Universal Periodic Review

This UPR tool reflects the global recommendations made to Austria by all countries world-wide during the Universial Priodic Review process (UPR) at the UN Human Rights Council and their current status of implementation. The League coordinates a significant part of Austrian civil society in the UPR process. 

The recommendations can be filtered in the menu below by human rights topics, SDGs, proponent states etc. also a search function is available. 

 

We welcome your comments and suggestions at upr@liga.or.at.


Search category
Filter options
Filter by tag…

Progress: No progress

Review section 35 (2) of the asylum law, granting the right to family reunification without undue restrictions, in particular to unaccompanied minors

Proponent:

Uruguay


Republic of Eastern Uruguay

Uruguay


Republic of Eastern Uruguay

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Dec 31, 2024):

Section 35 (2) of the Asylum Act regulates family reunification for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection (see Asylum Act 2005, Federal Law Gazette I No. 56/2018 : https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/eli/bgbl/i/2005/100/P35/NOR40205456). According to a study from December 2016, there are further challenges in the area of family reunification (see the PDF from the European Migration Network on family reunification of third-country nationals in Austria: https://www.emn.at/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Die-Familienzusammenfuehrung-von-Drittstaatsangeh%c3%b6rigen-in-%c3%96sterreich.pdf, page 35 ff). In contrast to persons entitled to asylum, a 3-year waiting period without any flexibility is required for persons entitled to subsidiary protection. This cannot be waived even by a decision of the authorities. In addition, there are the fundamental problems that exist with every family reunification under Austrian law: German language skills must be demonstrated at the time of application. And at least in the context of a prognosis decision, the authorities must be convinced of a secure livelihood and local housing for the family that will join them in the future. This legal situation remains unchanged.  In fact, there has been a larger number of family reunifications in recent years, although the publicly available statistical data does not allow a breakdown into family reunifications of persons entitled to asylum or subsidiary protection. The Red Cross ( https://www.roteskreuz.at/ich-brauche-hilfe/familienzusammenfuehrung) in particular provides support services and counselling for applications for family reunification;

Progress: No progress

Provide sufficient high-quality childcare places on a national level to improve the compatibility of family and career

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

The recent extension of the Equal Treatment Act in Austria, particularly in the context of caring activities, is a positive step. Nevertheless, precise wording is needed to ensure legal certainty. Austria has recently extended the scope of protection of the Equal Treatment Act to cover discrimination in the context of care work. This is a significant step forward, but requires clear wording in the extended § 5a to ensure clarity and legal certainty.   The missed opportunity to distribute parental leave more evenly is regrettable and contradicts the goal of gender equality. The current amendment of the law offers the opportunity to rectify shortcomings, in particular by introducing a statutory minimum compensation for cases of discrimination. Despite positive developments, however, there is still no uniform standard of protection for all those affected by discrimination. Civil society, including the Litigation Association, appeals to legislators to seriously consider the recommendations, particularly with regard to the clear wording of Section 5a, the equal distribution of parental leave and the introduction of statutory minimum compensation. A holistic view beyond the world of work and the transfer of responsibility to the Federal Equal Treatment Commission in accordance with Directive (EU) 2019/1158 are crucial. These measures strengthen the protection of families and promote gender equality in Austria (see statement of the Litigation Association: https://www.klagsverband.at/klav/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Stellungnahme-Klagsverband-10.07.2023.pdf).  As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the federal government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).

Progress: No progress

Develop a comprehensive and mandatory strategy for the de-institutionalisation of children with disabilities, including needs-based family support and personal support services

Proponent:

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

League


Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte


Rahlgasse 1/26, A-1060 Wien


http://www.liga.or.at/projekte/universal-periodic-review-2020-upr/

Remarks to progress by Liga (last modified Apr 1, 2025):

Austria lacks the political will to implement a fully inclusive education system. There is no precise information on the budget allocated to individual children’s needs to enable appropriate measures for equal access to education. The Second National Action Plan on Disability 2022-2030 (NAP II) does not promise any effective changes in the area of inclusive education. None of the 31 measures in the education chapter, which sets inclusive education as a goal, have their own budget funds available. Inclusion is only mentioned when it comes to pre-determined learning content and educational goals of school types, which contradicts the human rights-based model of disability. As a result, children and young people with learning difficulties and cognitive disabilities are largely excluded from educational opportunities after compulsory schooling (see the National Disability Action Plan on the website of the Ministry of Social Affairs: https://www.sozialministerium.at/Themen/Soziales/Menschen-mit-Behinderungen/Nationaler-Aktionsplan-Behinderung.html).   There is still no legal entitlement to an inclusive kindergarten place. In Vienna, due to parental protests, a compulsory kindergarten year and an 11th and 12th school year were temporarily offered for children with disabilities, but with restrictions and redistributions. The children are largely redistributed, often lose their afternoon care (and parents their jobs) and sometimes have to be transported across Vienna, even though they previously had a place with afternoon care at their place of residence. In addition, recreational teachers continue to be cut or converted into assistant teachers, which jeopardises the quality of the profession and the inclusive multi-grade classes. The quality of the profession and the inclusive multi-grade classes is jeopardised. The Austrian Ombudsman Board has been informed, there have already been two television programmes on this and there will be another review shortly (see link to the „Citizens‘ Advocate“ programme on the topic of children with special educational needs (SEN) on the website of the Austrian Ombudsman Board: https://volksanwaltschaft.gv.at/artikel/11-und-12-Schuljahr-fuer-Kinder-mit-Behinderung available).
  As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the Federal Government is launching a process to improve child and youth welfare, harmonise standards and provide funding for cross-sectoral projects (see Government Plan 2025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).
The recent extension of the Equal Treatment Act in Austria, particularly in the context of caring activities, is a positive step. Nevertheless, precise wording is needed to ensure legal certainty. Austria has recently extended the scope of protection of the Equal Treatment Act to cover discrimination in the context of care work. This is a significant step forward, but requires clear wording in the extended § 5a to ensure clarity and legal certainty.   The missed opportunity to distribute parental leave more evenly is regrettable and contradicts the goal of gender equality. The current amendment of the law offers the opportunity to rectify shortcomings, in particular by introducing a statutory minimum compensation for cases of discrimination. Despite positive developments, however, there is still no uniform standard of protection for all those affected by discrimination. Civil society, including the Litigation Association, appeals to legislators to seriously consider the recommendations, particularly with regard to the clear wording of Section 5a, the equal distribution of parental leave and the introduction of statutory minimum compensation. A holistic view beyond the world of work and the transfer of responsibility to the Federal Equal Treatment Commission in accordance with Directive (EU) 2019/1158 are crucial. These measures strengthen the protection of families and promote gender equality in Austria (see statement of the Litigation Association: https://www.klagsverband.at/klav/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Stellungnahme-Klagsverband-10.07.2023.pdf).  As part of the Government Plan 2025-2029, the federal government is pursuing this goal through close cooperation with all stakeholders (see Government Plan 2ß025-2029: https://www.bundeskanzleramt.gv.at/bundeskanzleramt/die-bundesregierung/regierungsdokumente.html).

Redaktionelle Verantwortung UPR-Tool:

Österreichische Liga für Menschenrechte, upr@liga.or.at

Lizenz CC-BY-SA 

Unterstützung durch:

Forschungskooperation mit der Volksanwaltschaft

Förderung des Zukunftsfonds der Republik Österreich

 

Receive the latest news

Abonnieren Sie unseren Newsletter