A call for inclusive language: Advancing a human rights-based approach to criminal justice at the United Nations

Our words matter. Language plays a critical role in shaping how we see and relate to one another, impacting perceptions, policy, and human rights outcomes. Derogatory and dehumanizing language has long “facilitated the systemic, inhumane treatment of groups of people” worldwide, including those impacted by the criminal justice system. In every corner of the world, individuals convicted of a crime or otherwise involved in the justice system are often labeled “prisoners,” “inmates,” “offenders,” “convicts,” or “felons.” These labels frequently persist beyond prison walls – often for life – affecting societal acceptance, access to basic needs, and enjoyment of human rights. Women, children, minority groups, and other vulnerable populations face even greater barriers.

Despite growing awareness among academia and civil society about the power of our words, many others – particularly politicians and media outlets – continue to use stigmatizing terminology. Unfortunately, these terms have been entrenched over time within local communities, national policies, and even international institutions like the United Nations (UN). At times, labels are used to justify discriminatory policies or reinforce bias; at others, they may reflect historical norms and institutional inertia that have impeded change. For example, even as UN sectors increasingly embrace dignity-based, person-centered language, criminal justice terminology in UN discourse has changed little since the 1950s.

While the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice (CCPCJ) and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) have examined social reintegration primarily through the lens of crime prevention and control, the UN human rights system – and Member States across all regions – have identified the need for complementary human rights-based approaches to the social reintegration of persons deprived of their liberty. Grounded in international human rights frameworks, a recent resolution of the Human Rights Council and study of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) provides a strong foundation for broader UN engagement and the systematic implementation of human rights approaches to criminal justice across the UN. As a strong first step, the UN should lead by example and eliminate stigmatizing language from its discourse on incarceration, social reintegration, and criminal justice more broadly.

This report examines the consequences of non-inclusive and stigmatizing language. By framing a person’s involvement in the system as their defining feature, labels obscure a person’s full humanity and agency, promoting implicit bias, stigma, and discrimination. This reality contributes to a person’s marginalization, and ultimately, the violation of their human rights. Notably, research further demonstrates the psychological harms of labeling, including diminished self-worth and internalized stigma, and how it can increase a person’s likelihood of returning to “deviant behavior” like crime. On the other hand, person-centered alternatives – which lead with a person’s humanity rather than their justice involvement – have demonstrated better outcomes for both reducing recidivism and safeguarding human rights. Terms like “person convicted of a crime,” “person deprived of their liberty,” or “returning citizen” have been shown to promote tolerance, societal acceptance, and constructive engagement by the public and policymakers. All things considered, potential arguments to maintain status-based labels – ease of use and historical precedent – cannot justify perpetuating the very problems that the UN seeks to address. By challenging harmful stereotypes and undermining systemic stigma, simple linguistic shifts can support the realization of human rights and dignity, particularly the rights to non-discrimination, equal treatment, and participation in civic life.

Following a review of terminology across the UN system, human rights treaties, and other soft law frameworks, it is apparent that the use of inclusive, person-centered terminology in UN criminal justice contexts lags significantly behind broader UN system-wide efforts. These include promoting and even mandating inclusive language in areas such as gender equality, disability rights, children’s rights, and health. While major UN frameworks increasingly adopt language grounded in dignity, the criminal justice field continues to rely heavily on traditional, status-based terms, resulting in clear inconsistencies in language across the UN system.

There is a striking need to close this gap by advancing inclusive language in UN discourse on criminal justice. To do this, we recommend that Member States and relevant UN bodies (1) welcome recent UN human rights system developments within the CCPCJ annual draft resolution on Reducing Reoffending through Rehabilitation and Reintegration, (2) introduce and adopt a CCPCJ resolution that highlights the harms of stigmatizing labels like “offender” and advances person-centered language in UN discourse, (3) review and reform terminology across UNODC-led and supported bodies, (4) develop language guidelines on crime prevention and criminal justice for UN-wide institutionalization, and (5) review, revise, and remove stigmatizing language across all UN work and encourage consistency across international and national frameworks.

In line with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and the emphasis on the dignity of all persons in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, implementing these recommendations would provide UN staff, Member States, civil society, and other stakeholders with concrete tools to combat bias and discrimination against justice-impacted individuals. Importantly, the use of inclusive language will support the operationalization of international human rights instruments, the Sustainable Development Goals, and the Agenda for Humanity, namely the principle of “Leave No One Behind.”