Human Rights ViolationsA topic report presented to the 2015 National Federation of High Schools

Topic Selection Committee

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Summer 2016

Presented by:

Alena Kang-Landsberg (Student)

A&M Consolidated High School, College Station, Texas

IntroductionWhen I began looking at writing a topic based on human rights violations I

quickly realized that human rights is an incredibly vague term. The typical definition of human rights is as follows;

Amnesty International USA. “Human Rights Basics.” www.amnestyusa.org. Amnesty International, n.d..Web. 28 Jan. 2016

Human rights are basic rights and freedoms that all people are entitled to regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, race, religion, language, or other status. Human rights include civil and political rights, such as the right to life, liberty and freedom of expression; and social, cultural and economic rights including the right to participate in

culture, the right to food, and the right to work and receive an education. Human rights are protected and upheld by international and national laws and treaties. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is the foundation of the international system of protection for human rights. It was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10th, 1948. This day is celebrated annually as International Human Rights Day. The 30 articles of the UDHR establish the civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights of all people. It is a vision for human dignity that transcends political boundaries and authority, committing governments to uphold the fundamental rights of each person. The UDHR helps guide Amnesty International's work.

Hence, the definition of human rights is vague enough that a resolution without a large number of limiters would essentially have an infinite number of different AFFs. After all, the UN declared internet access a human right.

Jackson, Nicholas. "United Nations Declares Internet Access a Basic Human Right." The Atlantic. Atlantic

Media Company, 3 June 2011. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.

A lengthy report (PDF) released by the United Nations Friday argued that disconnecting individuals from the Internet is a violation of human rights and goes against international law . "The Special Rapporteur underscores the unique and transformative nature of the Internet not only to enable individuals to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression," according to the report's summary, "but also a range of other human rights, and to promote the

progress of society as a whole." A BBC survey of 26 countries in March 2010 found that 79 percent of people believe access to the Internet is a fundamental right. The Democracy Report Released after the seventeenth session of the United Nations' Human Rights Council, the report "on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression" comes on a day when its message couldn't be more important. It's the same day, Wired's Threat Level blog points out, that "an Internet monitoring firm detected that two thirds of Syria's Internet access has abruptly gone dark, in what is likely a government response to unrest in that country." The report's authors speak to a wider issue that we're currently facing, though; this isn't just a problem in Syria. "[T]he recent wave of demonstrations in countries across the Middle East and North African region has shown the key role that the Internet can play in mobilizing the population to call for justice, equality, accountability and better respect for human rights," the report notes. "As such,

facilitating access to the Internet for all individuals, with as little restriction to online content as possible, should be a priority for all States." Of course, many of the dictators and leaders across the Middle East region that the report highlights recognized the power of the Internet early -- and attempted to cut it from their citizens' lives. But people, in most cases, found a way online.

In Egypt, for example, we saw hundreds of individuals using old modems and telephone lines to route their traffic through a volunteer network around the globe. And we support them. A survey of 26 countries conducted by the BBC in March 2010 found that nearly four out of five people (79 percent, to be exact) believe that access to

the Internet is a "fundamental human right." Some countries have taken things one step further. Estonia passed a law in 2000, for example, that declared access to the Internet a basic human right . In 2009, France followed. Legislators in Costa Rica, in 2010, reached a similar decision. In 2009, Finland, the report notes, "passed a decree ... stating that every Internet connection needs to have a speed of at least one Megabit per second (broadband level)." There, should they need to, people will be able to organize even faster.

Thus, since ensuring adequate negative ground is already difficult with rights-based topics, and since the basis for the topic this year (2015-2016)--the right to privacy--already involve a human rights violation, I determined that the best course of action would be to limit the topic to specific categories of rights. Human rights are typically divided into the following categories

End Slavery Now. "Human Rights and Slavery." Www.endslaverynow.org. End Slavery Now, n.d.. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.

Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of gender, nationality, place of residency, sex, ethnicity, religion, color or and other categorization. Thus, human rights are non-discriminatory, meaning that all human beings are entitled to them and cannot be excluded from them. Of course, while all human beings are entitled to human rights, not all human beings experience them equally throughout the world. Many governments and individuals ignore human rights and grossly exploit other human

beings. There are a variety of human rights, including: Civil rights (such as the rights

to life, liberty and security), Political rights (like rights to the protection of the law and equality before the

law), Economic rights (including rights to work, to own property and to receive equal pay), Social rights (like rights to education and consenting marriages), Cultural rights (including the right to freely

participate in their cultural community), and Collective rights (like the right to self-determination).

These rights are generally grouped as civil and political rights; economic, social, and cultural rights; and collective rights. I determined that the best categories to focus on are economic, social, and cultural rights for multiple reasons. Economic, social, and cultural rights provide important discussions on prominent problems such as poverty, health, and education. Additionally, a major problem with collective rights is that they have a complicated definition based on the group qua, as well as limited literature. Also, civil and political rights overlaps with this year’s (2015-16) surveillance topic as the right to privacy is an integral right within this category.

One might ask what the distinction between civil and political rights and economic, social, and cultural rights is. In truth, the distinction is limited. However, although the distinction is somewhat artificial, there is a distinction upon which arguments can be made.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. "Frequently Asked Questions on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights." Ohchr.org. Office of the United Nations High

Commissioner for Human Rights, Dec. 2008. Web. 14 Mar. 2016. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet33en.pdf

Are economic, social and cultural rights fundamentally different from civil and political rights? No. In the past, there has been a tendency to speak of economic, social and cultural rights as if they were fundamentally different from civil and political rights. However, this categorization is artificial and even selfdefeating. Why then do we often speak of “civil and political rights” and “economic, social and cultural rights” as separate categories of rights? Several reasons have led to this categorization, which has tended to obscure the elements

that all rights have in common. First, the distinction was initially drawn for historical reasons. While the Universal Declaration of Human Rights made no distinction between rights, the

distinction appeared in the context of the deepening cold war tensions between East and West. The market economies of the West tended to put greater emphasis on civil and political rights, while the centrally planned economies of the Eastern bloc highlighted the importance of economic, social and cultural rights. This led to the negotiation and adoption of two separate Covenants—one on civil and political rights, and another on economic, social and cultural rights. However, this strict separation has since been abandoned and there has been a return to the original architecture of the Universal Declaration. In recent decades, human rights treaties such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child or the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities have integrated all rights. Second,

economic, social and cultural rights have been seen as requiring high levels of investment, while civil and political rights are said simply to require the State to refrain from interfering with individual freedoms . It is true that many economic, social and cultural rights sometimes require high levels of investment—both financial and human—to

ensure their full enjoyment. However, economic, social and cultural rights also require the State to refrain from interfering with individual freedoms, for

instance trade union freedoms or the right to seek work of one’s choosing. Similarly, civil and political rights, although comprising individual freedoms, also require investment for their full realization . For example, civil and political rights require infrastructures such as a functioning court system, prisons respecting minimum living conditions for prisoners, legal aid, free and fair elections, and so on.

Although many of the differences are perceptual, these differences still provide a stasis point for the debate as there are separate covenants to reference. The adoption of the separate covenants provides a fairly clear delineation of what economic, social, and cultural rights entail. Hence, I would advise, as a starting point for understanding economic, social, and cultural rights, examining the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights. One can find said covenant in the appendix or at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx

Of course, there are other definitions and/or lists of economic, social, and cultural rights. The National Economic and Social Rights Initiative describes the following as some important economic and social rights.

National Economic and Social Rights Initiative. "Economic and Social Rights." www.nesri.org. National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, n.d. Web. 15 Feb. 2016.

Human rights are based on principles of dignity and freedom. Both are severely compromised when human beings cannot meet their fundamental needs. Economic and social rights guarantee that every person be

afforded conditions under which they are able to meet their needs. In particular, economic and social rights include: The Right to Education enabling all persons to participate effectively in

a free society and is directed to the full development of the human personality. Learn more » The Right to

Food guaranteeing freedom from hunger and access to safe and nutritious food. Learn more » The Right to Health ensuring the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health including access to care,

nutrition, and clean water and air. Learn more » The Right to Housing ensuring access to a safe, secure,

habitable, and affordable home with freedom from forced eviction. Learn more » The Right to Social Security guaranteeing that everyone regardless of age or ability to work has the means necessary to procure

basic needs and services. Learn more » The Right to Work guaranteeing the opportunity to have fulfilling and dignified work under safe and healthy conditions with fair wages affording a decent living for oneself and one's family. It also provides for freedom from unemployment and the right to organize. Learn more »

In addition to the question of defining which human rights to use, there was also the question of the scope of the topic. After all, human rights are a worldwide issue, with human rights violations occurring around the globe on a daily basis. Hence, an international topic would clearly explode Affirmative ground. In addition, since the 2016-2017 topic is an international one, that would potentially allow repetition of cases within consecutive years. Thus the topic ought to be a domestic topic. Furthermore, human rights protection is definitely necessary in the United States.

Human Rights Watch. "World Report 2015: United States." Human Rights Watch. Human Rights Watch, 20 Jan. 2015. Web. 21 June 2016.

The United States has a vibrant civil society and strong constitutional protections for many basic rights. Yet, particularly in the areas of criminal justice, immigration, and national security, US laws and practices routinely violate rights. Often, those least able to defend their rights in court or through the political process—racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, children, the poor, and prisoners—are the people most likely to suffer abuses.

Dakwar, Jamil. "UN Issues Scathing Assessment of US Human Rights Record." Aclu.org. American Civil

Liberties Union, 15 May 2015. Web. 21 June 2016.

The U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a scathing report today, consisting of 348 recommendations that address myriad human rights violations in the United States. The report came out as a part of a mechanism called the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), which

examines the human rights record of all U.N. member states. The council questioned the United States on its record earlier this week. Although many of these recommendations in the report are redundant or too general to offer tangible solutions to the human rights situation in the U.S., they echo many of the concerns raised by U.S. civil society groups like the ACLU, who attended the review and offered concrete recommendations to reverse policies that are inconsistent with international human rights principles. For example, the report adopted a recommendation made by Sweden to "halt the detention of immigrant families and children, seek alternatives to detention and end use of detention for reason of deterrence." The report also adopted several recommendations calling on the Obama administration to independently investigate allegations of torture documented in the recent Senate torture report and provide reparations to victims. Denmark, for instance, recommended that the United States "further ensure that all victims of torture and ill-treatment — whether still in US custody or not — obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation and as full rehabilitation as possible, including medical and psychological assistance." In addition, the report included many fitting recommendations to address police brutality and excessive use of force as well as ending racial profiling against minorities and immigrants. Mexico recommended that the U.S. "adopt measures at the federal level to prevent and punish excessive use of force by law enforcement officials against members of ethnic and racial minorities, including unarmed persons, which disproportionately affect Afro American and undocumented migrants." Ireland, for its part, directly touched on the broken trust between American law enforcement and communities of color and recommended that the U.S. "continue to vigorously investigate recent cases of alleged police-led human rights abuses against African-Americans and seek to build improved relations and trust between U.S. law enforcement and all communities around

the U.S." While in some areas, like LGBT rights and freedom of speech, the United States' human rights record fares far better than other parts of the world, in many areas — including national security, criminal justice, social

and economic rights, and immigration policy — the U.S. has an abysmal record compared to other liberal democracies . This report sends a strong message of no-

confidence in the U.S. human rights record. It clearly demonstrates that the United States has a long way to go to live up to its human rights obligations and commitments. This will be the last major human rights review for the Obama administration, and it offers a critical opportunity to shape the president's human rights legacy, especially in the areas of racial justice, national security, and immigrants' rights. The Obama administration has until September to respond to the 348 recommendations. At that time, the administration will make a direct commitment to the world by deciding which of the 348 will be accepted and implemented over the next four years, and which will be rejected. While many of the recommendations fall outside the constitutional powers of the executive branch — such as treaty ratification and legislative actions on the national, state, and local levels — the Obama administration should use its executive powers to their fullest

extent to effectuate U.S. human rights obligations. The U.S. record for implementing U.N. recommendations has thus far been very disappointing, but if President Obama really cares about his human rights legacy, he should direct his administration to adopt a plan of action with concrete benchmarks and effective implementation mechanisms that will ensure that the U.S. indeed learns from its shortcomings and genuinely seeks to create a more perfect union.

ResolutionsWhen writing these resolutions there were obviously many potential directions

for a human rights based topic. My goal with the topic would be to foster discussion not just about human rights violations, but to encourage discussion of actual solutions to said violations. Hence my resolutions (for the most part) involve establishing or enacting an actual policy or program.

1. The United States Federal Government should establish a policy to address domestic violations of economic, social, and/or cultural rights. *

2. The United States Federal Government shall enact a policy addressing domestic violations of economic, social, and/or cultural rights.

3. The United States Federal Government should reform its approach to domestic violations of economic, social, and/or cultural rights.

4. The United States Federal Government should materially increase programs addressing domestic violations of economic, social, and/or cultural rights.

Another potential basis for topic wording is the sustainable development goals. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals is the successor to the Millennium Development goals. The goals were created to reflect human rights in their creation.

OHCHR. "Human Rights and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development." Ohchr.org. United Nations, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2016. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/MDG/Pages/The2030Agenda.aspx

It is increasingly recognized that human rights are essential to achieve sustainable development. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) served as a proxy for certain

economic and social rights but ignored other important human rights linkages. By contrast, human rights

principles and standards are now strongly reflected in an ambitious new global development framework, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In September 2015, 170 world leaders gathered at the UN Sustainable Development Summit in New York to adopt the 2030 Agenda. The new Agenda covers a broad set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 167 targets and will serve as the overall framework to guide global and national development action for the next 15 years. The SDGs are the result of the most consultative and inclusive process in the history of the

United Nations. Grounded in international human rights law, the agenda offers critical opportunities to further advance the realization of human rights for all people everywhere, without discrimination. How are the SDGs different? Universal: While the MDGs applied only to so-called ‘developing countries’, the SDGs are a truly universal framework and

will be applicable to all countries. All countries have progress to make in the path towards sustainable development, and face both common and unique challenges to achieving the many dimensions of sustainable development captured in the SDGs.

The Danish Institute for Human Rights. "About This Guide." Sdg.humanrights.dk. The Danish Institute for Human Rights, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2016. http://sdg.humanrights.dk/

The Guide illustrates the human rights anchorage of the 17 goals and provides concrete links between the 169 targets and the range of human rights instruments and labour standards. Thereby, the Guide reaffirms that

human rights instruments and the 2030 Agenda are tied together in a mutually reinforcing way: human rights offer a legally-binding framework as well as guidance for

the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. In turn, the SDGs can contribute substantially to the realization of human rights.

5. The United States Federal Government shall establish a human rights based policy dedicated toward the domestic achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals.

Another distinction to enable a narrowing of the topic is based on the dual nature of the relationship between the state and human rights.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. "Frequently Asked Questions on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights." Ohchr.org. Office of the United Nations High

Commissioner for Human Rights, Dec. 2008. Web. 14 Mar. 2016. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet33en.pdf

These rights are human rights. Like other human rights, they contain dual freedoms: freedom from the State and freedom through the State. For example, the right to adequate housing covers a right to be free from forced evictions carried out by State agents (freedom from the State) as well as a right to receive assistance to access adequate housing in certain situations (freedom through the State). They have become increasingly well defined in national, regional and global legal systems, in laws and regulations, in national constitutions, and in international treaties. Accepting them as human rights creates legal obligations on States to ensure everyone in the country can enjoy these rights and to provide remedies if they are violated. As with other human rights, recognizing economic, social and cultural rights together with the principle of non-discrimination puts the focus on the most excluded, discriminated and marginalized groups in society.

6. The United States Federal Government shall enact a domestic policy to increase freedoms gained through the state.

* Indicates my preferred resolution.

DefinitionsAnother definition of economic, social, and cultural rights:

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. "Frequently Asked Questions on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights." Ohchr.org. Office of the United Nations High

Commissioner for Human Rights, Dec. 2008. Web. 14 Mar. 2016. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet33en.pdf

Economic, social and cultural rights are those human rights relating to the workplace, social security, family life, participation in cultural life, and access to housing, food, water, health care and education. Although economic, social

and cultural rights may be expressed differently from country to country or from one instrument to another, here is a basic list: Workers’ rights, including freedom from forced labour , the rights

to decide freely to accept or choose work, to fair wages and equal pay for equal work, to leisure and reasonable limitation of working hours, to safe and healthy working conditions, to join and form trade unions, and to strike; The right to social security and social protection, including the right not to be denied social security coverage arbitrarily or unreasonably, and the right to equal enjoyment of adequate protection in the event of unemployment, sickness, old age or other lack of

livelihood in circumstances beyond one’s control; Protection of and assistance to the family, including the rights to marriage by free consent, to maternity and paternity protection , and to protection of children from economic and social exploitation; The right to an adequate standard of living, including the rights to food and to be free from hunger,

to adequate housing, to water and to clothing; The right to health, including the right to

access to health facilities, goods and services, to healthy occupational and environmental conditions, and protection against epidemic diseases, and rights

relevant to sexual and reproductive health; The right to education, including the right to

free and compulsory primary education and to available and accessible secondary

and higher education, progressively made free of charge; and the liberty of parents to choose schools for their children; Cultural rights, including the right to participate in cultural life

and to share in and benefit from scientific advancement, and protection of authors’ moral and material interests from scientific, literary or artistic production.

What are the Sustainable Development Goals?

United Nations. "Historic New Sustainable Development Agenda Unanimously Adopted by 193 UN Members."

Www.un.org. United Nations, 25 Sept. 2015. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

A bold new global agenda to end poverty by 2030 and pursue a sustainable future was unanimously adopted today by the 193 Member States of the United Nations at the start of a three-day Summit on Sustainable

Development. The historic adoption of the new Sustainable Development Agenda, with 17

global goals at its core, was met with a thunderous standing ovation from delegations that included many of the more than 150 world leaders who will be addressing the Summit. It was a scene that was, and will be, transmitted to millions of people around the world through television, social media, radio, cinema advertisements, and cell phone messages. Ushering in a new era of national action and international

cooperation, the new agenda commits every country to take an array of actions that would not only address the root causes of poverty, but would also increase economic growth and prosperity and meet people’s health, education and social needs, while protecting the environment.

Another definition of economic, social, and cultural rights:

FPS Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation. "Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: A Brief Introduction to Economic, Social and Cultural Rights." diplomatie.belgium.be. Kingdom of Belgium, n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Economic, social and cultural rights are rights that aim to guarantee individuals a dignified, appropriate lifestyle. They cover a wide range of different domains, including: The right to work, the right to a free choice of work, and the right to good working conditions; the right to strike and the right to form and join trade unions; the right to social security; the right to an appropriate standard of living (including food, housing and adequate social services and medical care); the right to a family; the right to health; the right to education; the right to cultural identity and the right to take part in cultural life. Historically, these rights constitute ‘second-generation human rights’, because here in Belgium they were recognised later than civil and political rights. Furthermore, most of such rights were only incorporated into

Western countries’ Constitutions after being recognised in international instruments. The main difference between civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights is that the latter are programmatic rights, meaning that governments must undertake to gradually strive towards their full realisation , using all the resources at their disposal. In spite of the differences between these two generations of human rights, they are utterly interdependent. For instance, the right to a private life can hardly be exercised without the right to housing. Likewise, freedom of expression and conscience would certainly be constrained if there was no right to education.

Economic and social rights are defined by Amnesty International as:

Amnesty International Canada. "Economic and Social Rights." Www.amnesty.ca. Amnesty International, 2015. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.

Social and economic rights are concerned with basic human needs—for food, shelter, water and for the means to provide those things for oneself. We recognize that a person who is starving, who is homeless, who does not have the means to provide for their own basic needs, cannot realize any other human right. We demand dignity for all.

A definition of economic rights: (Although this definition has less to do with human rights doctrines and more to do with economic theory, and it is more intended to distinguish between economic rights and property rights)

Gorga, Carmine. "Toward the Definition of Economic Rights." Journal of Markets and Morality 2.1 (1999): 88-101. www.marketsandmorality.com. Center for Economic Personalism. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.

To clarify issues concerning the definition of economic rights, it might be useful to begin with an overview of three factual distinctions between economic rights, property rights, and entitlements. These distinctions can be taken as facts at this stage of the discussion but they will be justified in the course of the argument. First, the

content of these three entities is different. The object of property rights are marketable things, tangible or intangible things such as material goods and services. The object of entitlements are human needs, from food to

shelter to health. The object of economic rights are economic needs. Second, the legal form of these three entities is different. Property rights are concrete legal titles over existing wealth; economic rights are abstract legal claims over future wealth; and entitlements are moral claims on wealth that legally belong to others. Finally, the quantity that they measure is variable. While both property rights and entitlements relate to existing wealth, and therefore a necessarily finite quantity, economic rights relate to future wealth, an unknown and elastic—if not a potentially infinite—quantity.

Another definition of economic rights:

Cambridge University Press. "Description." Www.cambridge.org. Cambridge University Press, n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.

This book assesses economic rights: defined as the right to a decent standard of living, the right to work, and the right to basic income support for people who cannot work. It explains how economic rights evolved historically, how they are measured, and how they can be implemented internationally. The book includes chapters by leading scholars in economics, law, and political science. Unlike many other books on the subject, this one includes a substantial introduction and is tightly organized around three themes: concepts, measurement, and policy implementation of economic rights.

Definitions for both social and economic rights:

Donders, Yvonne, and Vladimir Volodin. Human Rights in Education, Science, and Culture : Legal Developments and Challenges. N.p.: Ashgate, 2007. Google Books. Google. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

“Social rights” have been defined as referring to rights “with regard to relationships in society” (Victor Condé 20014, 241), such as the right to family, to special protection for

children and the elderly and to form trade unions. “Economic rights” are defined as rights “whose purpose is to assure that human beings have the ability to obtain and maintain a minimum decent standard of living consistent with human dignity” (ibid., 55). Examples are the rights to food, health care, work, social security and to form trade unions. This distinction between “social” and “economic” rights, which is based on differences in the content of the right covered is not relevant in the context of justiciability. In any event, a division into these categories is by no means watertight, as the right to form trade unions most clearly demonstrates. In so far as these categories give rise to shared concerns, most importantly the perception that they are programmatic and that their realization requires resource allocation (or at least greater allocation than other rights), the term “socio-economic right” is used in this study. The concept also includes the right to education, not only because it may properly be included in the definition of both “social” and “economic” rights as set out above, but also because it is closely associated with the concerns raised below in respect of socio-economic rights.

A definition of cultural rights:

USLegal Inc. "Cultural Rights Law & Legal Definition." Uslegal.com. USLegal Inc., n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Cultural rights are the rights that are vested in groups of people in relation to their art and culture . It means the right to preserve and develop one’s cultural identity, as well as the right to protect endangered cultures. Cultural

rights are human rights that guarantee people and communities the freedom to access and participate in the culture of their choice. Cultural rights mainly aim at ensuring enjoyment of a culture and its components in conditions of equality, human dignity, and non-discrimination.

Another definition of cultural rights:

Interarts. "What We Mean by Cultural Rights?:." Cultural Rights. Interarts, 2005. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Cultural Rights are rights related to art and culture, both understood in a large sense.

The objective of these rights is to guarantee that people and communities have an access to culture and can participate in the culture of their election. Cultural rights are human rights that aim at assuring the enjoyment of culture and its components in conditions of equality, human dignity and non-discrimination. They are rights related to themes such as language; cultural and artistic production; participation in cultural life; cultural heritage; intellectual property rights; author’s rights; minorities and access to culture, among others.

A definition of social rights:

Nickel, James. "Human Rights." Stanford University. Stanford University, 08 Nov. 2014. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

The Universal Declaration included social (or “welfare”) rights that address matters such as education, food, and employment. Their inclusion has been the source of much controversy (see Beetham 1995). Social rights are often alleged to be statements of desirable goals but not really rights. The European Convention did not include them (although it was later amended to include the right to education). Instead they were put into a separate treaty, the European Social Charter. When the United Nations began the process of putting the rights of the Universal Declaration into international law, it followed the model of the European system by treating economic and social standards in a treaty separate from the one dealing with civil and political rights. This treaty, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (the “Social Covenant,” 1966), treated these standards as rights—albeit rights to be progressively realized.

Another definition of social rights:

Butt, Mark Eric, Julia Kübert, and Christiane Anne Schultz. "FUNDAMENTAL SOCIAL RIGHTS IN

EUROPE." Europarl.europa.eu. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, Nov. 1999. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Fundamental social rights in this context mean rights to which the individual citizen is entitled, which he can exercise only in his relationship with other human beings as a member of a group and which can be made effective only if the State acts to safeguard the individual's environment. Social rights are a necessary complement to civil rights and liberties, since the latter cannot be enjoyed without a minimum of social security. In contrast to civil rights and liberties, this means that it is not freedom from the State that is achieved, but freedom with the State's help. These are, then, fundamental rights in the form of entitlements. Although this would appear at first glance to indicate that they can be distinguished from the classical civil rights and liberties and the general principle of equality, there is considerable overlap. This study considers only those fundamental rights not included among the 'classical fundamental rights'. It does not therefore have anything to say on the right of freedom of occupation in the sense of freedom of occupational choice and the prohibition of forced labour or on the right to form associations and engage in collective bargaining or the right to strike. Nor will the study discuss in any depth fundamental rights which primarily concern equality and are generally recognised, such as the right to equal pay for men and women.

Balance

Although at first glance the topic may appear extremely biased toward the affirmative due to the difficulty of arguing against human rights, good wording and the availability of strong counterplans will correct the imbalance.

Core Arguments

AFF Arguments NEG Arguments

● Moral imperative to end suffering/discrimination

● The federal government has an obligation to protect the rights of the people

● Timeframe● Magnitude● Agent counterplans in general

○ NGO counterplans (these can be very specific to plans)

● The state as an agent of change is bad

More Specific Arguments

AFF NEG

Category Right* Example Cases****

Common Advantages

Oncase Offcase**

Economic Rights

Right to Work

-Protect migrant labor-Close the gender pay gap-Raise the minimum wage

-income equality-innovation-benefit the economy-neoliberalism advantages-single moms

-bad for unions-bad for business-innovation impact turn

-super strong politics disadvantages-capitalism critique-environmental disadvantages because of mechanization

Right to leisure/rest/holidays

-Maternity and paternity leave

-break the cycle of poverty-single mothers-glass ceiling

-Not a human right-Not enough to break the cycle of poverty

-Either a critique because people who work at small businesses remain uncovered, or a disadvantage based on small businesses-Illiteracy

disadvantage based on teachers

Social Rights

Right to Social Security

-Expansion of social safety net-Migrant workers

-Poverty trap-Consumer Confidence

-Doesn’t work-Economics turn-Higher Taxes

-Funding Disadvantage-Totalitarianism disadvantage

Right to Adequate living

-Potable Water-Expand food stamp programs-Homelessness

-Cycle of Poverty-Education-Health

-No simple remedy-Alternate causes

-GMO disadvantage-Funding disadvantage-Environmental disadvantage

Right to a social and international order

-Domestic implementation of various treaties (not just ratification because ratification is not a policy)-Also policies designed toward reforming the social order.

-treaty-specific advantages-multilateralism advantage-hegemony

-treaty-specific disadvantages

-critique US hegemony is bad-not a human right-there is a very strong topicality argument to be made here

Right to health

-Pollution controls-Mental illness facilities-Single-payer healthcare

-health-democratization of medicine-pandemic prevention

-antibiotic resistance-increased cancer rates

-disadvantage about health care cost increases-biopolitics critique-Malthusian disadvantage

Cultural Rights***

Right to Education

-Voucher programs-School districting and funding-School Busing-Higher education reform

-poverty cycle-innovation-economy-ending de facto segregation-decreasing the opportunity gap

-when the government pays for higher education; colleges raise prices-feasibility

-trade profession disadvantage-identity disadvantage (homogenization of education)-totalitarianism

-Common Core reform

Right to take part in cultural life

-expand wifi/electricity to rural areas-Native American cultural life-Anti-Patent troll legislation

-innovation-equality-structural violence-soft power hegemony-cultural diversity

-For cases relating to the borders of Native American reservations; security issues-not feasible

-environmental & funding disadvantages-criticism of cultural practices that are detrimental to the environment or other human rights

*Depending on the source, the exact explanations of many of these rights overlap, and they are often worded similarly. Hence, while the cases are divided into these categories, the actual division between some categories is limited.

**Obviously topicality arguments are always an option, especially with a topic with definitions as vague as what constitutes a right.

***Many cultural rights are often bundled under either economic rights or social rights; hence, regardless of whether the phrase “cultural rights” is actually included in the resolution, many of these cases would still be more or less topical.

****This is by no means intended to be a complete list of all of the possible cases or arguments for this topic.

Core Affirmative Ground

The two basic assumptions around which most affirmative cases would be structured are the idea of a moral imperative to relieve suffering or promote human rights (to ensure that their impacts have weight), and the idea that the federal government has a duty to protect human rights. The difficulty for the affirmative will lie in successfully weighing human rights impacts (or non-extinction impacts) against the extinction-level impacts that the negative is likely to leverage, and in ensuring that their plan is both feasible and actually solves for what they claim. On the other hand, the affirmative has the advantages of the broadness of the topic and the fact that they are arguing for supporting human rights, and arguing against human rights is often difficult.

Core Negative Ground

At first glance, one might expect the negative to have an extremely difficult time with this topic as they are technically arguing against human rights. However, the negative team would usually be able to win both timeframe and magnitude of impacts, as preventing human rights violations usually do not also enable one to claim to prevent extinction. In addition, the kind of change needed to truly solve for a human rights violation takes time, so disadvantages could be very strong. Furthermore, the negative

team could argue that the United States Federal Government is not the best avenue for preventing human rights violations. This opens up two potential avenues for the negative; the negative could take a critical avenue, arguing that the state can never act as a positive force in the fight for human rights; or they could argue that the United States is not the best or most efficient actor in an agent counterplan. In addition, the negative team will have access to many of the traditional negative arguments such as politics disadvantages (which would be more relevant than normal as solving human rights violations tends to be incredibly politically divisive), funding tradeoff disadvantages (cases based on obtaining rights through the state would often be expensive), and federalism disadvantages.

Right to Work

The right to work involves free choice of employment; just and favourable conditions of work; protection against unemployment; equal pay for equal work; just and favourable payment; and the right to join unions.

On the affirmative side, potential cases include improving conditions for migrant workers, addressing the pay gap, and raising the minimum wage. Common advantages would involve income equality, neoliberal economic ideas, economic advantages, breaking the cycle of poverty, and advantages relating to single mothers.

On the negative side, on-case arguments would probably mostly consist of competing economic theories and impact turns for economic advantages. In terms of off-case, the capitalism critique would be exceptionally strong, and politics disadvantages would have stronger links. In addition, depending on the affirmative, the negative could claim an environmental disadvantage due to increased mechanization as a reaction to improving workers’ conditions.

Right to Leisure/Rest/Holidays

The right to leisure/rest/holidays include reasonable working hours and paid vacations. This would also include paid, or at least guaranteed maternity and paternity leave. This right is not explicitly included in many core human rights conventions.

On the affirmative side, potential cases that also have strong impacts are slim for this right. The biggest one is paid maternity and paternity leave. The main advantages would be related to working mothers, namely breaking the cycle of poverty and the glass ceiling.

On the negative side, for on-case, there is strong evidence for alternative cause arguments or simply that such actions would not be enough to actually break the cycle of poverty. In addition, one could definitely make the argument that this is either not a human right, or simply not that significant in terms of magnitude of impact (depending

of course, on the case). In terms of off-case, depending on the plan itself, one could either make a critique because people who work at small businesses would remain uncovered, or argue an economic disadvantage as small businesses cannot necessarily afford the requisite paid leave.

Right to Social Security

The right to social security is not the right to the current program in the United States titled Social Security, but rather the right to a form of social safety net, such as social insurance and the realization of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

On the affirmative side, common cases would involve some form of expansion of the current social safety net, be it a new form of welfare, social security, or assistance in the event of homelessness. In addition, the status of migrant workers would also be a potential case under this category. Common advantages would include advantages relating to equality, and consumer confidence.

On the negative side, for on-case, one could find fairly good evidence stating that whatever program the affirmative chooses to create would not work. Other on-case could include economic problems and higher taxes. In terms of off-case positions, funding disadvantages would be strong arguments, and a disadvantage or critique based on the ideas of totalitarianism or biopolitics would would not be out of place.

Right to Adequate living

The right to adequate living means the right to an adequate standard of living including food, clothing, housing, medical care, social services, and security in the event of some form of disaster.

On the affirmative side, cases would include guaranteeing potable water, new programs such as food stamp programs, and programs to address homelessness. Common advantages would include breaking the cycle of poverty, improving access to education, and improving people’s health.

On the negative side, on-case would have strong solvency arguments as well as strong alternate cause arguments. In terms of off-case, potential positions include a GMO disadvantage and an environmental disadvantage. In addition, funding disadvantages would be strong for cases involving this right.

Right to a social and international order

The right to a social and international order is the right to a social and international order in which rights and freedoms can be fully obtained. This right is not explicitly included in many core human rights conventions.

On the affirmative side this is a difficult right to come up with concrete cases for. It could potentially include domestic implementation of treaties as well as other policies designed to somehow reform the social order to be more equitable. For the first type of case affirmatives would have treaty-specific advantages, multilateralism, and hegemony. For the second type of case, affirmatives would have advantages relating to increased opportunity and potentially also some of the advantages from realizing other rights.

On the negative side, for the first type of affirmative, on-case would include treaty-specific disadvantages, and off-case would have a very strong topicality argument as well as a critique of, or disadvantage based on, the idea that United States hegemony is bad. For the second type of affirmative, the negative side could very easily attack solvency for on-case. There is also a strong case turn in the argument that dramatic reform destabilizes the social order, instead of aiding it to become more equitable.

Right to health

The right to health is pretty self-evident. It involves the right to adequate health and well-being as well as the right to security, or insurance, in the face of disaster. Most of these cases could also fall under the right to an adequate standard of living.

On the affirmative, potential cases include pollution controls, mental illness facilities, and of course universalized and/or single-payer healthcare. Advantages would include health, pandemic prevention, and the democratization of medicine.

On the negative, on-case arguments could include turns such as the growth of antibiotic resistance and increased cancer rates. Off-case could included disadvantages relating to health care cost increases, a critique grounded in biopolitics, or a disadvantage grounded in neo-Malthusian theory.

Right to Education

The right to education includes that of free elementary and fundamental education; compulsory elementary education; generally available technical and professional education; equally accessible higher education based on merit; education directed toward the full development of personality and the strengthening of respect for human rights and freedoms promoting tolerance; and the prior right for parents to choose the kind of education given to their children.

On the affirmative, potential cases could include voucher programs, new policies with regard to school districting and funding, school busing, higher education reform, and common core reform. Advantages would include (depending on the case) breaking the poverty cycle, increasing innovation, benefiting the economy, ending de facto segregation, and decreasing the opportunity gap.

On the negative, on-case would include feasibility and legality of such actions by the federal government. In addition, in the case of higher education, there is an impact

turn as when the government subsidizes higher education, colleges raise prices (at least in the United States). Off-case positions would include a trade profession disadvantage, an identity critique or disadvantage based on the homogenization of education, and a biopolitical or totalitarianism disadvantage or critique. A major counterplan would be a states counterplan, or an even more local counterplan.

Right to take part in cultural life

The right to take part in cultural life includes the right to participate freely in cultural life, to enjoy the arts, to share in scientific advancements, and the protection of interests regarding any production of which the person is the author.

On the affirmative, potential cases include the expansion of wifi or electricity to more isolated rural areas, anti-patent-troll legislation, reformation of reservation policy that impedes Native American cultural life, and policies regarding the celebration of the cultural life of any other minority. Advantages would include innovation, structural violence, soft power hegemony, and cultural diversity.

On the negative, major on-case positions would relate to feasibility and security issues. In terms of off-case, there would be environmental and funding disadvantages as well as criticisms of cultural practices that are detrimental to the environment or the flourishing of other human rights.

RangeThis topic would be excellent for every level of debaters. Human rights are a

subject that can be discussed at a preliminary level, with little background information, at an extremely advanced level, with in depth philosophy and more nuanced explanations of solutions, and at every level in between.

Human rights is an excellent topic to attract new debaters and for novices. Most people have at least some interest in human rights. Additionally, human rights is an accessible topic, because while the option is available, debating solutions to human rights violations does not necessitate an extensive knowledge of complex policy or bureaucracy.

On the other hand, for varsity debaters solutions to human rights violations can foster incredibly in depth debate, both with respect to the legislative process and the effectiveness of the federal government as well as with respect to the philosophical grounding of many human rights.

In addition, the topic would be interesting for judges as well. The topic is broad enough to provide varied debates throughout the year. Moreover, the universal nature of human rights ensures that the topic will be interesting to lay judges as well.

InterestA rights based topic would inspire a wide range of interest for a multitude of reasons.

The motto of the National Speech and Debate Association is quite literally “Giving Youth a Voice,” debate is intended to empower youth and give them the ability to form strong advocacies. Multiple organizations have founded debate organizations for the express purpose of enabling youth to advocate for themselves.

Whalen, Sally. "Youth For Debate Gives New York Students a Voice." www.college.columbia.edu. Columbia

College, 26 Jan. 2016. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

Raising their hands in response, the seventh and eighth graders of New York’s P.S. 111 are just a few of the many

students who benefit from Columbia University’s Youth for Debate (YFD) program. The Columbia students who are involved in YFD teach public speaking and debate curricula once a week to hundreds of middle and high school students in twenty classrooms throughout New York City. In the words of its

graduating president, Misha Solomon CC ’14, YFD works “to provide students at underserved New York City public schools with the skills of debate and public speaking in order to open their minds and to encourage them to advocate for themselves.” YFD was founded at Columbia in 2008 by a group of sophomore and junior debaters who,

according to YFD’s mission, wanted to play a role in “giving a voice to [the] future.” Now, six years later and with a board that includes Columbia alumni, the organization has established itself as a national 501(c)(3), has established another chapter at Duke University and is working to expand the program to other colleges across the United States.

And, youth are interested in campaigning for human rights.

The Civic Solidarity Platform. "International Youth Human Rights Movement." Www.civicsolidarity.org. The Civic Solidarity Platform, n.d. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

The International Youth Human Rights Movement is a community of young people from different countries (at present, more than 30) who value human rights and individual dignity. Members are united in a network to defend and promote human rights, share ideas, organize joint actions, and form a new generation of civil society activists. The network organizes public actions and campaigns and holds seminars and

trainings on human rights. Its members undertake independent human rights research for publication.

Advocates for Youth. "Youth Activism." www.advocatesforyouth.org. Advocates for Youth, 2008. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

Youth activists can and do take their health and rights into their own hands, organizing activism efforts, lobbying policy makers, educating their peers, and taking leadership roles in the United States and around the world. Advocates’ Youth Activist

Network is comprised of tens of thousands of young people with a commitment to securing honest sexual health information and affordable, confidential sexual health services for all young people, as well as redressing health

disparities and ending discrimination.

By their very nature human rights apply to everyone and can thus inspire interest in students, judges, and the community alike.

TimelinessHuman rights violations, especially violations of social economic and cultural rights, are ever present, and unlikely to disappear within the next year alone. There are multiple areas in which both the United States and the world have a long way to go.

The following include some examples of current problems related to economic, social, and cultural rights within the United States.

One right is the right to an adequate standard of living which includes the right to clean water. The recent events in Flint, Michigan demonstrates some of the current problems in the United States regarding clean water, but the problems go beyond that.

Adler, Robert. "The Clean Water Act: Has It Worked?" Csun.edu. California State University Northridge, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2016. http://www.csun.edu/~vchsc006/pub/CWAA

We have good reason to applaud the success of the Clean Water Act over the past two decades. Pollution from point sources has been reduced dramatically, and some human health and environmental threats have declined

accordingly. It is equally clear from the above, however, that we still have a long way to go in meeting the basic goals of the Clean Water Act. Three basic messages predominate from

this evaluation. First, although point-source pollution has declined, we continue to release large amounts of toxic and other pollutants into our water, causing continuing contamination of water, sediment, and fish and wildlife. Second, although we have

paid much attention to pollution from point sources, relatively little has been done to stem the tide of polluted runoff from farms, lawns, and city streets. Third, while some progress has been

made in restoring the chemical integrity of our waters, the biological health of these same waters is moving in the wrong direction. A revised and revitalized Clean Water Act could address these major flaws in the current law, and in current programs.# (Adler is Senior Attorney at the National Resources Defense Council in Washington, DC. This article was excerpted from Chapter 2 of The Clean Water Act: 20 Years Later [Island Press 1993].) [BEGIN BOX FOR ADLER STORY:] The Safe Drinking Water Act in Retrospect Twenty years following the passage of the Safe Drinking Water Act in 1974, the Natural Resources Defense Council has recently completed an analysis of the protection and treatment techniques currently used by the nation's largest drinking-water systems. The results of this analysis were published in a March 1994 report entitled Victorian Water Treatment Enters the 21st Century (authors: Brian A. Cohen and Erik D. Olson). As the title of this report indicates, NRDC finds that most large water suppliers in the United States are traveling on a technological "dirt road" at the same time that most Americans are preparing to enter the "information

superhighway." Following are some highlights from the report: *The vast majority of large water suppliers do little or nothing to prevent contamination of the watershed or ground water that they rely upon for source water. The most effective way for drinking-water utilities to protect public health and reduce the risks from chemical contamination is to provide multiple

barriers of protection. The first and most effective technique is protecting water supplies from deterioration by preventing their pollution. However, about two-thirds of large surface water systems have failed to adopt even minimal watershed protection techniques such as watershed land ownership and stream or reservoir buffers to prevent runoff or discharges of chemically or microbiologically polluted water into their source water. About 8 of 10 ground-water-supplied systems have failed to adopt wellhead protection programs to prevent

contamination of their wells. *More than 90 percent of major water utilities have failed to install modern, post-World War I chemical-contaminant removal technology, despite widespread chemical contamination. Fewer than 10 percent of large community water systems are using modern water treatment technologies (such as granular activated carbon or ozone, both widely used by European drinking water systems) to reduce risks of chemical contamination by pesticides, arsenic, and other contaminants as well as disinfection byproducts. Moreover, only 26 percent of all large utilities are using the centuries-old and simple technique of aeration for removing volatile

contaminants. While a relative handful of U.S. water systems have pristine watersheds and produce low levels of disinfection byproducts, most do not

and should therefore consider a shift to higher quality treatment. *Scores of major systems with inadequately protected source waters have dragged their feet and have not installed basic 19th- Century filtration and particle removal technology needed to protect water from dangerous microbes. As of February 1994, more than 80 large surface-water systems (serving over 10,000 people each), which provide water to over 4.5 million people, have inadequately protected their watersheds and have not installed filtration, in violation of EPA's Surface Water Treatment Rule, according to EPA data. This does not include cities with watershed protection programs tentatively approved by EPA as adequate to avoid filtration, such as the Delaware-Catskill watershed of New York (see article on page 24). Approximately 140 large surface-water-supplied utilities (approximately 10 percent) also are not using coagulation and flocculation--basic steps in the pretreatment process needed to remove particles prior to filtration of all but the most pure source waters. Moreover, as of 1989, nearly 50 large ground-water systems provided no water treatment whatsoever--not even basic disinfection. Many experts argue that ground water adequately protected from surface contamination does not need extensive treatment because passage of the water through the aquifer is enough to remove many particles and contaminants. However, many of the ground-water systems are under the influence of surface water and are subject to contamination from surface

sources. *Aged, crumbling distribution systems are neglected and are often the cause of waterborne disease outbreaks . The final step in the provision of safe drinking water is water distribution: the network of pipes that carries the water from the treatment plant to the customer. The

distribution system is fraught with concerns. Millions of pipes are made with lead, and as a result, millions of Americans are exposed to unsafe levels of lead in their drinking water (see boxed item on page 19). In addition, there are less obvious concerns. In many cases,

the pipes that bring us our water are 100 or more years old and are cracking or crumbling. These aged pipes often harbor microbial growth and are subject to catastrophic breakage. Broken or "cross connected" pipes that allow contaminated water to seep into the water system have often been linked by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to waterborne disease outbreaks, yet the average water pipe will be over a century old before it is replaced.

Additionally, there is consistent inequality with regard to economic opportunity and the pay gap, between women and men.

Warner, Judith. "Women's Equality By the Numbers: Still a Long Way to Go." Newsweek.com. Newsweek, 9

Aug. 2015. Web. 29 Mar. 2016. http://www.newsweek.com/womens-equality-numbers-still-long-way-go-360937

Women have outnumbered men on college campuses since 1988. They have earned at least one-third of law degrees since 1980 and accounted for fully one-third of medical school students by 1990. Yet they have not moved up to positions of prominence and power in America at anywhere near the rate that

should have followed. In a broad range of fields, their presence in top leadership positions—

as equity law partners, medical school deans, and corporate executive officers—remains stuck at a mere 10 percent to 20 percent. Their “share of voice”—the average proportion of their representation on op-ed pages and corporate boards; as TV pundits, Wikipedia contributors, Hollywood writers,

producers and directors; and as members of Congress—is just 18 percent. In fact, it has been estimated that, at the current rate of change, it will take until 2085 for women to reach parity with men in key leadership roles in the United States.

Hill, Catherine, Ph.D. "The Simple Truth about the Gender Pay Gap (Spring 2016)." Aauw.org. AAUW, 2016. Web. 4 Apr. 2016. http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/

Did you know that in 2014, women working full time in the United States typically were paid just 79 percent of what men were paid, a gap of 21 percent? The gap has narrowed since the 1970s (Figure 1), due largely to women’s progress in education and workforce participation and to men’s wages rising at a slower rate. But progress has stalled in recent years, and the pay gap does not appear likely to go away on its own. Not only is there a national pay gap statistic, the pay gap can also be calculated for each state (Figure 2). According to data from the American Community Survey, in 2014 the pay gap was smallest in Washington, D.C., where women were paid 90 percent of what men were paid, and largest in

Louisiana, where women were paid 65 percent of what men were paid. The Pay Gap Is Worse for Women of Color The pay gap affects women from all backgrounds, at all ages, and of all levels of educational achievement, although earnings and the gap vary depending on a woman’s individual situation. Among full-time workers in 2014, Hispanic, African American, American Indian, and Native Hawaiian women had lower median annual earnings compared with non-Hispanic white and Asian American women. But within racial/ethnic groups, African American, Hispanic, American Indian, and Native Hawaiian women experienced a smaller gender pay gap compared with men in the same group than did non-Hispanic white and Asian American women (Figure 3). A Closer Look at the Numbers by Race Using a single benchmark provides a more informative picture. Because non-Hispanic white men are the largest demographic group in the labor force, they are often used for that purpose. Compared with salary information for white male workers, Asian American women’s salaries show the smallest gender pay gap, at 90 percent of white men’s earnings. The gap was largest for Hispanic and Latina women, who were paid only 54 percent of what white men were paid in 2014 (Figure 4). The smaller gender pay gap among African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, and Native Hawaiians is due solely to the fact that those men of color were paid substantially less than non-Hispanic white men in 2014. Age Is More than Just a Number Earnings for both female and male full-time workers tend to increase with age, with a

plateau after 45 and a drop after age 65. The gender pay gap also grows with age, and differences among older workers are considerably larger than gaps among younger workers. Women typically earn about 90 percent of what men are paid until they hit 35. After that median earnings for women are typically 76–81 percent of what men are paid.

There is consistent inequality in opportunities between people of various races.

National Opportunity to Learn Campaign. "Opportunity Gap." Otlcampaign.org. National Opportunity to Learn Campaign, n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2016. http://www.otlcampaign.org/issues/opportunity-gap

The opportunity gap is the unconscionable disparity in access to the quality educational resources needed for all

children to be academically successful. Students from historically disadvantaged families have just a 51 percent Opportunity to Learn compared to White, non-Latino students. Closing this opportunity gap is essential to closing the academic achievement gaps that separate most Black and Hispanic students from their White and Asian peers

There are over 600,000 homeless people currently in the United States. Migrant workers consistently face problems related to economic and social rights. Health care remains

inaccessible to many americans, and the quality of public education in the United States remains incredibly uneven.

These are only a few examples of various problems regarding human rights within the United States, and none of them will disappear in the next two years.

ScopeAs Eleanor Roosevelt said, “Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In

small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighbourhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerned citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world,” (UN).

The very nature of human rights means that human rights affect everyone. Even with the limitation to economic, social, and cultural rights, violations of those rights still affect everyone. Every individual, regardless of location, class, or race, has a vested interested in human rights.

Additionally, even within the United States, there are plenty of human rights violations to choose from.

QualityThe inherent universality of human rights not only means that the topic would be

enjoyable to everyone, but also that the discussions held during debates would be applicable to students’ daily lives. The development and discussion of actual plans to promote human rights can provide quality debate and have an important impact on students. First, solutions to human rights violations are complicated, and creating plans that actually solve them would foster excellent critical thinking skills. In addition, the resulting debates over human rights violations and solutions would be of immense real-world value. The best cases will be real-world cases based on current issues and events. Current human rights violations are problems that will need to be solved in the future, and as students will shape the future, experience discussing solutions to complex real-world problems will inform students and enable them to make real, lasting change in the world.

Additionally, the plethora of material available, and the variety of affirmative and negative positions would ensure quality debate. The availability of material will ensure that students can have well informed debates on human rights. In addition, the nature of the topic will enable good clash, as solutions to human rights violations, and even what constitutes a human right, are controversial and there are plenty of writings for both sides regarding any solution to human rights issues. Furthermore, the topic is broad enough to prevent repetitive debates.

MaterialThere is an extraordinary amount of information available about human rights

violations. Good sources to start with include the UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, any of a near-infinite number of NGOs, investigative journalism websites, and even just the regular news sources.

The following are only a handful of a plethora of potential sources.

The National Economic and Social Rights Initiative: https://www.nesri.org/human-rights/economic-and-social-rights

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx

The United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Pages/Home.aspx

The Sustainable Development Goals: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/

The Center for Investigative Reporting: https://www.revealnews.org

Any number of NGOs, dedicated toward the promotion of human rights:

● https://www.hrw.org/ ● http://www.amnestyusa.org/

In addition, most news sources have a human rights section.

Any of the sources in the bibliography are potential sources for a case.

BibliographyAdler, Robert. "The Clean Water Act: Has It Worked?" Csun.edu. California State

University Northridge, n.d. Web. 28 Mar. 2016.

Advocates for Youth. "Youth Activism." www.advocatesforyouth.org. Advocates for Youth,

2008. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

Amnesty International Canada. "Economic and Social Rights." Www.amnesty.ca. Amnesty

International, 2015. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.

Amnesty International USA. “Human Rights Basics.” www.amnestyusa.org. Amnesty

International, n.d..Web. 28 Jan. 2016

Butt, Mark Eric, Julia Kübert, and Christiane Anne Schultz. "FUNDAMENTAL SOCIAL

RIGHTS IN EUROPE." Europarl.europa.eu. EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, Nov. 1999.

Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Cambridge University Press. "Description." Www.cambridge.org. Cambridge University

Press, n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.

The Civic Solidarity Platform. "International Youth Human Rights Movement."

www.civicsolidarity.org. The Civic Solidarity Platform, n.d. Web. 21 Feb. 2016.

Dakwar, Jamil. "UN Issues Scathing Assessment of US Human Rights Record." Aclu.org.

American Civil Liberties Union, 15 May 2015. Web. 21 June 2016.

The Danish Institute for Human Rights. "About This Guide." Sdg.humanrights.dk. The

Danish Institute for Human Rights, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2016.

Donders, Yvonne, and Vladimir Volodin. Human Rights in Education, Science, and Culture

: Legal Developments and Challenges. N.p.: Ashgate, 2007. Google Books. Google.

Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

End Slavery Now. "Human Rights and Slavery." www.endslaverynow.org. End Slavery

Now, n.d.. Web. 28 Jan. 2016.

FPS Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation. "Economic, Social and

Cultural Rights: A Brief Introduction to Economic, Social and Cultural Rights."

diplomatie.belgium.be. Kingdom of Belgium, n.d. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Gorga, Carmine. "Toward the Definition of Economic Rights." Journal of Markets and

Morality 2.1 (1999): 88-101. www.marketsandmorality.com. Center for Economic

Personalism. Web. 27 Apr. 2016.

Hill, Catherine, Ph.D. "The Simple Truth about the Gender Pay Gap (Spring 2016)."

Aauw.org. AAUW, 2016. Web. 4 Apr. 2016.

Human Rights Watch. "World Report 2015: United States." Human Rights Watch. Human

Rights Watch, 20 Jan. 2015. Web. 21 June 2016.

Interarts. "What We Mean by Cultural Rights?:." Cultural Rights. Interarts, 2005. Web. 28

Apr. 2016.

Jackson, Nicholas. "United Nations Declares Internet Access a Basic Human Right." The

Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 3 June 2011. Web. 20 Feb. 2016.

National Commissions for UNESCO. "General Economic, Social and Cultural Rights."

Claiming Human Rights. The National Commissions for UNESCO of France and

Germany, 16 Sept. 2011. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.

National Economic and Social Rights Initiative. "Economic and Social Rights."

www.nesri.org. National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, n.d. Web. 15 Feb.

2016.

National Opportunity to Learn Campaign. "Opportunity Gap." Otlcampaign.org. National

Opportunity to Learn Campaign, n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2016.

Nickel, James. "Human Rights." Stanford University. Stanford University, 08 Nov. 2014.

Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. "Frequently Asked

Questions on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights." Ohchr.org. Office of the

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Dec. 2008. Web. 14 Mar.

2016.

OHCHR. "Human Rights and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development." Ohchr.org.

United Nations, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2016.

OHCHR. "International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights." Ohchr.org.

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 16 Dec. 1966.

Web. 14 Mar. 2016.

UN. "Human Rights for All: Quotations." www.un.org. United Nations, n.d. Web. 21 Feb.

2016.

United Nations. "Historic New Sustainable Development Agenda Unanimously Adopted

by 193 UN Members." Www.un.org. United Nations, 25 Sept. 2015. Web. 28 Mar.

2016.

USLegal Inc. "Cultural Rights Law & Legal Definition." Uslegal.com. USLegal Inc., n.d.

Web. 28 Apr. 2016.

Warner, Judith. "Women's Equality By the Numbers: Still a Long Way to Go."

Newsweek.com. Newsweek, 9 Aug. 2015. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.

AppendixInternational Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966

entry into force 3 January 1976, in accordance with article 27Preamble

The States Parties to the present Covenant,

Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations,

recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human

family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Recognizing that these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person,

Recognizing that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free

human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created

whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political

rights,

Considering the obligation of States under the Charter of the United Nations to promote universal

respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedoms,

Realizing that the individual, having duties to other individuals and to the community to which he

belongs, is under a responsibility to strive for the promotion and observance of the rights recognized in

the present Covenant,

Agree upon the following articles:

PART I

Article 1

1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their

political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without

prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the

principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own

means of subsistence.

3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the

administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right

of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of

the United Nations.

PART II

Article 2

1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps, individually and through

international assistance and co-operation, especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its

available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized

in the present Covenant by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislative

measures.

2. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the

present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language,

religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

3. Developing countries, with due regard to human rights and their national economy, may determine

to what extent they would guarantee the economic rights recognized in the present Covenant to non-

nationals.

Article 3

The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure the equal right of men and women to

the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights set forth in the present Covenant.

Article 4

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, in the enjoyment of those rights provided by

the State in conformity with the present Covenant, the State may subject such rights only to such

limitations as are determined by law only in so far as this may be compatible with the nature of these

rights and solely for the purpose of promoting the general welfare in a democratic society.

Article 5

1. Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any

right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights or

freedoms recognized herein, or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the

present Covenant.

2. No restriction upon or derogation from any of the fundamental human rights recognized or existing

in any country in virtue of law, conventions, regulations or custom shall be admitted on the pretext

that the present Covenant does not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser extent.

PART III

Article 6

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which includes the right of

everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts, and will take

appropriate steps to safeguard this right.

2. The steps to be taken by a State Party to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this

right shall include technical and vocational guidance and training programmes, policies and

techniques to achieve steady economic, social and cultural development and full and productive

employment under conditions safeguarding fundamental political and economic freedoms to the

individual.

Article 7

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and

favourable conditions of work which ensure, in particular:

(a) Remuneration which provides all workers, as a minimum, with:

(i) Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction of any kind, in

particular women being guaranteed conditions of work not inferior to those enjoyed by men, with

equal pay for equal work;

(ii) A decent living for themselves and their families in accordance with the provisions of the present

Covenant;

(b) Safe and healthy working conditions;(c) Equal opportunity for everyone to be promoted in his employment to an appropriate higher level,

subject to no considerations other than those of seniority and competence;

(d ) Rest, leisure and reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay, as well as

remuneration for public holidays

Article 8

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to ensure:

(a) The right of everyone to form trade unions and join the trade union of his choice, subject only to the

rules of the organization concerned, for the promotion and protection of his economic and social

interests. No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those prescribed by law

and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public order or

for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;

(b) The right of trade unions to establish national federations or confederations and the right of the

latter to form or join international trade-union organizations;

(c) The right of trade unions to function freely subject to no limitations other than those prescribed by

law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public

order or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;

(d) The right to strike, provided that it is exercised in conformity with the laws of the particular

country.

2. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces or of the police or of the administration of the State.3. Nothing in this article shall authorize States Parties to the International Labour Organisation

Convention of 1948 concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize to take

legislative measures which would prejudice, or apply the law in such a manner as would prejudice, the

guarantees provided for in that Convention.

Article 9

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to social security, including

social insurance.

Article 10

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that:

1. The widest possible protection and assistance should be accorded to the family, which is the natural

and fundamental group unit of society, particularly for its establishment and while it is responsible for

the care and education of dependent children. Marriage must be entered into with the free consent of

the intending spouses.

2. Special protection should be accorded to mothers during a reasonable period before and after

childbirth. During such period working mothers should be accorded paid leave or leave with adequate

social security benefits.

3. Special measures of protection and assistance should be taken on behalf of all children and young

persons without any discrimination for reasons of parentage or other conditions. Children and young

persons should be protected from economic and social exploitation. Their employment in work

harmful to their morals or health or dangerous to life or likely to hamper their normal development

should be punishable by law. States should also set age limits below which the paid employment of

child labour should be prohibited and punishable by law.

Article 11

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard

of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the

continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure

the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-

operation based on free consent.

2. The States Parties to the present Covenant, recognizing the fundamental right of everyone to be free

from hunger, shall take, individually and through international co-operation, the measures, including

specific programmes, which are needed:

(a) To improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of

technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by

developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development

and utilization of natural resources;

(b) Taking into account the problems of both food-importing and food-exporting countries, to ensure

an equitable distribution of world food supplies in relation to need.

Article 12

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the

highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.

2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of

this right shall include those necessary for:

(a) The provision for the reduction of the stillbirth-rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy

development of the child;

(b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene;

(c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases;

(d) The creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the

event of sickness.

Article 13

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education. They agree

that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its

dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further

agree that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote

understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups,

and further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

2. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, with a view to achieving the full

realization of this right:

(a) Primary education shall be compulsory and available free to all;

(b) Secondary education in its different forms, including technical and vocational secondary education,

shall be made generally available and accessible to all by every appropriate means, and in particular

by the progressive introduction of free education;

(c) Higher education shall be made equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity, by every

appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;

(d) Fundamental education shall be encouraged or intensified as far as possible for those persons who

have not received or completed the whole period of their primary education;

(e) The development of a system of schools at all levels shall be actively pursued, an adequate

fellowship system shall be established, and the material conditions of teaching staff shall be

continuously improved.

3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and,

when applicable, legal guardians to choose for their children schools, other than those established by

the public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or

approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity

with their own convictions.

4. No part of this article shall be construed so as to interfere with the liberty of individuals and bodies

to establish and direct educational institutions, subject always to the observance of the principles set

forth in paragraph I of this article and to the requirement that the education given in such institutions

shall conform to such minimum standards as may be laid down by the State.

Article 14

Each State Party to the present Covenant which, at the time of becoming a Party, has not been able to

secure in its metropolitan territory or other territories under its jurisdiction compulsory primary

education, free of charge, undertakes, within two years, to work out and adopt a detailed plan of action

for the progressive implementation, within a reasonable number of years, to be fixed in the plan, of the

principle of compulsory education free of charge for all.

Article 15

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone:

(a) To take part in cultural life;

(b) To enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications;

(c) To benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific,

literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for the conservation, the development and the diffusion of science and culture.3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to respect the freedom indispensable for

scientific research and creative activity.

4. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the benefits to be derived from the

encouragement and development of international contacts and co-operation in the scientific and

cultural fields.

PART IV

Article 16

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to submit in conformity with this part of the

Covenant reports on the measures which they have adopted and the progress made in achieving the

observance of the rights recognized herein.

2.

(a) All reports shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall transmit

copies to the Economic and Social Council for consideration in accordance with the provisions of the

present Covenant;

(b) The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall also transmit to the specialized agencies copies of

the reports, or any relevant parts therefrom, from States Parties to the present Covenant which are also

members of these specialized agencies in so far as these reports, or parts therefrom, relate to any

matters which fall within the responsibilities of the said agencies in accordance with their

constitutional instruments.

Article 17

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant shall furnish their reports in stages, in accordance with a

programme to be established by the Economic and Social Council within one year of the entry into

force of the present Covenant after consultation with the States Parties and the specialized agencies

concerned.

2. Reports may indicate factors and difficulties affecting the degree of fulfilment of obligations under

the present Covenant.

3. Where relevant information has previously been furnished to the United Nations or to any

specialized agency by any State Party to the present Covenant, it will not be necessary to reproduce

that information, but a precise reference to the information so furnished will suffice.

Article 18

Pursuant to its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations in the field of human rights and

fundamental freedoms, the Economic and Social Council may make arrangements with the specialized

agencies in respect of their reporting to it on the progress made in achieving the observance of the

provisions of the present Covenant falling within the scope of their activities. These reports may

include particulars of decisions and recommendations on such implementation adopted by their

competent organs.

Article 19

The Economic and Social Council may transmit to the Commission on Human Rights for study and

general recommendation or, as appropriate, for information the reports concerning human rights

submitted by States in accordance with articles 16 and 17, and those concerning human rights

submitted by the specialized agencies in accordance with article 18.

Article 20

The States Parties to the present Covenant and the specialized agencies concerned may submit

comments to the Economic and Social Council on any general recommendation under article 19 or

reference to such general recommendation in any report of the Commission on Human Rights or any

documentation referred to therein.

Article 21

The Economic and Social Council may submit from time to time to the General Assembly reports with

recommendations of a general nature and a summary of the information received from the States

Parties to the present Covenant and the specialized agencies on the measures taken and the progress

made in achieving general observance of the rights recognized in the present Covenant.

Article 22

The Economic and Social Council may bring to the attention of other organs of the United Nations, their

subsidiary organs and specialized agencies concerned with furnishing technical assistance any matters

arising out of the reports referred to in this part of the present Covenant which may assist such bodies

in deciding, each within its field of competence, on the advisability of international measures likely to

contribute to the effective progressive implementation of the present Covenant.

Article 23

The States Parties to the present Covenant agree that international action for the achievement of the

rights recognized in the present Covenant includes such methods as the conclusion of conventions, the

adoption of recommendations, the furnishing of technical assistance and the holding of regional

meetings and technical meetings for the purpose of consultation and study organized in conjunction

with the Governments concerned.

Article 24

Nothing in the present Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the provisions of the Charter of the

United Nations and of the constitutions of the specialized agencies which define the respective

responsibilities of the various organs of the United Nations and of the specialized agencies in regard to

the matters dealt with in the present Covenant.

Article 25

Nothing in the present Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the inherent right of all peoples to

enjoy and utilize fully and freely their natural wealth and resources.

PART V

Article 26

1. The present Covenant is open for signature by any State Member of the United Nations or member of

any of its specialized agencies, by any State Party to the Statute of the International Court of Justice,

and by any other State which has been invited by the General Assembly of the United Nations to

become a party to the present Covenant.

2. The present Covenant is subject to ratification. Instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the

Secretary-General of the United Nations.

3. The present Covenant shall be open to accession by any State referred to in paragraph 1 of this

article.

4. Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession with the Secretary-General

of the United Nations.

5. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall inform all States which have signed the present

Covenant or acceded to it of the deposit of each instrument of ratification or accession.

Article 27

1. The present Covenant shall enter into force three months after the date of the deposit with the

Secretary-General of the United Nations of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or instrument of

accession.

2. For each State ratifying the present Covenant or acceding to it after the deposit of the thirty-fifth

instrument of ratification or instrument of accession, the present Covenant shall enter into force three

months after the date of the deposit of its own instrument of ratification or instrument of accession.

Article 28

The provisions of the present Covenant shall extend to all parts of federal States without any

limitations or exceptions.

Article 29

1. Any State Party to the present Covenant may propose an amendment and file it with the Secretary-

General of the United Nations. The Secretary-General shall thereupon communicate any proposed

amendments to the States Parties to the present Covenant with a request that they notify him whether

they favour a conference of States Parties for the purpose of considering and voting upon the

proposals. In the event that at least one third of the States Parties favours such a conference, the

Secretary-General shall convene the conference under the auspices of the United Nations. Any

amendment adopted by a majority of the States Parties present and voting at the conference shall be

submitted to the General Assembly of the United Nations for approval.

2. Amendments shall come into force when they have been approved by the General Assembly of the

United Nations and accepted by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties to the present Covenant in

accordance with their respective constitutional processes.

3. When amendments come into force they shall be binding on those States Parties which have

accepted them, other States Parties still being bound by the provisions of the present Covenant and any

earlier amendment which they have accepted.

Article 30

Irrespective of the notifications made under article 26, paragraph 5, the Secretary-General of the

United Nations shall inform all States referred to in paragraph I of the same article of the following

particulars:

(a) Signatures, ratifications and accessions under article 26;

(b) The date of the entry into force of the present Covenant under article 27 and the date of the entry

into force of any amendments under article 29.

Article 31

1. The present Covenant, of which the Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally

authentic, shall be deposited in the archives of the United Nations.

2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall transmit certified copies of the present Covenant

to all States referred to in article 26.