These assessments show what action government has taken to carry out the United Nation’s (UN’s) recommendations, within the scope of our methodology.
They include recommendations from the UN committees associated with the human rights treaties that the UK government has signed and ratified (agreed to follow), which are:
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
- International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
- Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)
- Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)
- Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
- Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (CAT)
Overview of action taken
Monitoring economic, social and cultural rights obligations
What we assessed in the recommendation:
Create a system for tracking how well government is meeting its economic, social and cultural rights obligations and use this system to measure progress for different groups. Consider using the guidelines on human rights indicators developed by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
ICESCR Concluding Observations 2025, paragraph 68:
The Committee recommends that the State Party take steps to progressively develop and apply appropriate indicators on the implementation of economic, social and cultural rights in order to facilitate the assessment of progress achieved by the State Party in complying with its obligations under the Covenant for various segments of the population. In that context, the Committee refers the State Party to, inter alia, the conceptual and methodological framework on human rights indicators developed by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The UK government has not created a system using UN guidelines on human rights indicators for:
- tracking how well it is meeting its economic, social and cultural rights obligations
- measuring economic, social and cultural human rights progress for different groups
Assessment up to date as of June 2026.
Requiring businesses to carry out human rights checks
What we assessed in the recommendation:
Update the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. Introduce laws that require businesses to check for and stop human rights abuses across their work (due diligence), including in organisations they work with. This law should ensure that companies are held responsible if they violate people’s economic, social or cultural rights, and should also ensure that victims in the UK, including people who are not citizens, have effective access to remedies. This should be done in line with United Nations advice on government obligations on business activities. As a priority, the government should require human rights due diligence to be carried out in industries that have caused issues or concerns in other countries, especially in the financial and banking sectors. This should include a requirement for businesses to take into account children’s rights.
ICESCR concluding observations 2025, paragraph 11:
Recalling its previous recommendation, the Committee urges the State Party, along with the devolved governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales: (a) To establish a legal framework requiring businesses to conduct human rights due diligence, ensuring accountability for violations of economic, social and cultural rights in their operations and supply chains, both domestically and abroad, and guaranteeing effective access to remedies for victims, including non-nationals in the State Party, and to be guided by the Committee’s general comment No. 24 (2017) on State obligations under the Covenant in the context of business activities. As a matter of priority, the State Party should require mandatory human rights due diligence in sectors that have caused extraterritorial impacts and concerns, particularly the financial and banking services.
ICESCR concluding observations 2025, paragraph 11:
Recalling its previous recommendation, the Committee urges the State Party, along with the devolved governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales: (b) to update its National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, taking into account the 2016 guidance on national action plans on business and human rights of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises.
CRC concluding observations 2016, paragraph 19:
With reference to its general comment No. 16 (2013) on State obligations regarding the impact of business on children’s rights, the Committee recommends that the State party: (a) Integrate an explicit focus on children’s rights, including the requirement for businesses to undertake child-rights due diligence, in the revised version of its first National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights.
The CRC recommendation was made in July 2016 and the ICESCR recommendation was made in March 2025.
In May 2020, the UK government published a progress update on the implementation of the National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights. However, the plan itself has not been updated since it was first published in September 2013.
Since the recommendations were made, the UK government has not introduced a law specifically to require businesses to check for and stop human rights abuses across their work.
In September 2024, the UK government awarded a contract to the University of Nottingham to carry out a baseline assessment on the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), which will include to what extent UK businesses have committed to respecting human rights, including by carrying out voluntary Human Rights Due Diligence. This delivery date for this is unconfirmed.
In June 2026, the UK government introduced the Immigration and Asylum Bill to parliament. The bill includes changes which would extend the duty in the Modern Slavery Act 2015 for commercial organisations to report annually on actions taken to address modern slavery in supply chains to the public sector. It also introduces powers for the Home Secretary to apply financial penalties to organisations that do not comply with the reporting requirements. The bill is currently being considered by parliament and is not yet law.
Assessment up to date as of June 2026.
Action plan to address racial discrimination
What we assessed in the recommendation
Put in place or improve policies and plans for tackling racial discrimination and inequality. These should specifically address the root causes of discrimination and colonialism and slavery. This should be done in a coordinated way, with specific, timebound and measurable goals. Establish clear and effective ways to monitor current and future policies, plans and strategies for combatting racial discrimination. These should assess the impact of reducing institutional, systemic and structural inequalities. Plans, policies and strategies should be developed, implemented, monitored and evaluated in consultation with civil society organisations. This includes on the progress and final outcome assessments.
CERD concluding observations 2024, paragraph 18:
The Committee recommends that the State party adopt further comprehensive policies and action plans, or strengthen existing ones, to tackle racial discrimination and inequalities in all jurisdictions of the State party, including the overseas territories and the Crown dependencies, in a coordinated manner and that it include in them specific, time-bound and measurable goals. In particular, it recommends that the State party: (a) Establish effective and transparent monitoring mechanisms for current and future policies, plans and strategies to measure their concrete impact in combating racial discrimination, including its institutional and systemic dimensions, and in reducing structural inequalities. (d) Ensure meaningful consultations and engagement with civil society organizations in the development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policy measures, plans and strategies, including progress and final outcome assessments.
CERD recommendations 2024, paragraph 26:
The Committee recommends that the State party take adequate measures to combat the structural discrimination and inequalities faced by ethnic minorities, address the root causes of racial discrimination and inequalities, including colonialism and slavery, and eliminate all obstacles preventing these groups from fully enjoying their rights. Recalling its previous concluding observations, it recommends that the State party adopt a detailed action plan to eliminate structural discrimination and inequalities that has concrete targets, monitoring and accountability mechanisms and sufficient resources and includes special or affirmative measures, including in all devolved jurisdictions, overseas territories and Crown dependencies, in accordance with articles 1 (4), 2 (2) and 5 of the Convention. It recalls that, in accordance with its general recommendation No. 32 (2009) on the meaning and scope of special measures in the Convention, States parties are responsible for ensuring that such special measures are designed and implemented following consultation with the communities concerned and with their active participation.
In 2022, before the recommendation was made in September 2024, the UK government introduced the Inclusive Britain Action Plan (IBAP). This set out a strategy and actions aimed at tackling racial and ethnic disparities more broadly across all ethnic groups. It does not reference colonialism or slavery.
There is no evidence that the UK government consulted stakeholders when preparing the IBAP. However, the IBAP was the UK government’s response to the 2021 report of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities (CRED). In preparing the report, CRED issued a call for evidence. The summary of responses to the call for evidence stated that CRED received evidence from over 2,000 stakeholders, including organisations representing different ethnic groups relevant to this recommendation.
Since the recommendation was made, the UK government established a Race Equality Engagement Group (REEG) in March 2025. The REEG will aim to better understand the lived experience of ethnic minority people and ensure their views are represented in government decision making.
In March 2025, the UK government launched a consultation on potential measures to be included in a draft Equality (Race and Disability) Bill. The consultation asked for views on how to implement mandatory ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting for large employers.
In April 2025, the UK government launched a call for evidence on the prevalence of pay discrimination and on how to make sure the right to equal pay is effective for people from ethnic minority backgrounds. The consultation and call for evidence have now closed, and the UK government is considering responses to these.
Assessment up to date as of September 2025.
Independent complaints system to investigate racial discrimination by law enforcement
What we assessed in the recommendation
Set up an independent complaints system to investigate claims against law enforcement of racial profiling, use of excessive force and racial violence, and unlawful or inappropriate stop and search and strip searches. This system should help victims report these crimes. It must ensure that perpetrators are prosecuted and punished with appropriate penalties. Victims should have access to effective remedies and adequate reparations.
CERD concluding observations 2024, paragraph 32:
In the light of its general recommendations No. 31 (2005) on the prevention of racial discrimination in the administration and functioning of the criminal justice system and No. 36 (2020) on preventing and combating racial profiling by law enforcement officials, the Committee recommends that the State party: (e) Establish an independent complaint mechanism to carry out investigations into all allegations of racial profiling, stop-and-search, strip-searches, excessive use of force and racist violence, facilitate reporting by victims and ensure that perpetrators are prosecuted and punished with appropriate penalties and that victims have access to effective remedies and adequate reparations.
Since before the recommendation was made, people have been able to make complaints against the police about the way they have been treated. They can complain directly to the police force responsible or to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), who oversee the police complaints system in England and Wales. This includes claims relating to racial profiling, stop and search, strip searches, use of excessive force and racial violence. The IOPC operates independently from government.
Complaints sent to the IOPC will initially be dealt with by the police force or local policing body involved, with the IOPC investigating the most serious complaints. In November 2024, the IOPC published updated guidelines on investigating allegations of racial discrimination.
Where allegations may amount to a criminal offence, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is responsible for decisions on whether to prosecute. The CPS operates independently from government.
The UK government has made no changes to this process since the recommendation was made in September 2024. It has not taken any action to increase access to remedies or reparations for victims of racial profiling, excessive use of force, racist violence and unlawful or inappropriate stop-and-search and strip-searches.
Assessment up to date as of September 2025.
Children's rights and complaints
What we assessed in the recommendation
Give national human rights institutions and Children’s Commissioners the powers they need to monitor children’s rights and to deal with complaints by children in a child-friendly way.
CRC concluding observations 2023, paragraph 13:
The Committee recommends that the State party: (a) Ensure that the national human rights institutions or Children’s Commissioners, as relevant, have the mandate and sufficient human, financial and technical resources to monitor children’s rights and to receive, investigate and address complaints by children in a child-friendly manner.
Since the recommendation was made in June 2023, the UK government has not altered the powers of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) or the Children’s Commissioner for England (CCE).
Under section 9, 10 and 11 of the Equality Act 2006, the EHRC has the mandate to monitor children’s human rights in England and Wales. Under section 2 of the Children’s Act 2004 (as amended), the CCE has a mandate to monitor children’s rights in England
Under section 28 of the Equality Act 2006, the EHRC has a mandate to provide legal assistance in claims under the Equality Act 2010, including those from children where there is a human rights element in addition to discrimination. However, these powers do not cover cases that only raise human rights issues. The EHRC in England and Wales has the power to intervene in existing legal proceedings to provide the court with its expertise on human rights and / or equality law and can institute own name judicial review proceedings in respect of the same. The CCE is able to investigate matters relating to children’s rights, but is not able to conduct investigations of the cases of individual children with the exception of children (including 18 to 25 year olds) who are leaving care, living away from home or receiving social care services.
Assessment up to date as of December 2024.
Coordinating and monitoring CEDAW implementation
What we assessed in the recommendation
Consider setting up an oversight body for coordinating and monitoring implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Include input from national human rights institutions and women’s organisations.
CEDAW concluding observations 2019, paragraph 26:
The Committee recommends that the State party: (b) Consider establishing a national oversight mechanism to coordinate and monitor the implementation of the Convention, with the effective participation of its national human rights institutions and women’s organizations.
The UK government has not set up an oversight body for coordinating and monitoring implementation of CEDAW. However, there is evidence that it may have considered this. As the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) noted in a parliamentary oral evidence session in April 2024, they were ‘not in favour of further formal mechanisms beyond the arrangements that we have at the moment’.
Assessment up to date as of December 2024.
National Preventive Mechanism (NPM)
What we assessed in the recommendation
Set out in law the role and powers of the United Kingdom’s National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) and its members. Guarantee that the NPM is independent from government.
CAT concluding observations 2019, paragraph 17:
The State party should clearly set out in legislation the mandate and powers of the NPM secretariat and its members and guarantee their operational independence, and ensure effective follow-up to and implementation of the NPM’s recommendations, in accordance with the guidelines on national preventive mechanisms of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (see CAT/OP/12/5, paras. 6-8)). The State party should also guarantee that the NPM’s secretariat and member bodies receive sufficient resources to discharge their prevention mandate independently and effectively.
The UK government has not clearly set out in legislation the mandate, powers and membership of the NPM secretariat or guarantees of operational independence. The NPM was established in 2009 by written ministerial statement, which designated its members.
The UK government consulted on placing the NPM on a statutory footing in 2020, after the recommendation was made in June 2019, but has not yet published a response.
Assessment up to date as of December 2024.
Child-rights impact assessments
What we assessed in the recommendation
Develop a mandatory child-rights impact assessment process to assess the impact of new laws and policies on children’s rights.
CRC concluding observations 2023, paragraph 8:
The Committee recommends that the State party: (e) Develop mandatory child-rights impact assessment procedures for legislation and policies relevant to children in England, Northern Ireland and Wales.
Since the recommendation was made in June 2023, there is no evidence that the UK government has developed mandatory child-rights impact assessment procedures for legislation and policies relevant to children in England and Wales.
The UK government Department for Education did produce a Child Rights Impact Assessment (CRIA) template in 2018 for use by civil servants within government departments. The Children’s Rights Alliance for England explains this on page 2 of their guidance, Using CRIAs to improve policy making. This is not mandatory.
Assessment up to date as of December 2024.
Transgender and gender-questioning children
What we assessed in the recommendation
Develop guidance, with input from children and civil society, on making sure transgender and gender-questioning children are fully included in schools. The guidance should respect their rights, including to identity and privacy.
CRC concluding observations 2023, paragraph 47:
Noting with concern inequalities in educational attainment and outcomes for children in disadvantaged situations, the Committee recommends that the State party: (g) Develop guidance, with the participation of civil society organizations and children, for the inclusion of trans and gender-questioning children in schools in all constituent countries and ensure that such guidance fully respects their rights, including their rights to identity and to privacy.
The UK government opened a consultation on draft guidance for schools and colleges on gender questioning children in December 2023, after the recommendation was made. This consultation closed in March 2024. The outcome of the consultation has not been published, so it is not possible to establish whether civil society and children participated in it.
The draft guidance specifies that it aims to help schools make decisions regarding children questioning their gender ‘within an environment that protects the rights of children fairly’. Schools’ obligations under the Equality Act 2010, Human Rights Act 1998 and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) are outlined. The draft guidance mentions the need to respect the right to privacy, but not the need to respect the right to identity.
Assessment up to date as of December 2024.
Use of restraint on children
What we assessed in the recommendation
Introduce legal guidance to make sure restraint on children is used only as a last resort, and only to prevent harm to the child or others. Monitor the use of this guidance.
CRC concluding observations 2023, paragraph 30:
The Committee notes with appreciation the information provided by the State party on the regulations governing the use of electrical discharge weapons, pain inducing techniques and seclusion on children, but remains deeply concerned by the large number of children who continue to experience such treatment, particularly children belonging to ethnic minority groups and children with disabilities. The Committee reiterates its previous recommendations10 and urges the State party: (b) To develop statutory guidance on the use of restraint on children to ensure that it is used only as a measure of last resort and exclusively to prevent harm to the child or others and monitor its implementation.
CAT concluding observations 2019, paragraph 23:
The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation (CAT/C/GBR/CO/5, para. 27) that the State party raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility and ensure the full implementation of juvenile justice standards. In accordance with rules 63 and 64 of the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (General Assembly resolution 45/113, annex), instruments of restraint and force can only be used in exceptional cases, where all other control methods have been exhausted and failed. In addition, the State party should prohibit the application of solitary confinement to juveniles. It should also prohibit the transport of prisoners in any way that subjects them to unnecessary physical risk of abuse in violation of the Convention.
Since the CAT recommendation was made in 2019, the secondary legislation governing the use of restraint in the Youth Secure Estate (YSE) has not changed. In Secure Training Centres (STC) and Secure Children’s Homes (SCH) in England, restraint may be used for a wide range of purposes including to prevent damage to property, but must be necessary and proportionate to this aim. Restraint is not covered by the relevant secondary legislation for Youth Offender Institutions.
After the CRC recommendation was made in June 2023, the Ministry of Justice developed non-statutory guidance on the use of restraint across the YSE, including STCs and Young Offender Institutions (YOI). This guidance was implemented from February 2024 and will be monitored by the Youth Custody Service. Pre-existing statutory guidance by the Department of Education governs the use of restraint in Secure Children's Homes (SCH) in England.
Assessment up to date as of December 2024.
Page updates
Published:
29 January 2025
Last updated:
27 August 2026