The council has 47 members that are elected for three-year terms. These have included overlooking the violations of some of the world's most oppressive dictatorships and even honoring some of the most flagrant abusers of human rights with seats on the council.
"Al Jazeera's Rosiland Jordan, reporting from Washington, DC, said the United States exit from the 47-member Geneva-based body" did not come as a shock", as it was something that Haley had talked about nearly from the moment that she became the U.S. ambassador to the UN in early 2017.
"The UNHRC has perverted its stated mandate by serially abusing Israel, while horrific human rights abuses around the world receive scant attention, if at all", Hier and Cooper went on to say.
The US decision Tuesday was hailed by some as a principled act proclaiming the Trump administration's refusal to continue to bestow legitimacy on a flawed and unrepentant body through American participation. "The only thing worse than a council that does nearly nothing to protect human rights is a council that covers for human-rights abuses - and is therefore an obstacle to progress and an impediment to change".
"Far from advancing its viewpoint, such withdrawals wound the impact that the voice of the USA inevitably carries", he said.More news: Falling German crime stats "speak for themselves"
No-one, she argues, is lily white when it comes to human rights, not the least America which has allowed kids to be "ripped away from their parents".
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley's scathing, though predictable, critique of the United Nations' main body for promoting and defending human rights is yet further evidence that this administration has no real interest in doing the hard labor required to be a leader on human rights. Several human rights NGOs, including some global groups that represent a large number of such NGOs, opposed the "reforms". Suggestions for reform of the council by rights groups were incremental, she said, and consensus based. "The first loser here is human rights", Dr. Labonte says.
That means the council will be left without one of its traditional defenders of human rights.
Asked about USA criticism of China's rights record, Geng said the United States was ignoring the facts and that anyone who was without prejudice could see the enormous progress China had made on rights.
Especially given the timing of the decision, directly following the U.N. human rights chief's valid criticism ("unconscionable") of Trump's child separation policy that American medical experts have said amounts to child abuse, the discussion now centers on the United States' delinquency on human rights - not on the UNHRC or on the U.N.'s more general hypocrisy on human rights. "But that is precisely why we must leave". The Russian mission to the United Nations called the US criticism of the council "cynical", saying: "The US apparently would like to turn the council into an obedient tool to promote its interests and punish objectionable countries".More news: Croatia send reluctant substitute Nikola Kalinic home from World Cup
"How can we stay when USA slammed the door on our account", a former senior diplomat told The Times of Israel, arguing that "once the U.S. has left the council because of us, we have no choice but to cut ties".
"While the UNHRC has a sad and troubling record of showing strong bias against Israel, US withdrawal will do nothing to address this issue", the J Street statement said. Obama joined. Trump is taking us out.
US Ambassador to the United Nation Nikki Haley speaks at the US Department of State in Washington DC on June 19, 2018.
The US officially pulled out from the UNHRC on Tuesday for being a "cesspool of political bias", particularly against its ally Israel.More news: Google Podcasts: Everything you need to know!