Standford Hr

8/9/2019 Standford Hr

1/21

STANDFORDHuman RightsFirst published Fri Feb 7, 2003; substantive revision Tue Aug 24, 2010

Human rights are international norms that help to protect all people everywhere from severepolitical, legal, and social abuses. Examples of human rights are the right to freedom of religion,the right to a fair trial when charged with a crime, the right not to be tortured, and the right toengage in political activity. These rights exist in morality and in law at the national andinternational levels. They are addressed primarily to governments, requiring compliance andenforcement. The main sources of the contemporary conception of human rights arethe Universal Declaration of Human ights!United "ations, #$%&b' and the many human rightsdocuments and treaties that followed in international organi(ations such as the United "ations,the )ouncil of Europe, the *rgani(ation of +merican tates, and the +frican Union.

The philosophy of human rights addresses questions about the existence, content, nature,universality, -ustication, and legal status of human rights. The strong claims made on behalf ofhuman rights !for example, that they are universal, or that they exist independently of legalenactment as -ustied moral norms' frequently provo/e s/eptical doubts and counteringphilosophical defences. e0ection on these doubts and the responses that can be made to themhas become a sub1eld of political and legal philosophy with a substantial literature !seethe 2ibliographybelow'.

This entry includes a lengthy nal section, 3nternational Human ights 4aw and *rgani(ations,that o5ers a comprehensive survey of today6s international system for the promotion andprotection of human rights.

#. The 7eneral 3dea of Human ights

8. The Existence of Human ights

9. :hich ights are Human ights;

o 9.# )ivil and The 3nternational )riminal )ourt

o %.?


2/21

o *rgani(ations !7overnmental and "ongovernmental'

elated Entries

1. The General Idea of Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human ights!#$%&' sets out a list of over two do(en specichuman rights that countries should respect and protect. These specic rights can be divided into

six or more familiesB security rightsthat protect people against crimes such as murder,massacre, torture, and rapeC due process rightsthat protect against abuses of the legal systemsuch as imprisonment without trial, secret trials, and excessive punishmentsC liberty rightsthatprotect freedoms in areas such as belief, expression, association, assembly, andmovementCpolitical rightsthat protect the liberty to participate in politics through actions suchas communicating, assembling, protesting, voting, and serving in public oceC equalityrightsthat guarantee equal citi(enship, equality before the law, and nondiscriminationCand social or !"el#are$% rightsthat require provision of education to all children and protectionsagainst severe poverty and starvation. +nother family that might be included is group rights. TheUniversal Declaration does not include group rights, but subsequent treaties do. 7roup rightsinclude protections of ethnic groups against genocide and the ownership by countries of theirnational territories and resources !see +naya 8%, 2a/er 8%, Henrard 8, Fymlic/a #$&$,

and "ic/el 8?'.

3n this section 3 try to explain the general idea of human rights by setting out some deningfeatures. The goal here is to answer the question of what human rights are with a generaldescription of the contemporary concept rather than a list of specic rights. Two people can havethe same general idea of human rights even though they disagree about whether someparticular rights are human rights. !Aor another attempt to characteri(e the idea of human rightsin light of contemporary human rights practice see 2eit(, #%f.'

Airst, human rights are political norms dealing mainly with how people should be treated by theirgovernments and institutions. They are not ordinary &oral nor&s applying &ainly tointerpersonal conduct!such as prohibitions of lying and violence'. +s Thomas


3/21

Aifth, human rights are international nor&scovering all countries and all people living today.3nternational law plays a crucial role in giving human rights global reach. :e can say that humanrights are universalprovided that we recogni(e that some rights, such as the right to vote, areheld only by adult citi(ensC that some human rights documents focus on vulnerable groups suchas children, women, and indigenous peoples.

ixth, human rights are high+priority nor&s. =aurice )ranston held that human rights arematters of Gparamount importance and their violation Ga grave a5ront to -ustice !)ranston#$?@'. This does not mean, however, that we should ta/e human rights to be absolute. +s Iames7rin says, human rights should be understood as Gresistant to trade1o5s, but not too resistant!7rin 8#b'. The high priority of human rights needs support from a plausible connection withfundamental human interests or powerful normative considerations.

eventh, human rights require robust usti-cations that apply every"here and support their highpriority. :ithout this they cannot withstand cultural diversity and national sovereignty. obust-ustications are powerful but need not be understood as ones that are irresistible.

Eighth, human rights are rights, but not necessarily in a strict sense. +s rights they have severalfeatures. *ne is that they have rightholders J a person or agency having a particular right.2roadly, the rightholders of human rights are all people living today. +nother feature of rights isthat they #ocus on a #reedo&, protection, status, or bene-t #or the rightholders!2randt #$&9,

%%'. ights also have addresseeswho are assigned duties or responsibilities. + person6s humanrights are not primarily rights against the United "ations or other international bodiesC theyprimarily impose obligations on the government of the country in which the person resides or islocated. The human rights of citi(ens of 2elgium are mainly addressed to the 2elgiangovernment. 3nternational agencies, and the governments of countries other than one6s own, aresecondary or Gbac/up addressees. The duties associated with human rights typically requireactions involving respect, protection, facilitation, and provision. Ainally, rights are usually&andatoryin the sense of imposing duties on their addressees, but they sometimes do littlemore than declare high1priority goals and assign responsibility for their progressive reali(ation. 3tis possible to argue, of course, that goal1li/e rights are not real rights, but it may be better simplyto recogni(e that they comprise a wea/er but useful notion of a right.

Having set out a general idea of human rights with eight elements, it is useful to consider threeother candidates which 3 thin/ should be re-ected. The rst is the claim that all human rights arenegative rights, in the sense that they only require governments to refrain from doing things. *nthis view, human rights never require governments to ta/e positive steps such as protecting andproviding. To refute this claim we do not need to appeal to social rights that require the provisionof things li/e education and medical care. 3t is enough to note that this view is incompatible withthe attractive position that one of the main -obs of governments is to protect people6s rights bycreating an e5ective system of criminal law and of legal property rights. The European)onvention on Human ights !)ouncil of Europe #$>' incorporates this view when it says thatGEveryone6s right to life shall be protected by law !+rticle 8.#'. +nd the U" )onvention against

Torture and *ther )ruel, 3nhuman or Degrading Treatment or


4/21

problems. ome countries have large human rights problems, and many have massive problems!Ggross violations of human rights'. 2eyond this, the responsibility of the current government ofa country for these problems also varies. The main responsibility may belong to the previousgovernment and the current government may be ta/ing reasonable steps to move towardsgreater compliance.

Aurther, dening human rights as norms that set the bounds of toleration requires restrictinghuman rights to only a few fundamental rights. awls suggests the following listB Gthe right to life!to the means of subsistence and security'C to liberty !to freedom from slavery, serfdom, andforced occupation, and to a sucient measure of liberty of conscience to ensure freedom ofreligion and thought'C to property !personal property'C and to formal equality as pressed by therules of natural -ustice !that is, that similar cases be treated similarly' !awls #$$$, ?>'. +sawls recogni(es this list leaves out most freedoms, rights of political participation, equalityrights, and social rights. 4eaving out any protection for equality and democracy is a high price topay for assigning human rights the role of setting the bounds of tolerance, and we canaccommodate awls6 underlying idea without paying it. The intuitive idea that awls uses isthat countries engaging in &assive violations o# the &ost i&portant hu&an rightsare not to betolerated J particularly when the notion of toleration implies, as awls thin/s it does, full andequal membership in good standing in the community of nations. To use this intuitive idea we donot need to follow awls in equating human rights with some stripped down list of human rights.3nstead we can wor/ up a view J which is needed for other purposes anyway J of which humanrights are the weightiest and whether they can classied into tiers. 4arge violations of the mostfundamental rights can then be used as grounds for non1tolerance. !Aor a fuller version of thesecriticisms see "ic/el 8?.'

2. The Eisten!e of Human Rights

The most obvious way in which human rights exist is as norms of national and international lawcreated by enactment and -udicial decisions. +t the international level, human rights norms existbecause of treaties that have turned them into international law. Aor example, the human rightnot to be held in slavery or servitude in +rticle % of the European )onvention and in +rticle & ofthe 3nternational )ovenant on )ivil and


5/21

behavior bac/ed by reasons and values. These moralities contain specic norms !for example, aprohibition of the intentional murder of an innocent person' and specic values !for example,valuing human life.' *ne way in which human rights could exist apart from divine or humanenactment is as norms accepted in all or almost all actual human moralities. 3f almost all humangroups have moralities containing norms prohibiting murder, these norms could constitute thehuman right to life. Human rights can be seen as basic moral norms shared by all or almost allaccepted human moralities.

This view is attractive but lled with diculties. Airst, it seems unli/ely that the moralities ofalmost all human groups agree in condemning, say, torture, unfair criminal trials, undemocraticinstitutions, and discrimination on the basis of race or sex. There is a lot of disagreement amongcountries and cultures about these matters. Human rights declarations and treaties are intendedto change existing norms, not -ust describe the existing moral consensus. econd, it is far fromclear that the shared norms that do exist support rights held by individuals. + group may thin/that torture is generally a bad thing without holding that all individuals have a high1priority rightagainst being tortured. Third, human rights are mainly about the obligations of governments.*rdinary interpersonal moralities often have little to say about what governments should andshould not do. This is a matter of political morality, and depends not -ust on moral principles butalso on views of the dangers and capacities of the contemporary state.

Let another way of explaining the existence of human rights is to say that they exist most

basically in true or -ustied moralities. *n this account, to saying that there is a human rightagainst torture is mainly to say that there are strong reasons for believing that it is almost alwayswrong to engage in torture and that protections should be provided against its practice. Thisapproach would view the Universal Declaration as attempting to formulate a -ustied politicalmorality. 3t was not merely trying to identify a preexisting moral consensusC it was also trying tocreate a consensus on how governments should behave that could be supported by veryplausible moral and practical reasons. This approach requires commitment to the ob-ectivity ofsuch reasons. 3t holds that -ust as there are reliable ways of nding out how the physical worldwor/s, or what ma/es buildings sturdy and durable, there are ways of nding out whatindividuals may -ustiably demand of governments. Even if there is little present agreement onpolitical morality, rational agreement is available to humans if they will commit themselves toopen1minded and serious moral and political inquiry. 3f moral reasons exist independently of

human construction, they can J when combined with premises about current institutions,problems, and resources J generate moral norms di5erent from those currently accepted orenacted. The Universal Declaration seems to proceed on exactly this assumption. *ne problemwith this view is that existence as good reasons seems a rather thin form of existence for humanrights. 2ut perhaps we can view this thinness as a practical rather than a theoretical problem, assomething to be remedied by the formulation and enactment of legal norms. The best form ofexistence for human rights would combine robust legal existence with the sort of moral existencethat comes from being supported by strong moral and practical reasons.

". #hi!h Rights are Human Rights$

This section discusses the question of which rights belong on lists of human rights. "ot every

question of social -ustice or wise governance is a human rights issue. Aor example, a countrycould have too much income inequality, inadequate provision for higher education, or no nationalpar/s without violating any human rights. Deciding which norms should be counted as humanrights is a matter of some diculty. +nd there is continuing pressure to expand lists of humanrights to include new areas. =any political movements would li/e to see their main concernscategori(ed as matters of human rights, since this would publici(e, promote, and legitimi(e theirconcerns at the international level. + possible result of this is Ghuman rights in0ation, thedevaluation of human rights caused by producing too much bad human rights currency !ee)ranston #$@9, *rend 88, :ellman #$$$, 7rin 8#'.

*ne way to avoid rights in0ation is to follow )ranston in insisting that human rights only dealwith extremely important goods, protections, and freedoms. + supplementary approach is to

impose several -usticatory tests for specic human rights. Aor example, it could be required thata proposed human right not only deal with some very important good but also respond to acommon and serious threat to that good, impose burdens on the addressees that are -ustiableand no larger than necessary, and be feasible in most of the world6s countries !see "ic/el 8?'.

This approach restrains rights in0ation with several tests, not -ust one master test.

Human rights are specic and problem1oriented !Dershowit( 8%, Donnelly 89, hue #$$?,Talbott 8>'. Historic bills of rights often begin with a list of complaints about the abuses ofprevious regimes or eras. 2ills of rights may have preambles that spea/ grandly and abstractly oflife, liberty, and the inherent dignity of persons, but their lists of rights contain specic normsaddressed to familiar political, legal, or economic problems.


6/21

3n deciding which specic rights are human rights it is possible to ma/e either too little or toomuch of international documents such as the Universal Declaration and the European)onvention. *ne ma/es too little of them by proceeding as if drawing up a list of important rightswere a new question, never before addressed, and as if there were no practical wisdom to befound in the choices of rights that went into the historic documents. +nd one ma/es too much ofthem by presuming that those documents tell us everything we need to /now about humanrights. This approach involves a /ind of fundamentalismB it holds that if a right is on the ociallists of human rights that settles its status as a human right !G3f it6s in the boo/ that6s all 3 need to/now.' 2ut the process of listing human rights in the United "ations and elsewhere was apolitical process with plenty of imperfections. There is little reason to ta/e international diplomatsas the most authoritative guides to which human rights there are. Aurther, even if a treaty couldsettle the issue of whether a certain right is a human right within international law, such a treatycannot settle its weight. 3t may claim that the right is supported by weighty considerations, but itcannot ma/e this so. 3f an international treaty enacted a right to visit national par/s withoutcharge as a human right, the ratication of that treaty would ma/e free access to national par/sa Ghuman right within international law. 2ut it would not be able to ma/e us believe that theright to visit national par/s without charge was suciently important to be a real human right.

*nce one ta/es seriously the question of whether some norms that are now counted as humanrights do not merit that status and whether some norms that are not currently accepted ashuman rights should be upgraded, there are many possible ways to proceed. *ne approach thatshould be avoided puts a lot of weight on whether the norm in question really is, or could be, aright in a strict sense. This approach might yield arguments that human rights cannot includechildren6s rights since young children cannot exercise their rights by invo/ing, claiming, orwaiving !Hart #$>>, :ellman #$$>'. This approach begs the question of whether human rightsare rights in a strict sense rather than a fairly loose one. The human rights movement and itspurposes are not well served by being forced into a narrow conceptual framewor/. The mostbasic idea of the human rights movement is not that of a right, but the idea of regulating thebehavior of governments through international norms. +nd when we loo/ at human rightsdocuments we nd that they use a variety of normative concepts. ometimes they spea/ ofrights, as when the Universal Declaration says that GEveryone has the right to freedom ofmovement !+rticle #9'. ometimes these documents issue prohibitions, as when the UniversalDeclaration says that G"o one shall be sub-ected to arbitrary arrest, detention, or exile !+rticle

$'. +nd at other times they express general principles, as illustrated by the UniversalDeclaration6s claim that G+ll are equal before the law !+rticle @'.

+ better way to evaluate a norm that is nominated for the status of human right is to considerwhether it is compatible with the general idea of human rights that we nd in internationalhuman rights documents. 3f the general idea of human rights suggested above is correct, itrequires armative answers to questions such as whether this norm could have governments asits primary addressees, whether it ensures that people can have minimally good lives, whether ithas high priority, and whether it can be supported by strong reasons that ma/e plausible itsuniversality and high priority.

Muestions about which rights are human rights arise in regard to many families of human rights.

Discussed below are !#' civil and political rightsC !8' minority and group rightsC !9' environmentalrightsC and !%' social rights.

".1 %i&il and 'oliti!al Rights

These rights are familiar from historic bills of rights such as the Arench Declaration of the ightsof =an and the )iti(en!#@&$' and the U.. 2ill of ights!#@$#, with subsequent amendments'.)ontemporary sources include the rst 8# +rticles of the Universal Declaration, and such treatiesas the European )onvention, the 3nternational )ovenant on )ivil and


7/21

These rights t the general idea of human rights suggested above !see #. The 7eneral 3dea ofHuman ights'. Airst, they are political norms that primarily impose responsibilities ongovernments and international organi(ations. econd, they are minimal norms in that theyprotect against the worst things that happen in political society rather than setting out standardsof excellence in government. Third, they are international norms establishing standards for allcountries J and that have been accepted by more than #> of the world6s countries. Ainally, it isplausible to ma/e claims of high priority on their behalf, and to support these claims ofimportance with strong reasons. )onsider the right to freedom of movement. *ne approach to

-ustifying this right and its high priority would argue the indispensability of free movement tobeing able to nd the necessities of life, to pursuing plans, pro-ects, and commitments, and tomaintaining ties to family and friends. + related approach argues that it is impossible to ma/euse of other human rights if one cannot move freely. The right to political participation isundermined if a person is not permitted to go to political rallies or to the polls.

=ost civil and political rights are not absoluteJthey are in some cases overridden by otherconsiderations and rightly set aside in those cases. Aor example, some civil and political rightscan be restricted by public and private property rights, by restraining orders related to domesticviolence, and by legal punishments. Aurther, after a disaster such as a hurricane or earthqua/efree movement is often appropriately suspended to /eep out the curious, to permit access ofemergency vehicles and equipment, and to prevent looting. The 3nternational )ovenant on )iviland


8/21

The right against genocide seems to be a group right. 3t is held by both individuals and groupsand provides protection to groups as groups. 3t is largely negative in the sense that it requiresgovernments and other agencies to refrain from destroying groupsC but it also requires that legaland other protections against genocide be created at the national level.

)an a group right t the general idea of human rights proposed earlier;


9/21

right to adequate food, clothing, and housing !+rticle ##', the right to basic health services!+rticle #8', the right to education !+rticle #9', and the right to participate in cultural life andscientic progress !+rticle #>'.

+rticle 8.# of the ocial )ovenant sets out what each of the parties commits itself to do aboutthis list, namely to Gta/e steps, individually and through international assistance and co1operationNto the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively thefull reali(ation of the rights recogni(ed in the present )ovenant. 3n contrast, the )ivil and


10/21

minimum income ma/e it easier for people at the bottom economically to follow politics,participate in political campaigns, and to spend the time and money needed to go to the pollsand vote.

The second ob-ection is that social rights are too burdensome. 3t is very expensive to guaranteeto everyone basic education and minimal material conditions of life. , >9'. econd, property rights are not so strong that they can never beoutweighed by the requirements of meeting other rights.

The third ob-ection to social rights is that they are not feasible in many countries. 3t is veryexpensive to provide guarantees of subsistence, minimal public health measures, and basiceducation. +s we saw above, the ocial )ovenant dealt with the issue of feasibility by calling forprogressive implementation, that is, implementation as nancial and other resources permit.Does this view of implementation turn social rights into high1priority goals; 3f so, is that a badthing;


11/21

tandards that outrun the abilities of many of their addressees are good candidates fornormative treatment as goals. Treating such standards as goals, which allows us to view them aslargely aspirational rather than as imposing immediate duties, avoids massive problems ofinability1based noncompliance. *ne may worry, however, that this is too much of a demotion. +snorms, goals seem much wea/er than rights. 2ut goals can be formulated in ways that ma/ethem more li/e rights. 7oals can be assigned addressees !the party who is to pursue the goal',beneciaries, scopes that dene the ob-ective to be pursued, and a high level of priority. trongreasons for the importance of these goals can be provided. +nd supervisory bodies can monitorlevels of progress and pressure low1performing addressees to attend to and wor/ on their goals.

Treating very demanding rights as goals has several advantages. *ne is that proposed goals thatexceed one6s abilities are not as farcical as proposed duties that exceed one6s abilities. )reatinggrand lists of human rights that many countries cannot at present reali(e seems fraudulent tomany people, and perhaps this fraudulence is reduced if we understand that these Grights arereally goals that countries should promote. 7oals are inherently ability1calibrated. :hat youshould do now about your goals depends on your abilities and other commitments. 7oals coexisthappily with low levels of ability to achieve them. +nother advantage is that goals are 0exibleCaddressees with di5erent levels of ability can choose ways of pursuing the goals that suit theircircumstances and means. 2ecause of these attractions of goals, it will be worth exploring waysto transform very demanding human rights into goals. The transformation may be full or partial.

+ right together with its supporting reasons might be divided into two parts. *ne part, call it theGdemand side, sets out the rightholder6s claim and the reasons why it is very valuable orimportant that this claim be fullled. 3f the right is the right to a fair trial when one is arrestedand accused of a crime, the demand side would set out the rightholder6s claim to a fair trial andthe reasons why that claim is very valuable or important. The other part, the Gsupply side,would set out the addressees6 responsibilities in regard to the rightholder6s claim. 3t wouldexplain why this claim to a fair trial is a matter of duty, what the duties are, and why it is theseparticular addressees rather than other possible addressees that have the duty !Aeinberg #$@9'.

+ goal that is similar to a right could also be divided into these two parts. The demand side wouldset out the beneciary6s claim or demand and the reasons why it is very desirable or importantthat this demand be fullled. Aor example, the demand side might set out the reasons why it is

desirable for the beneciary to have access to employment. +nd the supply side would set outthe addressee6s responsibility in regard to the beneciary6s demand. 3t would explain whypromoting access to employment for the beneciary should be a goal for the addressee. 3t doesnot impose duties on the addressee, but it shows that the addressee has good reasons for actingto satisfy the demand.

ince even a goal that is supported by good reasons imposes no duties J that is, fails to bemandatory in character J we may thin/ that such goals are poor substitutes for rights andshould not be called Grights. 2ut it is possible to create right1goal mixtures that contain somemandatory elements and that therefore seem more li/e real rights !see 2rems 8$ for a similaridea'. + minimal right1goal mixture would include a duty to try to reali)e the goal as quicly as

possible. Here the demand side would set out the beneciary6s demand or claim and the reasons

why it is very desirable or important that this demand be fullled. +nd the supply side wouldexplain not only why the addressee has good reasons to pursue this goal, but also explain whythe addressee has a duty to try to reali(e this goal with all deliberate speed. The economic andsocial rights in the ocial )ovenant seem to t this model. The countries ratifying the )ovenantagree to ma/e it a matter of government duty to reali(e the list of rights as soon as possible. +swe saw earlier, each of the ocial )ovenant6s signatories has agreed to Gta/e steps, individuallyand through international assistance and co1operation to the maximum of its available resources,with a view to achieving progressively the full reali(ation of the rights recogni(ed in the present)ovenant. The signatories agree, on this interpretation, to ma/e it a matter of duty to reali(ethe listed rights as soon and as far as resources permit.

+ problem with such a right1goal mixture is that it allows the addressee great discretion

concerning "hento do something about the right and ho" &uchto do. + body supervisingcompliance with a human rights treaty may wish to remove some of this discretion by requiringthat the addressees at least ta/e some signicant and good faith steps immediately andregularly and that these steps be documented. Duties to try are less vaporous if they arecombined with duties that require immediate steps. )ountries may be required to act in certainways !e.g., ma/e a good faith e5ort and be prepared to demonstrate that they have done so', setspecic benchmar/s and timetables, establish agencies to wor/ on the goals, provide them withbudgets, and use expert assistance from international agencies. To facilitate the monitoring ofcompliance the country may be required to collect data continuously concerning reali(ation ofthe goals, ma/e periodic reports, and allow its citi(ens to complain to the monitoring body aboutfailures to pursue the goals energetically !United "ations #$$#'.


12/21

+rticle #% of the ocial )ovenant imposes a conditional duty in regard to the right to educationthat was set out in +rticle #9. 3t says that countries that Ghave not been able to securecompulsory primary education, free of charge, Gunderta/e, within two years, to wor/ out andadopt a detailed plan of action for the progressive implementation, within a reasonable numberof years, to be xed in the plan, of the principle of compulsory education free of charge for all.)ompliance with this requirement, which is only present for the right to education, involvesplanning and setting timetables. 3nstead of, or in addition to, requiring plans and timetables agoal1right mixture could require immediate compliance with minimal standards. The idea is thatminimal provision might be within the capacity of all addressees. Aor example, countries could berequired very soon to provide all children with reading and writing instruction.

These ways of creating right1goal mixtures allow us to see that some rights can be goals whilestill having enough mandatory elements to be counted as rights in a meaningful sense.

+ complementary approach to implementing social rights !and other demanding rights as well' indeveloping countries emphasi(es ability enhancement rather than burden reduction. 3t see/s toincrease the ability of developing countries to implement rights e5ectively.


13/21

with treaties such as the 7enocide )onvention !#$%&', the European )onvention on Humanights and Aundamental Areedoms !#$>', and the 3nternational )ovenants on )ivil and . 3ts )harterestablished goalsof protecting future generations from the Gscourge of war and promoting Gfundamental human

rights and the Gdignity and worth of the human person.

"ot long after its founding the U" established a committee with the charge of writing aninternational bill of rights. This document was to be similar to historic bills of rights such as theArench Declaration of the ights of =an and of the )iti(en !#@&$' and the United tates 2ill ofights !#@$#', but was to apply to every person in every country. This international bill of rightsemerged in December #$%& as the Universal Declaration of Human ights!=orsin/ #$$$, 4auren#$$&, 7lendon 8#'. +lthough some diplomats had hoped for a binding human rights treaty thatcountries -oining the U" would have to adopt, the Universal Declaration was a set ofrecommended standards rather than a binding treaty. 2y now, however, almost all of the normsin the Universal Declaration have been incorporated in widely1ratied U" human rights treaties.

The Universal Declaration has been astoundingly successful in setting the pattern for subsequenthuman rights treaties and in getting countries to include its list of rights in national constitutionsand bills of rights !=orsin/ #$$$'. The Universal Declaration, and the treaties that followed it,largely dene what people today mean when they spea/ of human rights. +s we saw in ection #above, the Universal Declaration proposed six families of rights including security rights, dueprocess rights, liberty rights, rights of political participation, equality rights, and social rights. Theinclusion of social rights to goods such as education and an adequate standard of living too/ theDeclaration beyond its #&th century antecedents !see Eide #$$8'.

The Universal Declaration was born at a time that made its success dicult. The Declaration6sapproval by the 7eneral +ssembly coincided with the beginning of the )old :ar J an ideological
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#overviewhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#UNtreatieshttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#otherUNhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#regionalhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#ICChttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#stateshttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#NGOhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#futurehttp://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/http://www.un.org/rights/50/decla.htmhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#GenIdeHumRighttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#GenIdeHumRighttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#overviewhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#UNtreatieshttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#otherUNhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#regionalhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#ICChttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#stateshttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#NGOhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#futurehttp://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/http://www.un.org/rights/50/decla.htmhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#GenIdeHumRighttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/#GenIdeHumRig


14/21

and geopolitical con0ict between capitalist and communist countries that continued almost until#$$. 3deological di5erences and hostilities might have stalled the human rights movement if notfor human rights advances in Europe. 3n the early #$>s :estern European countries formed the)ouncil of Europe and created the European )onvention for the 9, and wasbinding upon countries that ratied it. The European )onvention established basic rights similarto those in the Universal Declaration, but included provisions for enforcement and ad-udication.

The European )onvention gave birth to the European )ourt of Human ights, whose -ob is toreceive, evaluate, and investigate complaints, mediate disputes, issue -udgments, and interpretthe )onvention. The human rights set forth in the )onvention are legally enforceable rights towhich member states are bound. 3n creating the European )onvention and )ourt, the countries of:estern Europe gradually proved that e5ective protection of human rights could be provided atthe international level.

3nspired by the success of the European )onvention, the United "ations followed a similar path,creating numerous treaties aimed at the enforcement and ad-udication of the rights set forth inthe Universal Declaration. These documents establish legal obligations among the ratifyingcountries to implement international rights within their national legal and political systems. 2y8 the main human rights treaties had been ratied by a large ma-ority of the world6scountries. +s +nn 2ayefs/y writes, GEvery U" member state is a party to one or more of the sixma-or human rights treaties. &P of states have ratied four or more !2ayefs/y 8#'.

egional arrangements, similar to those in Europe, exist in the +mericas and +frica !see >.%.8and >.%.9 below'. E5orts to protect human rights through international law have obviously notbeen totally successful J lots of human rights violations still occur today in all parts of the world.3nternational human rights law is a wor/ in progress, and has developed much farther than onecould have expected in #$> or even in #$@>.

+.2 /nited Nations Human Rights Treaties

3nternational human rights treaties transform lists of human rights into legally binding stateobligations. The rst such United "ations treaty was the 7enocide )onvention, approved in #$%&J -ust one day before the Universal Declaration. The )onvention denes genocide and ma/es it

a crime under international law. 3t also requires ratifying states to enact legislation prohibitinggenocide. )urrently the 7enocide )onvention has more than #9 parties. The 3nternational)riminal )ourt, created by the ome Treaty of #$$&, is authori(ed to prosecute genocide at theinternational level, along with crimes against humanity and war crimes.

+fter the creation of the Universal Declaration, the Human ights )ommission proceeded to tryto create treaties to ma/e the rights in the Universal Declaration into norms of international law.2ecause of the )old :ar, the e5ort went ahead at a glacial pace. To accommodate theideological division between those who believed in the importance of social rights and those whodid not, or who thought that social rights could not be enforced in the same way as civil andpolitical rights, the )ommission ultimately decided to create two separate treaties. Drafts of thetwo 3nternational )ovenants were submitted to the 7eneral +ssembly for approval in #$>9, but

approval was much delayed. +lmost twenty years after the Universal Declaration, the United"ations 7eneral +ssembly nally approved the 3nternational )ovenant on )ivil and


15/21

from the positions of their governments. The H) frequently expresses its views as to whether aparticular practice is a human rights violation, but it is not authori(ed to issue legally bindingdecisions !+lston and )rawford 8'.

The H) is responsible for publishing Ggeneral comments regarding the interpretation of the)ivil and


16/21

3n 8? the longstanding U" Human ights )ommission was replaced by a new Human ights)ouncil. The Human ights )ommission was a >? member committee, authori(ed by the U")harter, consisting of state representatives. The stated goals of the replacement were toeliminate Gdouble standards and politici(ation. The new )ouncil6s responsibilities includeGpromoting universal respect for the protection of all human rights, addressing gross humanrights violations, ma/ing recommendations to the 7eneral +ssembly, and Gresponding promptlyto human rights emergencies. The )ouncil6s other responsibilities include providing directassistance to U" member states to help them meet their human rights responsibilities throughcommunication, technical assistance, and capacity building.

The )ouncil consists of %@ members, elected directly and individually by the 7eneral +ssemblywith membership based on equitable geographic distribution. )ouncil members serve terms ofthree years, with a limitation of no more than two consecutive terms. permanent and #elected members. "ine votes are needed to approve any measures. +ny of the ve permanentmembers !)hina, Arance, ussia, the United Fingdom, and the United tates' can exercise their

veto power to prevent a given action from succeeding. The permanent membership of vecountries, with their veto power, is a clear concession to economic and military power within theecurity )ouncil. The ecurity )ouncil can issue binding decisions regarding internationalsecurity or peace, authori(e military interventions and impose diplomatic and economicsanctions !2ailey #$$%, amcharan 88'. 3n recent years the ecurity )ouncil has been willingto discuss and attempt to deal with ma-or human rights crises. +fter the international failure tointervene to prevent the wandan genocide, the ecurity )ouncil and other U" bodies began todevelop the idea of a Gesponsibility to


17/21

forth the fundamental rights covered in the convention, while the second section establishes theEuropean )ourt of Human ights.

The rights set forth in the European )onvention are similar to the rst twenty1one articles of theUniversal Declaration, covering standard civil and political rights. ocial rights were treated in aseparate document, the European ocial )harter. The European )onvention denes its rights ingreater detail than the Universal Declaration. + good example of this is seen in the right to life.:hile the Universal Declaration simply sets forth, GQeRveryone has the right to lifeN, theEuropean )onvention6s formulation is far more specic, requiring a &ens reaas a necessarycondition for violation and dening specic exceptions to this right !see +rticle 8'.

The European system originally had both a )ommission and a Human ights )ourt to ensure thatmember states fullled their human rights obligations. 3n #$$&, the European )onvention wasamended to abolish the )ommission, expand and reorgani(e the )ourt, and ma/e the )ourt afull1time operation. )ountries that ratify the European )onvention agree to respect andimplement a list of rights, but they also agree to the investigation, mediation, and ad-udication ofhuman rights complaints. The European )ourt of Human ights, based in trasbourg, Arance, iscomposed of one -udge from each participating state in the )ouncil of Europe. The -udges,however, are appointed as independent -urists rather than as state representatives.

)iti(ens from the participating countries with human rights complaints who have been unable to

nd a remedy in their national courts may petition the European )ourt of Human ights.)omplaints by governments about human rights violations in another participating country arealso permitted, but are rarely made. 3f the )ourt agrees to hear a complaint, it investigates andad-udicates it. 2efore issuing a -udgment, the )ourt attempts to mediate the dispute. 3fconciliation fails, the )ourt will issue a -udgment with supporting -udicial opinions and impose aremedy. Through this process a large body of international human rights -urisprudence hasdeveloped !Iacobs and :hite #$$?C Ianis, Fay and 2radley #$$>'. The )ourt currently has a verylarge bac/log of cases. 3n 8% reforms were implemented to address this problem !see the 8%amendment,


18/21

The )ommission6s main functions include investigating individual complaints and preparingreports on countries with severe human rights problems. To this end the )ommission isauthori(ed toB

eceive and investigate individual petitions regarding human rights violations


19/21

The +frican system has enormous human rights problems to address, frequently faces non1cooperation by governments, and has inadequate resources !Evans and =urray 88'. 2utdespite these problems the +frican Union seems to be slowly constructing internationalmechanisms to promote and protect human rights in +frica.

+.+.+ Other regions

4arge areas of the world lac/ functioning regional human rights systems !although they are, ofcourse, covered by the worldwide U" system'. "o regional system exists in +sia, although themembers of +ssociation of outheast +sian "ations !+E+"' created in 8$an 3ntergovernmental )ommission on Human ights. The +rab 4eague has an +rab )harter ofHuman ightsbut it has received few ratications despite its adoption more than a decade ago.

+. The International %riminal %ourt

+fter countries throw o5 oppressive regimes or emerge from civil war they face a period of !whatwe now call' transitional -ustice. During this period they face the question of what should bedone about prosecuting and punishing political, military, and ethnic leaders who organi(ed andcarried out severe human rights violations. The 3nternational )riminal )ourt!3))' is designed toprevent impunity for human rights crimes, genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

The 3)) was based on the models and experience of the "uremberg Tribunal, the 3nternational

Tribunal for the Aormer Lugoslavia, and the 3nternational )riminal Tribunal for wanda.

The 3)) was created in #$$& when #8 tates adopted the ome tatute of the 3nternational)riminal )ourtsetting forth the -urisdiction and functions of the )ourt. This treaty came into forcein 88. 3n the following year the member states adopted ules of


20/21

constitution and criminal lawC creating limits on federalismC and, promoting human rights throughpropaganda and education. '. ince theend of the )old :ar, numerous states have formulated new or revised constitutions that includehuman rights. + sampling of these states includes omania !#$$#', lovenia !#$$#', )ongo!#$$8', 4ithuania !#$$8', +lbania !#$$9', ussian Aederation !#$$9', =oldova !#$$%', Tunisia!#$$>', )ameroon !#$$?', and '. epresentativesof state commissions are permitted to participate in annual United "ations human rightssessions, enabling a state6s human rights problems or successes to receive attention at the

international level !amcharan 8>'. )ountries with national human rights commissions include+ustralia, )anada, Ai-i, 3ndia, 3reland, =exico, "epal, the '.

till, there are situations in which military intervention is the only possible means of ending aconsistent pattern of gross human rights violations. Humanitarian intervention relies on theprinciple that sovereign nations have an obligation to respect fundamental human rights. :henstate ocials perpetrate human rights crimes and the government fails to bring them to -ustice,the responsibility of the international community is triggered. 3nternational organi(ations havebeen widely critici(ed for failing to intervene early and decisively during the genocide in wanda.

E5orts by states help add real power to the international human rights system. The countries of:estern Europe along with )anada and +ustralia have been the historic pillars of the humanrights establishment. !


21/21

"ongovernmental organi(ations such as Human ights :atch and Doctors without 2orders areextremely active at the international level in the areas of human rights, war crimes, andhumanitarian aid. "ongovernmental organi(ations !"7*s' allow for collaborations between localand global e5orts for human rights by Gtranslating complex international issues into activities tobe underta/en by concerned citi(ens in their own community !Durham 8%'. The functions ofinternational "7*s include investigating complaints, advocacy with governments andinternational governmental organi(ations, and policy ma/ing. 4ocal activities include fundraising,lobbying, and general education !Durham 8%'.

+lthough they do not have the authority to implement or enforce international law, "7*s haveseveral advantages over state organi(ations in the human rights system. =uch of their wor/includes information processing and fact nding, in which "7*s educate people about theirhuman rights and gather information regarding human rights abuses in violating countries!)laude :eston #$$8, Durham 8%'. 3n this process "7*s have the benet of access to localpeople and organi(ations and are often able to get direct and indirect access to criticalinformation about current human rights violations !Durham 8%'. *nce they gather information,"7*s can design campaigns to educate the international community about these abuses.

+ /ey function of "7*s is advocacy J urging support for human rights and attempting toin0uence governments or international groups with regard to particular human rights violations.+dvocacy involves education, persuasion, and the public shaming of violators !)laude :eston

#$$8'. epresentatives of "7*s are seen everywhere in the international human rights system.=any international human rights "7*s attend and often participate in the meetings of U" humanrights bodies !)laude :eston #$$8'. They provide information about human rights situationsthrough their reports and testimony. They shape the agendas, policies, and treaties of the U"through participation and lobbying !Forey #$$&'. "otable examples include "7* involvement inthe development of the Universal Declaration of Human ights and the U" Declaration on Tortureand *ther )ruel, 3nhuman or Degrading Treatment !)laude :eston #$$8'.

"7*s with aliates around the world include +mnesty 3nternational, Human ights :atch, the3nternational )ommission of Iurists, the 3nternational Aederation of Human ights, =inority 7roupights, Doctors without 2orders, and *xfam. 2esides these high prole "7*s there arethousands of local and national organi(ations wor/ing on human rights issues. Aor a

comprehensive list of such organi(ations see "on1governmental *rgani(ations esearch 7uide.

+.5 The Future of Human Rights ,a-

+ person who has read the foregoing account of human rights law may wonder whether all thewor/ that has gone into its creation and implementation has made any di5erence. 3f so muchinternational human rights law exists, why is the world such a mess;

+ simple answer with much truth in it is that the world6s human rights problems are large anddeeply entrenched, and that human rights law and organi(ations are, by comparison, not verystrong J particularly within the United "ations. ome of the countries that have the worsthuman rights records do not participate in the U" human rights system, and many others

participate in a formal and hypocritical way.

egional systems, particularly in Europe and the +mericas, do somewhat better. They have theirown human rights courts, are more powerful, and en-oy more serious and sincere participation bymany !but not all' of their members.

The rst > years of the human rights movement were handicapped by the )old :ar. :ith thathandicap removed, the #$$s were a period of growth and improvement in human rights law andinstitutions. The period since 8# has seen a preoccupation with terrorism that has ta/en muchattention and energy away from other human rights problems.

uccess in promoting human rights requires hard1to1achieve success in other areas includingbuilding more capable, responsive, ecient, and non1corrupt governments, dealing with failedstates, increasing economic productivity !to pay for the protections and services that humanrights require', improving the power and status of women, improving education, and managinginternational tensions and con0icts. eali(ing human rights worldwide is a pro-ect for centuries,not decades. This is not to say, however, that progress cannot proceed at a faster pace than itcurrently does. till, there are some grounds for optimism. Human rights are more widelyaccepted than they have ever been. They have become part of the currency of internationalrelations, and most countries participate in the human rights system. Treaty arrangements helpencourage and pressure countries to deal with their human rights problems. The human rightspro-ect continues and has not failed.
http://library.duke.edu/research/subject/guides/ngo_guide/http://library.duke.edu/research/subject/guides/ngo_guide/

Documents

Standford Hr