A/HRC/24/22 I. Introduction 1. In its resolution 21/3, the Human Rights Council requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to collect information from States Members of the United Nations and other relevant stakeholders on best practices in the application of traditional values while promoting and protecting human rights and upholding human dignity, and to submit a summary thereon to the Council. The present report is submitted to the twenty-fourth session of the Council in accordance with its calendar of thematic resolutions. 2. On 26 December 2012, OHCHR sent a request for information to all permanent missions to the United Nations Office in Geneva and other relevant stakeholders. As at 27 May 2013, it had received responses from Groups of States, States Members of the United Nations (European Union; Belarus; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Brunei Darussalam; Guatemala; Honduras; Indonesia; Iraq; Jordan; Mauritius; Pakistan; Oman; Qatar; Serbia; Spain; Sri Lanka; Syrian Arab Republic); national human rights institutions (Colombia; Georgia; Ukraine; Uzbekistan); United Nations agencies (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East); academic institutions (Instituto de Ciencias para el Matrimonio y la Familia, Universidad Católica Santo Toribio de Mogrovejo, Peru; Observatoire de la diversité et des droits culturels, Université de Fribourg, Switzerland; Centre interdisciplinaire sur les droits culturels de l’Université de Nouakchott, Mauritania); civil society organizations (Acción Solidaria, Argentina; Alliance Defending freedom, United States of America; Alliance of Romania’s Families, Romania; Amnesty International; Arc International; Asociación de Familias Numerosas, Guatemala; Association Points-Cœur; Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, United States; Christian Family Movement, Panama; Catholics for Choice, United States; Concerned Women for America, United States; Contemporary Foundation, Argentina; Fundación Amando La Vida, Colombia; Fundación Sí a la Vida, El Salvador; Fundación Tetoka, Mexico; Global Helping to Advance Women and Children; Human Life International, Guatemala; Human Life International and Society for the Protection of Unborn Children; Human Rights Watch, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; Instituto Uruguayo de Formación Familiar, Uruguay; International Service for Human Rights; KELIN, Kenya; Association Relwendé pour le Développement, Burkina Faso; Natural Justice, South Africa; Nazra for Feminist Studies, Egypt; People’s Welfare and Development Society, India; Regional and National Human Rights Defenders Programme; Russian LGBT Network, Russian Federation; Rwanda Culture, Rwanda; Sexual Rights Initiative, Canada; The Good Shepherd, Plurinational State of Bolivia; Vida y Familia Chihuahua, A.C., Mexico; Voto Católico Colombia; Voz Pública A.C., Mexico; and Women for Development, Russian Federation). II. Contributions received A. Groups of States and States Members of the United Nations 3. The European Union stated that it was not in a position to provide examples of best practices. It stressed the need for caution, pointing to the possible danger of introducing the concept of traditional values in the human rights realm as there was no clear-cut, universally agreed definition. Whereas human rights were formalized in international law through consensus and agreed upon as universal and inalienable, traditional values were inherently subjective and specific to time and place. Thus, although traditions might sometimes be in line with human rights, the two notions were not necessarily analogous and 3