely, you know, questions about reform and questions about how do we make a more efficient UN, how do we make a better UN. Fundamentally, I think the question should be how do we make a UN that that serves human rights better, that puts human rights at the forefront of every policy and ultimately safeguards human rights and, like you said, creates accountability for human rights abuses. However, when you have reform coming out of such a point of desperation and necessity, when you have billions in arrears owed by states, it is not going to be done well more often than not, or at least there is a high risk that it's not going to be done well when you're sort of forced into a corner, when you're backed into a corner. Also, the UN ultimately, at its insection, although there was civil society or organizations around and there was civil society involvement enshrined, it is ultimately a deliberative body of states. And so states will always do what they can to protect their own interests. And so they are many of them are happy enough if human rights investigations don't happen. They are happy enough if civil society voices, particularly from their countries or civil society voices generally, if they get quietened, if they get pushed just a little bit more to the outside. And so within this framework, you have reform happening. And there are big question marks over what it will actually look like, whether it will actually serve who this sort of body should serve or who it does serve or who it's likely to serve.

Gary McLelland 12:00

It's interesting. I mean, one of the things I always think as well, in terms of these international bodies, um systems like the UN operate because states give them authority by signing treaties and cooperating and so on and so forth. But in the same sense, you can see one of the main purposes of human rights treaties and these mechanisms is to annoy or to be a block to things that governments want to do, which would be in contravention of human rights. So there's a sort of there's a built-in tension there between governments giving the UN the right to hold them to account and criticize them and so on, and them not wanting to do that.

Freedom Of Religion Or Belief Agenda

Leon Langdon 12:39

Yeah, no, completely. The international system ultimately works because other states get mad more often than not. And the but the ultimately the reason that other states tend to get mad is because civil society organizations like ours or our members more often than not raise issues to state level. And there but there is an inherent tension there, and it's very easy for countries with historically better human rights records to be on board with the UN as long as they are not under too much scrutiny, for example. They don't have to give too much of their capital away, uh, political, financial capital or otherwise. And so there is definitely a tension there, and we are very much seeing that tension brought out and really exposed for all to see in the last, I think, let's say year, but really beyond that, if you've been in the system. And I think that tension between holding member states accountable, but also needing member states to get something out of the system to have buy-in to begin with. It's a difficult line at the moment, for sure.

Gary McLelland 13:40

You obviously recently we've had the launch of the Freedom of Thought Report, which we were both in Brussels for, and that went really well. And the report has been very well received. Of course, that report and our advocacy work generally covers a range of different policy areas because the policies and the work that humanists are involved in is a very broad spectrum of human rights. One of the ones that comes up a time and time again is Freedom of Religion or Belief or Forbes. Is there anything happening at this session in Geneva on Forbes that we should be aware of? Yeah, lots actually.

Who Special Rapporteurs Are And How They Work

Leon Langdon 14:11

So off the top of my head, because it's the March session, we always have um what they call the Forbes resolution, which is led by the European Union, and that is a an annual recurring resolution which speaks to the importance of the right to freedom of religion or belief. It often welcomes the special rapporteur's report and lays out what the right to freedom of religion or belief actually is, and that is expected to pass by consensus. Related to that resolution, you have its sort of sister twin resolution, uh, which is colloquially known as 1618, but is the resolution countering on countering hatred based on religion or belief. And so that's led by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and that resolution came out of uh a really difficult kind of set time pre, I think it was 2011, where there was kind of consistently resolutions brought by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, so the OIC, they would bring resolutions on the desecration of religious symbols or the desecration of religions. Um, international human rights law protects people, it protects humans, it doesn't protect symbols, it doesn't protect ideas or dogma. And so in 2011, when the EU and the OIC, as well as many others, both civil society and otherwise, who were involved in getting these resolutions to where they were, they were two fantastic resolutions. So on one hand, we're very happy to see that they will be are likely to be renewed and that both will be brought to the table again. With that said, what I or or representative of Humanist International have been saying for years is these resolutions are truly fantastic and they are a testament to the consensus-building spirit of the United Nations. But with that said, we would love to see these resolutions developed on, to get into the intricacies of freedom of religion or belief, to be very specific in ways that the resolution isn't at the moment. For example, the explicit inclusion of the non-religious, which we don't see there. Now, the right to freedom of religion or belief does protect the non-religious, and we know that from a document from the 1990s called General Comment No. But we would like that kind of reaffirmed consistently within that resolution. So they're kind of two the two big sort of pieces of law, as it were, of international law that that will be negotiated, as well as that. We'll have an interactive dialogue with the special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief. Mazila Gamea is an incredible special rapporteur. She also spoke at the launch of our Freedom of Thought report, which was really wonderful. Her latest report on mourning the dead and how that relates to freedom of religion or belief has been released. We're cited in it, as are, I think, about six of our members and about six more inputted into our submission for that report. So I'll be speaking in response to that tomorrow, which is very exciting, thanking her for that and asking her some questions on that. And actually, it's the 40-year anniversary of that mandate. So the UN Human Rights Council and its predecessor have been looking at freedom of religion or belief through the lens of a special rapporteur for, I think, 40 years now. And so there's going to be a couple of events to mark that. So they're sort of the big things happening on Freedom of Religion or Belief this session that we'll be involved in, which is exciting.

Gary McLelland 17:32

That is exciting. Do you mentioned the special rapporteur and you mentioned the other mandate holders? Am I right in saying that these people are unpaid volunteers that do their work on behalf of the UN basically for free?

Leon Langdon 17:46

Yeah, exactly. So special rapporteurs are considered UN human rights experts. It's actually one of my pet peeves, is when people, you know, when there are news articles that say like UN says something or other UN criticizes something, UN denounces, whatever it might be. The UN is is anything but a monolith. And you, I don't know. I think there's a responsibility to be specific about who we're talking about. But often who they're talking about are UN special rapporteurs who are technically independent of the UN. So they're given a title by the UN, but they are pretty under-resourced. They're given, depending on the mandate, given a small staff, they themselves, I think, have their travel covered, but to keep them independent, um, they're not given direct funding. So more often than not, because they have had long careers to become experts to get to this level, they'll be funded, for example, by their universities if they come from academia, or some are funded by different fellowships or actually different NGOs are sometimes involved in in small ways. Um, and that's generally how the sort of uh what we call the special procedures system works.

Gary McLelland 18:50

Because I I think a lot of our members and associates that may have been involved with inputting into a special rapporteur report or attending a visit or something, or just generally reading the work of the special rapporteurs will be quite surprised to know that they are not paid UN officials.

How Resolutions And Agendas Get Made

Leon Langdon 19:07

Yeah. And I think it's also quite important to note that in the context of actually all of the multilateralism sort of issues we've talked about even already on funding, but also um that we've talked about, for example, with the US withdrawal. Just last year, we released a statement when the UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine was facing sanctions and sort of different attacks undermining her independence from the US. And that's something that's continued, and we still see, and even the UN Secretary General has come out on that issue as well, the independence of special rapporteurs and the protections afforded to them diplomatically are long enshrined in international law as well. But the quality of the work that they consistently produce is really stellar and it is so important and it really helps us push on our understanding of international human rights law. I think that's where, for example, the frustration that we sometimes exhibit around the resolution on the right to freedom of religion or belief comes from is since this resolution in 2018, which as I mentioned, we do support and we're really happy exists, there have been some fantastic reports by this special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief on anything from gender to SOGI to the instrumentalization of freedom of religion or belief. And we would love to see some of those comments incorporated in that sort of piece of law that comes out of the Human Rights Council. But their work is consistently commendable and to be commended continually.

Gary McLelland 20:31

Before we move on to uh a day in the life of, as it were, uh in Geneva for you, Leon, maybe we could just have a bit of an overview of other big items that are on the agenda for this session of the council. And maybe also can you give us an idea? Again, the Human Rights Council will be something which is quite an abstract idea in most people's head, most people's heads. So how do how is the agenda created? Are there standing items, or how do the priorities get formed through the members of the council? And yeah, just a quick overview of any big items that are on the agenda for this session.

Representing Humanists International at the UN Human Rights Council

Leon Langdon 21:05

So what ends up on the agenda of the council is created by the council ultimately. The 47 members, wherever they are in a given year, will table these resolutions and they will vote on them. And they, for example, will call for the creation of a special rapporteur or the renewal of a mandate, and they might call for a report to be produced on a certain issue and then to be presented maybe in in three months' time or in a year's time at another session of the Human Rights Council. They might call for the creation of an investigative mechanism, for example, the independent investigative mechanism on Myanmar, or we're a working group, for example, the working group in arbitrary detention. All of these things are created by the council members themselves. And it almost becomes like tradition more than anything. So some resolutions will be annual, some will be biannual, which doesn't mean every six months means every two years, I've learned. Some will be triannual. And then within that, whoever the country is who leads on that will often have a different thematic focus. So off the top of my head, for example, the resolution on human rights defenders had a specific focus on human rights defenders in the digital age last year. I'm not 100% sure what their focus is this year, but there is going to be another resolution on human rights defenders. And so often these resolutions are passed by consensus, so with the full agreement of the council, but there's sometimes contentious votes as well. Or you will have amendments proposed at the last minute if they weren't accepted by the proposer of the resolution, the drawing. After we called the pen. So if the pen doesn't accept amendments, countries can still table amendments directly to the council and they get voted on separately as well. So with that in mind, at this current council session, a couple of interesting resolutions. There'll be one on minority rights. We've been doing a bit of work forwarding humanists as and the non-religious in certain contexts as a religious minority, harkening back to this 1990 or the general comment from 1990s. But also the special rapporteur on minority issues has acknowledged that non-religious comes under his mandate as of 2020. We have a new mandate holder, so we're hoping to get that recognized again. The resolution on the prevention of genocide. There's one on child's rights, which has a focus on digital rights. There's one on freedom of expression. And again, as I mentioned, one on human rights defenders. And so these will go through multiple rounds of negotiations. They will be tabled by the pens, they will be brought to the floor in sort of conference rooms, and people will, other countries, but also civil society, including us, will ask to the floor, will offer our comments conceptually on the resolution, but then literally line by line through the resolutions, arguing over specific words, wondering whether it's already language that's been agreed in a previous resolution or whether they're trying to do something new. It it can be quite tedious. The freedom of religion or belief resolution will probably be quick, if I had to guess right now, because there is, like I said, agreement and it's not open for too many amendments. I recall the poor Norwegians who brought the human rights defenders resolution last year. I can't remember how many rounds they went through, but it was a lot.

Gary McLelland 24:13

And obviously, we know one of the big things that our members and associates will see every time there's a human rights council is the oral statements that we deliver. But putting them aside for one moment, just give us an idea of you're in Geneva for the next 10 days to represent Humanists International at the council. Give us an idea of the different types of meetings or the different processes that you'll be involved in.

Leon Langdon 24:34

Yeah, so I've already touched on a few of them. So, for example, the negotiations of resolutions. So they're called informal consultations when they appear on the schedule. And so we'll be on to states. I'm already on to states, and I've gotten copies of many of the resolutions of interest, the ones I mentioned, and then several more as well. And so we'll go in with an idea in most cases of what we want to say. We won't actually offer comments on them all because we also recognize that we're always not the best placed organization to be making comments. But at the same time, we it's important for us to monitor negotiations, to see what states are saying, see what states might be friendly to us long term on certain issues. So yeah, there's the two different ways to approach informals, which is either going in with something to say or almost more as a monitoring thing. Also, within that, it's a great opportunity to meet member states, their representatives, that is. In these rooms, it's never really ambassadors. I don't think I've ever seen an ambassador in one of these rooms. It's often just policy wonks, desk officers working on these issues, which is quite interesting. It they tend to be a bit less tense than high-level meetings. There is generally a spirit of trying to get things done together, but they can, of course, become contentious, and I've seen that as well. And yes, a civil society as an accredited organization, we will be offered the floor as well if we'd like. So that's one thing I'll be doing. I'll probably be attending two or three of those a day. They're usually about 90 minutes each. Sometimes they're back to back, sometimes you've got a bit more time. So that'll just depend on the schedule, which is constantly updated. So it's it can be quite annoying to add them all to your calendar and have to then move them around afterwards. And when it comes to oral statements, I'll also be delivering some of those in person. So many of our members will have been involved in delivering oral statements by video, which is a really great way to be engaged in the United Nations that we allow our members or facilitate for our members in terms of raising their voice. But also it's really helpful to be in the room in Geneva to be delivering statements. So tomorrow I'll be delivering two statements in person. So one on freedom, religion, or belief, and one on cultural rights. It can be really helpful to get FaceTime with diplomats and to get FaceTime with the special rapporteurs in those issues. And then the kind of third of I'd say four things I'll mention is aside events. So NGOs and governments alike, often in collaboration, will host events, usually about an hour each, on a range of issues. There was one last week on blasphemy laws. There's one tomorrow, which I might attend on the potentially creating a new charter of rights for victims of torture. There's ones on how faith communities can and should respond to different things and on different rights, human rights issues, either thematically or in country. And then finally, it's just meeting people. So I'm very fortunate to have a large network in Geneva by virtue of doing this work. I've texted many people up to now to see if they'd like to get coffee, if we can catch up on what different priorities are. So that's anyone from UN staff working, you know, for example, at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, or even working for governments or other civil society colleagues. And so great opportunities to catch up on a personal level, of course, but more importantly, it's an opportunity to forward humanists and international's voice even in informal settings. And that's stuff we don't really get to talk to our members about much, or you can ever truly quantify that impact. But we definitely do see impact from those conversations as well, particularly over the long-term relationship building side of things.

Gary McLelland 28:01

Amazing, yeah. I mean, it's an amazing overview of what is going to be a very busy 10 days ahead for you, I think. But I mean, if I was to summarize it like this, tell me what you think. But I would say, you know, be being at the Human Rights Council allows members and associates of Humanists International all around the world, through you and through our trainings and engagement opportunities to shape and influence the direction of international law and policy as it relates to a whole number of different policy areas. We've touched um more deeply on the Forbes, freedom of religion or belief aspect, and but also to be lobbying states, other NGOs, to be building partnerships and coalitions. And you know, as you've mentioned, it's um because of the nature of these things, the um the schedules are constantly shifting and changing, and a lot of this stuff, I guess, with diplomats takes place, kind of corridor discussions, informal discussions and things. So it's really important to be there, to be part of those conversations, to be able to speak up and give people the information and the evidence they need, maybe to back up some of their arguments.

Closing Thoughts & Message to Listeners

Leon Langdon 29:03

Yeah, exactly. I think particularly, as I said, it is ultimately state-led and government-led. It's really important to be here and to be telling diplomats and telling governments what's actually happening on the ground for our members. I couldn't do this work without the information in the Freedom of Thought report, which is obviously informed by our members, but also reaching out to members ourselves, several of our members will deliver statements at this upcoming council session. And having their voices like at the table rather than on the table is incredibly important. And being able to inform that work, you know, against the geopolitical backdrop that is, you know, for example, what's going on in Iran at the moment, having voices in our community asking us to comment on these issues and to put forward the humanist perspective or putting forward their perspective on these issues is incredibly important.

Gary McLelland 29:52

Thanks, Leon. Well, you've convinced me. It sounds obviously it's going to be a very important session. And hopefully, this podcast will, for our members and associates, just give a bit more context and understanding. They will see the statements and they'll read the reports that come from the Human Rights Council. But hopefully that helps to put things in a bit of a kind of geopolitical landscape so people can understand why we're doing these things, why they're so important. We're just about to wrap up this episode of the podcast. Leon, is there any last things you'd like to share with our members and associates related to the UN Human Rights Council?

Leon Langdon 30:23

I think it's just to employ them to engage as much as possible. And that goes not just for our members and associates, but also anyone who happens across this podcast and who has the privilege of listening to us, let's say. The UN can be really difficult to get involved in, but there are mechanisms, there are ways through organizations or even as individuals, through, for example, the EPR. The UN cannot function if it doesn't have information. Governments can't function in terms of offering human rights critiques if they don't have information. We need to ensure that it is, you know, well-resourced financially and those discussions are ongoing, and we're trying to be as involved in them as possible. But ultimately, it's information is one of the biggest resources that civil society and just individuals who care about the world can offer these international institutions.

Gary McLelland 31:10

Absolutely. If anybody's listening and hasn't joined our mailing list, please do. The links will be in the show notes, and that's how you can get involved and help supporting this important work. Thank you, Leon. Thanks, Gar. Appreciate it as always. Thanks everyone for listening to this week's episode of the Freedom of Thought Podcast from Humanists International. A big thank you to Humanize Live and James at the Humanize Live team for all their help in producing this podcast. Please remember to like and subscribe and give us a good review on your podcasting app. And tune in next week.