01Recorded votes per yearresolutions decided by roll-call, by deciding body
Commission on Human RightsHuman Rights Council
02How contested were the votes?
Share of recorded votes by Yes−No margin — near-unanimous through highly divided.
03Most divided votesnarrowest Yes−No margin
YearResolutionSubjectYNA
01How it voted, year by year
Each column = share of that year's votes cast Yes / Abstain / No (absences excluded; in tooltip). Grey strip below: how many votes that year. Dashed gaps: years outside CHR/HRC membership.
YesAbstainNovotes-per-year strip
02Closest & furthest voting partners
Voting coincidence over shared recorded votes (min. 20 in common). Bar colour = UN regional group.
Closest 30
Furthest 30
AfricanAsia-PacificEastern EuropeLatin America & CaribbeanWestern Europe & Others
03Voting-agreement world mapsame encoding as the blocs matrix
Every state coloured by its voting coincidence with — over the selected window. Dots mark small states; grey = fewer than 20 shared votes. Historical entities (USSR, Yugoslavia, …) appear only in the lists above — the map shows present-day borders.
Vote apartVote alikeselected state
04Every recorded vote votes · click a column header to sort
00Most frequent subjects
Related subject tags in these results:
01Support over time
Yearly average share voting Yes — of those casting Yes / No / Abstain (official totals). Faint dots: individual resolutions.
02Resolutions
YearResolutionSubjectYNABody
03How states voted on this topic
Each state's Yes / Abstain / No share across these votes (min. 5 cast), ranked by support.
YesAbstainNo
Pick a subject tag above, or type in the search box, to see the resolutions and how each state voted.
01Alignment map
Every state is placed by how often it votes the same way as two anchor states — right = agrees with the first, up = agrees with the second (dashed diagonal = equal agreement with both). The selected country set (the Country set control above) is highlighted in colour and labelled; all other states are grey — hover any dot for its name and figures.
AfricanAsia-PacificEastern EuropeLatin America & CaribbeanWestern Europe & Others
02Regional-group cohesion
How unified each UN regional group votes over the window — Agreement Index (1 = unanimous, 0 = evenly split), across all its members. Independent of the country set above.
03Most often outvoted
Share of each state's votes that differ from the outcome's majority position — the winning Yes / No / Abstain side pooled across the whole chamber (min. 20 votes in the window). A high rate often means siding with a cohesive minority bloc, not voting alone — compare the cohesion panel. Bar colour = UN regional group.
AfricanAsia-PacificEastern EuropeLatin America & CaribbeanWestern Europe & Others
04Voting-coincidence matrix
Every pair of states in the selected set, by how often they voted the same way — blue = vote alike, red = vote apart. The densest view: the whole matrix at once, for those who want the pairwise detail. Hover any cell for the figure.
Vote apartVote alike· grey = too few shared votes
Labels:AfricanAsia-PacificEastern EuropeLatin America & CaribbeanWestern Europe & Others
01Source & scope
All data comes from the OHCHR Search Library — Voting collection, harvested in full (… records — matching the collection's own reported total) via its MARCXML export. It covers every voting record catalogued for the Commission on Human Rights (1946–2006) and its successor, the Human Rights Council (2006–present).
02Why most views show ~1,700 resolutions, not 6,346
Only resolutions decided by an actual roll-call (recorded) vote have a per-country breakdown. The Country profile, Topics, and Blocs views all depend on that breakdown, so they operate on this subset. Everything else — most resolutions — passed by consensus, with no individual positions logged.
Vote type (source catalogue)ResolutionsHas roll-call
03Resolutions by decade
DecadeAll resolutionsRecorded votes
04Vote-code legend
CodeMeaningRowsShare
05How topics are identified
The Topics view does not use machine-learning or keyword clustering. It reuses OHCHR's own catalogued subject heading for each resolution (MARC field 991$d — the controlled vocabulary librarians use for search facets on the source site), so every topic label is traceable to the source catalogue. Subjects are additionally split into thematic vs. country-situation using a simple name-matching heuristic against the list of states in the vote data — imperfect at the margins and easy to adjust in the build script.
Distinct subjects, all resolutions
…
Distinct subjects, recorded votes
…
06Known data-quality notes
Roll-call reconciles with official totals
…
Roll-call vs. totals mismatch
…
For ~9% of recorded votes — concentrated in older Commission-era records — the sum of individual Yes/No/Abstain positions doesn't exactly match the resolution's official totals, almost always by a small margin in the Abstain / non-participation count. Official totals are treated as authoritative; the per-country breakdown is shown alongside rather than forced to reconcile. One lowercase vote-code typo was normalised during parsing; nothing else is altered.
07Analytics & privacy
This site uses Google Analytics 4 only to see which views are used, and only after you accept the banner (Google Consent Mode v2 defaults to denied; nothing is sent before then, and a
Do-Not-Track browser setting skips it entirely). We record view names only (Overview, Country profile, Topics, Blocs, Methodology). We never send your searches, the countries or subjects you select, the records you open, or your IP address in clear — GA4 anonymises IP and ad-personalisation / Google signals are disabled. The offline single-file version does no tracking at all. 08Alignment methods
The Blocs & alignment tab uses three standard measures from the study of legislative and UN voting, all computed client-side from the recorded roll-calls (no external data):
• Alignment map — a reference-pole scatter: each state is placed by its voting agreement with two anchor states you choose (horizontal = agreement with the first, vertical = agreement with the second, each 0–100% over shared recorded votes). Positions are directly interpretable; the dashed diagonal marks equal agreement with both anchors.
• Regional-group cohesion — the Agreement Index (Hix, Noury & Roland): for each resolution, (largest bloc − ½·the rest) ÷ total among a group's members, averaged over the window; 1 = unanimous, 0 = evenly split.
• Most often outvoted — the share of a state's votes that differ from the majority position (the winning Yes/No/Abstain side, from official whole-chamber totals), over states with at least 20 votes in the window. It measures being on the losing side, which is not the same as being isolated — a state can be in a large, cohesive minority bloc.
• Alignment map — a reference-pole scatter: each state is placed by its voting agreement with two anchor states you choose (horizontal = agreement with the first, vertical = agreement with the second, each 0–100% over shared recorded votes). Positions are directly interpretable; the dashed diagonal marks equal agreement with both anchors.
• Regional-group cohesion — the Agreement Index (Hix, Noury & Roland): for each resolution, (largest bloc − ½·the rest) ÷ total among a group's members, averaged over the window; 1 = unanimous, 0 = evenly split.
• Most often outvoted — the share of a state's votes that differ from the majority position (the winning Yes/No/Abstain side, from official whole-chamber totals), over states with at least 20 votes in the window. It measures being on the losing side, which is not the same as being isolated — a state can be in a large, cohesive minority bloc.