In-country Programme (ICP)

collage ICP2


The In-country Programme (ICP) is UPR Info’s operational programme.  Its  chief objective  is to support the implementation of human rights obligations and commitments in each of the ICP’s target countries throughout the UPR mechanism. To achieve this, we facilitate dialogue between national stakeholders to monitor the implementation of UPR recommendations.  

UPR Info supports a number of countries across Asia and Africa during the UPR cycle. The beneficiaries of these efforts range from Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), parliamentarians, government officials, the judiciary, students, and media representatives. The ICP supports local ownership and a human rights-based approach. It has been designed to adapt to the needs of national stakeholders and to the context of the target country. 

We have identified five entry points throughout the UPR timeline to effectively engage in the mechanism.

In Country Program: Five entry Points

ICP 5 steps V2_EN by UPR Info Interns

Strategic objectives of the ICP

Objective 1

To increase quality information on the progress and challenges in implementing UPR recommendations in the target countries.

Objective 2

To trigger dialogue among groups of stakeholders on the human rights situation of target countries through the UPR mechanism.

Where do we work?

For more information on the UPR stage of each ICP country, you can visit our country-specific pages.

    In Africa

    Congo (Democratic Republic)
    • Step 1 – July 2018
    • Step 2 – February 2019
    • Step 3 – August 2019
    • Step 4.1 – November 2019
    • Step 4.2 – October 2021
    Cote D'Ivoire
    • Step 1 – August 2018
    • Step 2 – February 2019
    • Step 3 – July 2019
    • Step 4.1 – September-October 2019
    • Step 4.2 – September 2020 and August-October 2021
    • Step 5 – October 2021
    • Step 1 – May 2019
    • Step 2 – October 2019
    • Step 3 – December 2020
    • Step 1 – April-July 2021
    • Step 2 – October-November 2021
    South Africa

     Step 1 – February 2022

    In Asia

    • Step 5 – January 2020
    • Step Pre-1 – 2022
    • Step 1– March 2018
    • Step2– November 2018
    • Step 3– February-March 2019
    • Step 4.1 – October 2019
    • Step 1 – January 2020
    • Step 2 – October-November 2020
    • Step 3 – December 2021
    • Step 1 – February 2020
    • Step 2 – October 2020
    • Step 3 – December 2021

    What we achieve

    • Participation of regional stakeholders: The ICP programme actively reaches out to regional representatives in order to ensure effective and sustainable UPR participation. This has been achieved in countries such as Bangladesh, Côte d’Ivoire,  Guinea, DRC, Kyrgyzstan, Morocco and Nepal. 
    • Engagement with parliaments: Following reports on the importance of involving  parliaments in the national UPR process, UPR Info’s ICP reaches out to parliamentary actors in the countries where it operates. Moreover, the Parliaments of Côte d’Ivoire , DRC, Jordan and Togo have been involved in some activities and capacity building sessions. 
    • Multi-stakeholder approach to the UPR: UPR Info’s ICP encourages multi-stakeholder initiatives and plans that contribute to build trust and prove the added value of cooperation. For example, this approach has been successfully implemented in countries such as Bangladesh, Côte d’Ivoire, DRC, and Kenya, where government representatives, CSOs and NHRI gathered together to discuss implementation strategies. 
    • Effective advocacy: Our capacity building activities focus on maximising advocacy through the UPR. As a result, national CSOs and NHRIs suggest recommendations during the in-country Pre-sessions in order to inform the UPR Working Group.  The implementation of certain CSO and NHRI recommendations has also been achieved. Here we can briefly mention the efforts of CSOs and NHRIs in  Georgia, Cambodia, Côte d’Ivoire, DRC and Nepal. 
    • Strengthening the capacities of NHRIs: All NHRIs with whom ICP has engaged have actively participated in the UPR, both by submitting information/initiating consultations for reporting before the review and at mid-term. The acquisition of an A-status by some of these institutions reveals the impact of this engagement.   We can mention the recent work of NHRIs in  Bangladesh, Côte d’Ivoire, DRC, Guinea, and New Zealand.


    "The objective is to submit one report containing views from all regions of Kyrgyzstan. Having more CSOs trained on the UPR would be useful for exchanging important information on the human rights situation in the country."
    Murat Karypov Deputy Director - “Nash Vek” Bishkek


    “I find it important, as a member of civil society, to go and talk to parliamentarians in the context of the implementation of the UPR, especially in terms of advocating for the adoption of a law or an amendment to the law.”

    Jemima Mbuyi AOT-DRC  


    “It was the very first, real high-level meeting in which the high-level government participated the whole day. We never experienced such a serious commitment from them before. (...) Civil society needs to continue engaging with relevant government ministries and parliamentarians ahead of the next review to address implementation gaps.”

    Urantsooj Gombosuren, Chairperson, Centre for Human Rights and Development- Mongolia

    For more information, please contact