Lesson 4: Implementing Human Rights
The three sections in this Lesson shall consider the means by which the UN and various international treaties allow for the enforcement (of sorts) of human rights. Limitations to human rights also shall be considered.
Session 4.1 – Implementing Human Rights in the UN
Now that we have some background on human rights, especially what they imply and where they fit within the larger international framework, it is important to consider the means by which they can be applied and implemented.
Initially in this section, we shall consider the United Nations and the overall role in addressing human rights, moving on to more specific treaty mechanisms that allow for some degree of individual actions as well.
Regarding the UN, it is important to recognize that the UN was formed based on what is called realpolitik. That is, the UN was not some utopian ideal meant to create a world government that controlled states, but actually is to serve as a sounding board for states based on the principles of peace and security. The UN is a political body that attempts to reflect the current structure of the world. Hence, for example the Security Council’s five permanent members who maintain a right of veto on all Security Council actions presumably reflect the world powers.
Of course, this reflection of the world politic also makes it difficult to reach a consensus on many issues. This is especially the case for human rights where different states have various approaches to human rights and tempered acceptance of the international process. The UN is composed of five principal bodies, three of which maintain some form of important connection to the human rights process. We will address each one, with a brief explanation of their principal duties. The Secretary General essentially is the diplomat par-excellence of the UN. The Secretariat’s role is to forge the UN forward, ensuring for proper dialogue and acting as an objective address to which states may turn in times of conflict. Recently, recognizing the importance of human rights within such a process, the Secretariat formed a body called the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The purpose of the Commissioner is to engage in studies and inform the Secretary General of human rights developments as well as key in on trouble spots and various issues. The process is essentially internal, without essentially having state influence but encouraging dialogue and a focus on issues.
The principal player regarding human rights within the UN is the Economic and Social Council (ECOOC). Within ECOSOC, the UN created the first form of body that would focus on international human rights – the UN Commission on Human Rights. The Commission is involved in a number of duties pertaining to human rights and essentially reports to the ECSOC (which then refers issues to the General Assembly – the GA – when appropriate). States are involved in this process, as it is their representatives that compose the Committee, as well as ECOSOC.
The key duties within this framework is to engage in creating treaties, monitoring a variety of human rights issues and focusing on country (*with the issuance of reports by experts in the field) and issuing recommendations that are to serve as impetus for further action either within the Committee, ECOSOC or eventually the GA (ad at tomes even moving the issue to the Security Council, where appropriate).
The Commission was the first to establish a sort of individual form of complaint process, albeit one that operated via the states. It is referred to based on the Resolution that created the process, being Resolution 1503. That is, if a state demonstrates (on the basis of information received and submitted by individuals, groups, UN reports or other sources of information) that another state has engaged in a consistent pattern of gross violations of human rights, then the violating state may be subject to examination and oversight. Note however that Resolution 1503 is a rather cumbersome and bureaucratic procedure, and does not really allow for any effective form of remedies. Furthermore it is a closed door process (with the idea being to enable states to talk openly and freely – a notion of realpolitik) such that knowing what is actually happening or being asserted is not subject to any external, objective, oversight such as via a NGO. There also exist so-called thematic mechanisms via the Commission. That is, the Commission might deem a particular issue, such as the rights of women, to be of paramount concern. They might hire experts to engage in an overall review of the human rights situation of women worldwide, with the idea being that eventually a recommendation or resolution will be issued calling for further UN action. This can serve as the grounds for further UN involvement of the GA for example, or even the creation of a treaty on the particular issue. The key problems associated with ECOSOC are enforcement issues, given the lack of any “teeth” to the process, political bias by states who are involved in the process and can either stymie an issue or emphasis a region at the expense of other areas that truly require UN action, state orientation of the process leading to subjective analysis linked to state interests, and the buearocratic nature of ECOSOC (a common problem in many UN actions).
A further key player is the GA. The GA maintains a rather broad mandate in the UN and has representatives from every member state, such that it is presumably a reflection of world opinion o various matters. The key document that the GA has passed regarding human rights is the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. The latter is a widespread document that for the first time (in 1948) created an international understanding of human rights. While the Universal Declaration is only a GA Resolution (and thus not the same as a treaty), it serves as a key blueprint for future treaties and even domestic constitutions, and provides direction to states in the human rights area. Thus, although not a binding document, it has a respected status in international human rights and continues to serve as the reference document for human rights.
OPTIONAL READING: Steiner and Alston, 347-364, 376-382
