Saudi Arabia faced a second consecutive defeat on Wednesday during the United Nations General Assembly’s election for the Human Rights Council (UNHRC) for the 2025-2027 term. The kingdom’s bid for a seat was thwarted due to widespread concerns over its human rights record, with member states voting against its candidacy.

The election process involved selecting 18 new members from a pool of 19 candidates across five regional slates. Competing within the Asia-Pacific group, Saudi Arabia garnered only 117 votes, placing sixth among six candidates vying for five available seats. This marks the second time Saudi Arabia has been rejected, following its unsuccessful attempt in 2020.

Human Rights Watch previously stated that UN member countries should reject Saudi Arabia’s bid to join the UNHRC, emphasizing the need to uphold General Assembly Resolution 60/251. This resolution, which established the Human Rights Council, urges elector states to “take into account the contribution of candidates to the promotion and protection of human rights.” Furthermore, council members are required to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights” at home and abroad and to “fully cooperate with the Council.”

Before the vote on Wednesday, Louis Charbonneau, UN director at HRW, called Saudi Arabia “unfit to serve on the Human Rights Council,” emphasizing the need for member states to consider the kingdom’s human rights record in their decision-making process. According to a report by HRW, Saudi border guards killed hundreds of Ethiopian migrants and asylum seekers attempting to cross the Yemen-Saudi border in 2022 and 2023, actions that could constitute crimes against humanity. Additionally, HRW alleged there has been a lack of accountability for numerous war crimes committed by the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen since the conflict began in 2015.

Tess McEvoy, ISHR Programme Director, stated, “Today’s vote underscores the power of competitive elections at the UN. For the third year in a row, when given a real choice, States voted down the less deserving candidate, refusing to hand powerful actors who violate basic rights an enhanced ability to bend key human rights processes in their favour.”