Who this is relevant for
This entry point is for victims, family members, civil-society organisations, local and international lawyers, and researchers. It is particularly useful where there is an ongoing risk, an identifiable state action, official documents, or a credible pattern affecting several people.
Scope and procedure
Communications may address past violations, ongoing or imminent harm and concerning legislation or policies. The experts decide independently whether to send an allegation letter, urgent appeal or another communication. Domestic remedies need not generally be exhausted for Special Procedures, unlike many treaty-body individual communications.
Evidence, strategy and submission preparation
The intake should distinguish the alleged acts from background commentary, identify dates and actors, and make the information verifiable. Choose mandates by their actual scope: judicial independence is not the same as a generic request to reverse a judgment; privacy questions are not automatically GDPR complaints; and arbitrary detention has a specialised working group procedure.
Practical checklist
- Choose the thematic issue before searching for a mandate-holder's name.
- Check whether a country mandate also covers the alleged situation.
- Document what is known and what remains unverified.
- Record whether the victim agrees to naming and public disclosure.
- Explain any urgency with concrete dates and identifiable harm.
Key considerations and documents
| Issue | What to verify |
|---|---|
| Judicial independence | Pressure on judges, lawyers or prosecutors and systemic interference. |
| Arbitrary detention | Deprivation of liberty inconsistent with relevant human-rights standards. |
| Privacy | State surveillance or serious interference with private life; not a GDPR regulator. |
| Business and human rights | Alleged rights harms connected with corporate operations and responsibilities. |
What outcomes and limitations should you expect?
A mandate directory should not imply every allegation is accepted, or that a Special Rapporteur can order release, overturn a conviction, remove an INTERPOL notice or award damages. Published communications are not final judgments. Some working groups follow distinct methods of work.
How our team can help
Our role is to translate an account of events into a documented, procedurally coherent submission strategy. We distinguish public information from confidential materials, identify thresholds relevant to each mechanism, and recommend an appropriate next step even when that means a national remedy or no UN filing at present.
Frequently asked questions
Must I first lose a national court case?
Not as a general condition for Special Procedures communications. Prior domestic steps can still improve context and evidence.
Can several mandate-holders consider the same information?
Potentially, where their mandates genuinely overlap. The experts decide whether any joint communication is appropriate.
How soon is an urgent appeal sent?
No guaranteed timeline. OHCHR prioritises serious and urgent situations, but action depends on the experts and the information provided.
Request an assessment
Tell us the issue and any immediate danger. We can help screen relevant thematic and country mandates.
Next step: Request a confidential case assessment.
Related pages
- UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers
- UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention: Individual Cases
- UN Special Rapporteur Complaint Preparation
- Urgent Appeals to UN Special Procedures
Official references
- OHCHR Special Procedures submission guidance
- OHCHR current thematic mandate registry
- OHCHR current country mandate registry
Independent informational website. Not an official United Nations or OHCHR service. UN mechanisms assess matters independently; filing does not guarantee intervention, an outcome or a particular timeline.