Human Rights Notes
Human Rights Notes
These notes are for use within the undergraduate course on human rights at the
University of Zimbabwe and copyright in different sections of the notes belongs
variously to SAHRIT, Dr Cephas Lumina, SB Chimhini and SF Sacco. Violations
of such copyright will lead to litigation.
Definition
Professor L Hinkin defined human rights as
“….claims, which every individual has, upon society in which he (she) lives.
To call them human rights suggests that they are universal, they are due of
every human being in every society. They know no geography or history,
culture or ideology, political or economic system or state of development.
They do not depend on race, or class or status.”
To call them ‘rights’ implies that they are ‘claims as of right’ not merely appeals to
grace or charity or brotherhood or love, they needed not be earned or deserved.
They are more than aspirations or assertions ‘of the good’ but claims of
entitlements and corresponding obligations”
Jack Donnelly said about human rights “Human Rights are literally, the rights
that one has simply because one is Human.” He went on to explain
“Human rights, because they rest on nothing more than being human, are
universal, equal and inalienable. They are held by all human beings,
universally. One either is or is not human and thus has or does not have
rights, equally. And one can no more lose these rights than one can stop
being a human being – no matter how inhuman the treatment one suffer.
One is entitled to human rights and is empowered by them”
1
may be necessary or appropriate, in terms of international law, where
state does not comply with its obligation in this respect
Article 1 (3) of the Charter proclaims as one of the purposes of the UN, the
following:
“To achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an
economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character, and in promoting and
encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without
distinction as to race, sex, language or religion”.
Article 56 provides that all members of the UN “pledge themselves to take joint
and separate action in cooperation with the UN for the achievement of the
purposes set forth in Article 55”. These purposes include the promotion by the
UN of universal respect for, and the observance of, human rights and
fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or
religion.
To facilitate this cooperation, Article 13 (1) (b) of the Charter provides that the UN
General Assembly shall initiate studies and make recommendations for the
purpose of assisting in the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms
for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.
The provisions are broad but served to internationalise human rights; took H/R
out of the arena of the domestic sphere; members of the UN recognised that H/R
provided in the Charter are subject to international concern; obligates members
of the UN to cooperate with it in the promotion of H/R; conferred on the UN legal
authority to define and codify these rights and has led to the development of the
International Bill of Rights and other human rights instruments
2
Strengthens obligations of States made under the Charter
This is not a treaty therefore not legally binding but has become normative
instrument creating legal objectives for UN members (assumed status of
international customary law through practice by states therefore now
assumed status of legally binding instrument); provisions have been
adopted in legally binding instruments at regional and international level.
3
They are not necessarily justiciable in court.
States must undertake steps individually and through international
assistance and cooperation to the maximum of available resources with a
view of achieving progressively the full realisation of theses rights.
4
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment;
The African Charter on Human and People’s Rights.
Universalism v. Cultural Relativism
Definitions:
• Human rights: the right that one has only as a human being,
which implies that the rights are held by all human beings
without distinction of race, language, sex, religion, etc. (see
Donnelly)
5
ECHR; freedom of religion, art. 18 UDHR, 18 ICCPR, art. 9
ECHR). In addition, it can be argued that some practices such
as enforced disappearances or torture are completely devoid of
any cultural basis and thus do not deserve any sort of respect
(Donnelly)
Universalism:
6
declaration is now perceived by many to have such binding
force on account of its almost universal acceptance.
Cultural Relativism:
7
fundamental human rights of freedom of religion and
conscience contained in Article 18 of the UDHR. (An
Naim). Similarly, honour killings which are not regarded in
some countries as murders may be seen as breaches of
the right to life contained in art 6 of the ICCPR.
8
• Individual v Collective Human Rights:
It has been said that international human rights has been shaped
by liberal western ideology, which rests upon the notion of
autonomous individuals. International human rights law is
designed to protect the rights of the individual against oppressive
collectives. Thus human rights are meaningful only if they ensure
entitlements and immunities to individuals.
The idea that human rights exist mainly in their quality of group
rights is typical of non-western societies. The African Charter
refers to “human and peoples rights”. African, Asian and Arab
groups - for which, regardless of the level of development and
modernisation achieved, family ties and traditions are important
values - are today asking the reformulation of the Universal
Declaration so that it puts larger focus on the rights of collectivities.
9
Protocol) does not prevent such individuals from claiming that
It has also been argued that all human rights have a social
dimension. The very idea of respecting human rights is based on
the relationship of the individual with the rest of the community in
which he lives. Individuals today often see their identity as defined
by the membership to a group.
An Naim:
10
articulated – such as the framework for a common “culture” of
universal human rights.
• Culture: primary force in the socialisation of individuals and
determinant of the consciousness and experience of the
community. Cultural diversity is unavoidable as the product of
significant past and present economic social and environmental
differences.
• Ethnocentricity is indispensable but we need to accept the
ethnocentricity of others.
• International peace and co-operation are better achieved when
there is a minimum cultural consensus on goals and methods.
• “To be committed to carrying out human rights standards,
people must hold these standards as emanating from their
worldview and values, not imposed on them by outsiders.”
• An Naim notably looks at cultural relativism in the context of
Islamic punishments under Shari’a – Islamic law. He asks “can
lawful sanctions under Shari’a be condemned as cruel,
inhuman of degrading punishment or treatment?” Indeed what
may be seen as cruel in one culture may not be seen as such in
another.
Donnelly:
Baxi:
11
• There isn’t one world of human rights but many conflicting
world, nevertheless there are some patterns for understanding
human rights.
• Among them is the pattern of human rights as culture: driven
by the tension between universalism and cultural relativism.
• Human rights are conceived as cultural systems.
• No culture is devoid of notions about human rights.
12
security matters .Then, it was extended to regulate potentially
harmful activities (such as the incitement to violence and hate
speech) and to the assessment of morality. Therefore, i such
areas the EctHR has left room for diversity.
3. Art. 15 ICESCR – the right to take part in the cultural life (can
be used to resist human rights imperialistic tendencies).
Point of conclusion:
13
state to promote and protect the ‘morals and traditional values recognised by the
community’. The family is declared to be the ‘natural unit and basis of society’
which must be protected and assisted by the state. Special protection is provided
for in respect of the rights of vulnerable groups such as children, women, the
aged and people with disabilities. It is notable that the section on individual rights
refers to and incorporates other international instruments. For example, Article
18(3) places an obligation on the state to ensure the elimination of all kinds of
discrimination against women and children ‘as stipulated in international
declarations and conventions.’
Article 2:
• Sate must ‘respect and ensure’ guaranteed rights
• This obligation is absolute and immediate
Article 2:
• State must ‘take steps’ to the maximum of its ‘available resources’ to
‘progressively’ implement the guaranteed rights
• This obligation is progressive and relative
14
• Eg (1) obligation n the police not to torture people in police custody
articles 7 ICCPR
• Eg (2) Obligation of the state not to arbitrarily evict people from their
homes Art 11 ICESCR
Obligation to Protect
• The state is obliged to protect individuals from violations of their roights by
other private parties
• Eg art 26 if the ICCPR requires the state to provide effective protection
against discrimination, such as by the enactment of legislation that makes
it a crime to incite racial hatred
Obligation to fulfil
• This obligation is in two parts, the obligation to facilitate the realization of a
particular right by proactively enagaging in activities which strengthen
people’s access to resources and their means to ensure the enjoyment of
that right.
There are two theories regarding this matter: monism and dualism.
15
• The provisions of ratified treaties do not become national law unless they
have been enacted as legislation by the normal method.
• The legislative act creating the norms as domestic law is an act entirely
distinct from the act of ratification of the treaty
• The legislative bodies may refuse to enact legislation implementing
• In common wealth countries courts apply what are known as the
Bangalore Principles on the Application of International norms in the
domestic Lgal system. The principles, adopted by judges and jurists from
commonwealth states, require the courts to use international human rights
law as an interpretative tool. Local legislation must be construed in such a
way that is not in conflict with the obligation of the state under the treaty.
WHAT IS ENVISAGED
• Adoption of relevant legislation to implement treaty rights. The best action
would be to constitutionalise the rights
• Administrative measures
• Judicial measures
• Adoption of appropriate a plan of action
• Adoption of appropriate policies
• Mobilisation of necessary resources to implement rights especially
economic and social rights.
• Publicise the contents of the human rights treaties
• Steps should be taken to familiarise law enforcement officers, judicial
personnel, government officials, medical personnel, members of the
armed forces etc with the contents of the covenants
• Comprehensive legal aid programmes to ensure the availability of legal
aid or pro bono legal assistance for court and administrative proceedings.
16
• Must have power to review both legislative and executive acts which
violate human rights
• Independent bar/lawyers association
Independent Press
• To expose violations
• To make authorities accountable
Democratic Government
• Transparent accountable government
• Government based in free consent of the people
• Free and fair elections
• Effective separation of powers with meaningful checks and balances
• Social and economic pluralism
• Protection of minority rights
• Multi-partysm
17
The obligation of states to domesticate international human rights law
This paper is in two parts. The first part deals with general issues of law
pertaining to domestication of international human rights law. The second part is
an illustrative example of how states are required to domesticate the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
The definitions of human rights in fact range from a preoccupation with radical
universalism; which posits that culture is irrelevant to the validity of moral rights
and rules which are universally valid ( this is problematic; the definition poses the
danger of moral imperialism which disregards cultural diversity).
Other definitions are based on radical cultural relativism; which presupposes that
culture is the sole source of the validity of moral rights and rules. It recognises
the need for human rights to respect the variety of the world’s cultures. This
approach presents a problem of a different sort; it carries the inherent risk of
sacrificing some fundamental human rights (such as the right to life, art. 3 UDHR,
art. 6 ICCPR, art. 2 ECHR; freedom of religion, art. 18 UDHR, 18 ICCPR, art. 9
ECHR). In addition, it can be argued that some practices such as enforced
disappearances or torture are completely devoid of any cultural basis and thus
do not deserve any sort of respect (Donnelly).
Yet other approaches are based on what could be termed strong cultural
relativism; culture is the principal source of the validity of moral rights and rules.
The presumption is that rights are mainly determined by culture and the
universality of human rights serves as a check on potential excesses of
relativism.
On the other end there is the notion of weak cultural relativism; culture may be
an important source of the validity of moral rights and rules. The notion is that the
relativity of human rights serves as a check on potential excesses of
universalism. The bottom line of weak cultural relativism is that universal human
rights are subject only to secondary cultural modifications.
Notwithstanding the different world views highlighted above the binding legal
framework for implementation of human rights is premised on a general
acceptance of the universal nature of human rights. Indeed human Rights
instruments are based on the assumption that they reflect universally accepted
18
norms of behaviour. That assumption governed the adoption of the UDHR.
Indeed, in the formulation of its title as well as in the terms of the preamble (‘all
members of the human family’, ‘all peoples and all nations’, ‘every individual and
every organ of the society’) and of its provisions (‘all human beings’, ‘everyone’,
and ‘no-one) as such the UDHR suggested that the rights enshrined therein were
of a universal character.
It is noteworthy that the UDHR has now assumed “both moral and political
authority;” not only does it reflect an international standard by which the United
Nations and other subjects of international law judge the conduct of
governments, but it has also inspired a number of treaties and its provisions have
been reproduced in many national constitutions. Some of the provisions (mainly
the civil and political rights) of the UDHR have become part of customary
international law, and thus it is binding on States whether they voted for it or not.
The declaration is now perceived by many to have such binding force on account
of its almost universal acceptance. It can therefore be stated with certainty that
even for a state that is not party to any human rights instrument by virtue of
article 1(3) of the UN Charter as read with the UDHR there are certain obligations
attendant on each state that are claimable as of right.
The international bill of human rights and beyond, ratified by a large majority of
the States in the world have similarly been drafted in universal terms: “Everyone
has the right to liberty and security of person” (art 9 ICCPR) “No one shall be
held in slavery or servitude;” (art 8 ICCPR) “All peoples have the right to self-
determination.”(art 1 ICCPR), “the right of everyone” (art 6, 11, 12... ICESCR).
These claims for universality have been reaffirmed by the 1993 Vienna
Declaration of the World Conference on Human Rights. The declaration however
recognises the need to strike a balance between universalism and cultural
relativism. It is noteworthy that more than 183 states and 500 non governmental
organisations were represented at this World Conference on Human Rights.
Paragraph 5 of the declaration reads as follows
“All human rights are indivisible, universal, independent and interrelated. The
international community must treat human rights globally ... While the
significance of national and regional particularities and various historical cultural
and religious backgrounds must be borne in mind, it is the duty of the States,
regardless of their political economic and cultural systems, to promote and
protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
The reality of the world however is such that the application of a set of universal
human rights has been difficult to implement in practice. The maintenance of
cultural or traditional practices indeed challenges the claim for universality of
human rights. By way of illustration, in the Shari'a law of apostasy, a Muslim who
19
repudiates his faith in Islam, whether directly or indirectly is guilty of a capital
offence punishable by death. This aspect of Shari'a is clearly in contradiction with
the fundamental human rights of freedom of religion and conscience contained in
Article 18 of the UDHR. Similarly, honour killings which are not regarded in some
countries as murders may be seen as breaches of the right to life contained in art
6 of the ICCPR. Others examples include the practice of female circumcision
which continues to be commonly practised in many African countries (this is
argued to be a way of custom). Such practice threaten the right to health
enshrined in the ICESCR and may be regarded as an inhumane treatment in
violation of the ICCPR (art 7). Although some women in those countries would
like to stand against such practice, their fear of ostracism is so high that they end
up submitting to the ritual. In India the caste system is yet another proof of the
contradiction between some indigenous practices and universal human rights,
namely the prohibition of discrimination as provided in art 2 of the ICCPR.
Other mechanisms that exists in order to limit a State’s obligation with regard to
the universal implementation of human rights include the possibility for entering a
reservation (the reservation must be compatible with the object and purpose of
the Treaty; Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties article 19 (3))) and the
possibility for derogations (suspension of the enjoyment of certain rights) in time
of public emergency (Art 4 ICCPR, Art 15 ECHR, Art 27 ACHR. There are certain
rights that cannot be derogated from; the right to due process, the right not to be
tortured etc. Please note that the African (Banjul) Charter does not contain such
a provision. There is also a possibility for limitations on the extent to which
certain rights may be enjoyed in times of emergency in relation to matters
20
pertaining to public order or policy or public health which are to be found in
different provisions of the ICCPR, ECHR, and ACHR.
It is clear that international law does not dictate that one or the other of the
methods of legislative or automatic incorporation must be used. Either is
satisfactory assuming that the norms enshrined in the treaties effectively become
part of national law.
Operative clauses in treaties will specify the duties on a state with regards to
implementation. However so-called self-executing treaties do not need legislative
action to be judicially enforceable. It can therefore be stated that international law
determines the validity of treaties in the international legal system, i.e. when and
how a treaty becomes binding upon a state as regards other state parties. It also
determines the remedies available on the international plane for its breach. But it
is the national legal system which determines the status or force of law which will
be given to a treaty within that legal system, i.e. whether national judges and
administrators will apply the norms of a treaty in a specific case. When the treaty
norms become domestic law, national judges and administrators apply them, and
individuals in the ratifying states may benefit from the provisions of that treaty.
21
While the international legal system does not directly penetrate national systems
to enforce its norms it attempts to do so indirectly. States are required under
international law to bring their domestic laws into conformity with the international
obligations they have assumed under treaty law. Failure to do so, however,
results in an international responsibility but does not change the situation within
the national legal systems where judges and administrators may continue to
apply national law rather than international law in such cases.
There is no general rule of international law that treaties must have domestic law
effects but it is envisaged that states should implement the provisions of the
treaty to ensure effective realisation of the rights provided. Most international
human rights instruments clearly require execution through domestic legal
measures. That requirement follows from the general commitment of each state
party to the covenants to “respect and ensure to all individuals within its territory
and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognised in the present Covenant”
(Article 2(1) ICESCR). The basic commitment of the parties may be
characterized as an “obligation of result”
The question arises whether the obligation to ensure rights and remedies within
the domestic legal system require the states parties to make the Covenants
themselves part of domestic law? A number of states do so however, many other
states do not provide constitutionally, or in practice, for automatic incorporation.
Treaties may however, irrespective of constitutional law, require that they be
given direct effect in a domestic legal system and, if they do, the parties are
bound to follow the treaty requirement.
An illustrative example of how things work in practice can be seen from the
ICESCR. In article 2 of the Covenant, we find no requirement that [it] be
incorporated into domestic law. What it does require (para 2) is that the parties
take the necessary steps to adopt such legislative or other measures as may be
necessary to give effect to the rights recognized.
It is widely accepted in national legal systems that domestic law should, in the
event of doubt as to its meaning or application, be interpreted in a way consistent
with the country’s international obligations. A good example is the fact that while
the European Convention on Human Rights has not been made part of internal
law in the UK, it has been invoked as a guide to interpretation of the domestic
law of that country.
It is also important to take note of article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties (1969) which provides that every treaty in force is binding upon the
parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith (Pacta sunt servanda.)
Article 27 also gives guidance on how states should domesticate the provisions
22
of international instruments. This article provides that a party to a treaty may not
invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a
treaty obligation.
Illustrative example
23
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)1
is part of the International Bill of Rights. The Covenant is a legal document
creating binding obligations on parties who are signatories to it. The Covenant,
however, is couched in language which in some cases is imprecise and in others
somewhat vague. The imprecise language of the Covenant militates against easy
and general application of the obligations that it creates. This apparent weakness
has been used by many commentators as the basis for an argument that
suggests the rights enshrined in the Covenant are non justiciable and thus
incapable of national enforcement. The legal basis of such argument is suspect if
not untenable. I will argue in this paper that the Covenant with all its
imperfections, creates sufficiently clear legal obligations on duty holders in
respect of an identifiable beneficiary who in the case of a violation can look up to
the United Nations human rights system for protection2, in the first instance
however it is the state that should ensure effective realization of the provisions at
the national level. In this respect the Covenant meets the essential elements of
justiciability which have been identified as a two tier test;’ should the adjudicator
act’ and ‘can the adjudicator act3’. I will further argue that the legal obstacles to
justiciability of the Covenant should be considered within the context of a host of
contemporary developments in international law4.
The majority of writers who have commented on the justiciability of the economic,
social and cultural rights habitually begin by comparing the ICESCR with the
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It has now been proved, however
that it is mythical thinking that sways people into believing that ‘by their very
nature’ economic, social and cultural rights are non justiciable. I consider the
comparative analysis approach wholly inappropriate for an analysis of the legal
obstacles in the justiciability of social and economic rights, first, looking at
economic and social rights through the lenses of the ICCPR arbitrarily restricts
your analysis to the contours already defined by the on going debate on the
subject; this may not necessarily be appropriate. Economic and Social rights are
different from civil and political rights. This does not suggest that they are inferior;
to say men are different from women does not in itself suggest any hierarchy.
Further, analyzing the ICESCR within the context of the justiciability of the
ICCPR inevitably leads to an unduly legalistic approach to justiciability5. Cleary,
there will be points of overlap between the two Covenants and it is only at such
instances that we should look at the ICCPR as corroborating evidence of the true
nature of the legal obligations created by the ICESCR. It is my contention that
economic and social rights as enshrined in the ICESCR, are legally binding not
1
General Assembly resolution 2200 (XX1) sixteen December 1966, entry into force 3 January 1976.
2
General Comment 9 para10, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights adopted on 3/12/98 UN
Doc E/C. 12/1998/2
3
Hunt Paul, Reclaiming Social Rights International and Comparative Perspectives, Dartmouth 1996 at p25
4
Craven M, The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; A perspective on its
Development (1995) at p7, see the argument on hoe the Cold war affected the development of these rights.
Hunt P accepts this argument, supra at p9
5
Ibid n2 at para 9. the Committee highlights the fact that administrative action might be all that is required
of a state to fulfill its obligations
24
because the ICCPR is binding, but by virtue of the fact that they are justiciable.
When I refer to the ICCPR I do so only on the basis of the validity of the concept
of the indivisibility, interdependence and interrelation of human rights.
In domesticating the ICESCR States should take into account the very long
history behind the entry into force of this instrument. Part of the history has
strong bearing on the legal nature of the Covenant as will become apparent in
the body of this paper. A few points on the background to the 1966 adoption of
the ICESCR can be instructive and helpful in understanding the conceptual
background to human rights in general and the need for a strong implementation
and enforcement mechanism at the national level. Human rights have a firm
philosophical appeal, which influenced important events in many countries such
as the French and American Revolutions6.
The American Bill of rights and the French Declaration on the Rights of Man
‘gave a positivistic dimension’ to the philosophy of human rights7. Economic and
social rights were not the forerunner in this struggle, but they undoubtedly were
considered as intrinsic to the notion8. The Declarations were however dismissed
by some as ‘rhetorical statements costing nothing’. Over time the list of human
rights lengthened to expressly include economic, social, and cultural rights. In
1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted. The
declaration in clear and unambiguous language recognizes the concept of
economic and social rights9. The ICESCR was later adopted in 1966. Because
the ICESCR has direct links to the UDHR the two documents should be read
together. It should however be concede that while some provisions in the UDHR
are now accepted as being customary international law, those relating to
economic and social rights have not achieved that status yet. Nonetheless the
declaration is regarded as having strong persuasive authority on account of its
widespread acceptance. The ICESCR properly construed, therefore expresses
an unequivocal acceptance, within the limited scope of jurisdiction covered by its
provisions on the intention of the parties to the Covenant to create legal and
binging obligations which should be implemented at the national level. This
indeed is what is envisaged by the Vienna Convention on the law of Treaties
which confirms the presumption that parties to a treaty have an obligation to
implement the treaty provisions in good faith10.
The ICESCR is part of the international bill of human rights. It can only be logical
that the provisions of a Covenant that constitute an integral core of a human
rights system be regarded as sacrosanct. If such a document were to be treated
as being merely hortatory this would stupefy the notion of human rights as
6
Eizejiofor G, The Development of the Concept of Human Rights: Definition and Philosophical
Foundations, text for Human Rights Teaching, Constitutional Rights Projects, Nigeria, Chapter 1.
7
supra
8
supra
9
Article 25
10
Article 27 of the VCLT
25
recognised entitlements and would be inconsistent with the express language of
the Convention. The philosophical and conceptual background of human rights
also suggests that the Covenant is positivistic in nature. It is my contention that it
can be proved that the ICESCR is intended to incorporate legal obligations for
state parties.
Article 2 of the ICESR sets out the obligations being undertaken by the states as
being “..to take steps, individually and through international assistance and
cooperation, especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its available
resource, with a view of achieving progressively the fully realization of the rights
recognized in the present Covenant by all appropriate means, including
particularly the adoption of legislative measures.” Further down paragraph 2
there is an obligation to “…guarantee that the rights are enjoyed ‘without
discrimination’. Developing countries with “due regard” to human rights and their
national economy may determine to what extent non-nationals may enjoy the
rights enunciated in the Covenant.
Progressive realization, it has been observed, imposes a clear obligation for non
retrogression and to move expeditiously towards realization of the rights. It is not
extravagant so say that we know, with sufficient degree of clarity, what conduct
would constitute a breach of the ICESR11. It is clear who the duty holders are
and on whom the primary responsibility of fulfillment has been placed. Any
conduct which is inconsistent with the primary objective of the Covenant
constitutes a violation of the Covenant. This is apparent if due diligence is paid
to the context of paragraph 15 of General Comment 12. Paul Hunt refers to the
multi-layered obligations of states to give effect to human rights12. There is an
obligation to respect, protect and fulfill. It is abundantly clear that not only do the
states have the obligation not to interfere in the private life of its citizens in a
manner that would be prejudicial to effective realization of human rights but it is
11
General Comment 3 of the Committee on economic, Social and Cultural Rights gives a well reasoned
opinion of the nature of state obligations
12
Ibid n3 at p31
26
obliged to impose restriction on its subjects not to engage in any conduct that
may obstruct the enjoyment of economic and social rights13. In the event that
non interference by the state or non state actors is insufficient to allow full
realization, the state has an obligation to facilitate and provide to those unable to
realize these rights without such assistance14. Article 11(2) specified some of the
methods of facilitating effective realization of human rights. In these
circumstances it is mischievous for anyone to suggest that the Covenant does
not create clear obligations. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights has suggested that a distinction should be made between unwillingness to
comply and inability to comply in assessing acts of omission constituting a
violation.
The next step is to inquire on the issue whether national courts can adjudicate on
the implementation of economic, social and cultural rights. Put differently can the
adjudicator act? To borrow the words of Paul Hunt “Does the adjudicator have
the capacity and expertise to delineate the rights, contours, elaborate their
context and apply these to the facts of the case?” It seems to me that there has
been significant progress in establishing the normative content economic, social
and cultural rights, at least with sufficient specifity to enable a national court to
determine a violation of such a right. What is required is simply for the court to
engage in a factual analysis of a situation to make a finding on the extent to
which a state is taking measures to implement these rights. This is in fact what
the Committee on ICESCR does in considering state reports. A particularly
useful aid will be the use of benchmarks and indicators15. There is no need to be
prescriptive about how this should work in practice but it suffices to observe that
the normative content of the ICESCR can be assessed objectively, both
quantitatively and qualitatively. An objective analysis can be made in this
respect. The objective test is then followed by a subjective application of the
tests to take into account the consequences of different levels of resource
availability. The adjudicator is however, enjoined to be guided by the principle of
‘progressive realisation’ in making his assessment. At the domestic level
different courts in different jurisdictions have used different mechanics in
assessing the ‘progressive’ nature of the ‘programmatic’ nature of economic and
social rights. One notable mechansism has been the ‘reasonable test’ as applied
in South Africa16.
It has been argued that the major drawback of the ICESR is its weak monitoring
or implementation mechanism. This is an accurate observation but caution must
be taken to avoid reckless and over glorified assertion that such weakness
inherently makes the ICESCR non justiciable. This argument is too simplistic to
13
General Comment 12 of the Committee on Economic Social Rights, The right to food
14
Supra para 15
15
Asjorn E, Krause C, Rosas A, (Eds) 2001. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 2nd Martinus Njihoff
Publishers
16
The South Supreme Court has applied a the ‘reasonable conduct’ test to consider claims for enforcement
of socio-economic rights see Government of South Africa v Grootboom and others 2001 (1) SA 46
27
be of any meaningful value. One might ask is international law, law? Strictly
speaking only states are subjects of international law and the enforcement
mechansism is so weak to such an extent that it seems meaninglessly
inadequate to provide any effective remedy. A classical example is the 1503
procedure meant to provide redress in instances of generalized and
gross/serious human rights violations17. The justiciability of civil and political
rights has never been challenged on account of the ineffectiveness of the
implementation mechanism. It is gratuitously arbitrary, unscientific and puerile to
suggest that the ICESCR is non- justiciable notwithstanding the clear wording of
the Covenant suggesting otherwise. The actual problem with economic, social
and cultural rights is the fact that their development at the international level has
been faster than its growth at the domestic level. This is something of a
anomaly. Ordinarily, legal concepts are firmly established at the domestic level
before they receive international acceptance. Recent developments however
suggest that economic and social rights are being more readily accepted at
domestic level than ever before but the retarded growth is due to lack of
conceptual clarity and understanding of the Covenant
Conclusion
17
When Argentina was under consideration on this provision it managed to duck any real action against it
and it is precisely the embarrassment of the failure of the system that other methods of protection had to be
devised
28
Civil and Political Rights
Article 2 ICCPR, States undertake to respect and to ensure to all individuals
within their territory the rights recognized in the Covenant without discrimination.
States also undertake to adopt “all legislative or other measures as may be
necessary” to give effect to the rights.
Human Rights are interdependent and inter-related. The distinction between civil
and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights is not always
watertight. Most human rights instruments provide for both civil and political
rights as well as economic, social and cultural rights.
Freedom of Expression.
• A right without which other rights are difficult to enjoy
• An essential element for defence against the excesses of the state
A complex right which includes
• Freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds
• This right is provided for in article 9 of the ACHPR
• Jurisprudence
Suleiman v Sudan Communication 228/99
• The Commission interpreted the right to include political expression.
• Sir Dawda Jawara v The Gambia Communications 147/95 &149/96
• Failure to investigate attacks on a journalist violate the right to freedom of
expression
• Media Rights Agenda v Nigeria Communication 105/93, 128/94,
130/94,152/96
• Freedom of expression is vital to an individual’s personal development, his
political consciousness and participation in the conduct of public affairs in
his country
29
• This right is provided for in article 8 of the ACHPR
Jurisprudence
• Free legal Assistance Group v Zaire Communication 147/95 and 149/96
The Commission held that harassment of Jehovah’s witnesses and religious
leaders, assassinations and death threats aimed at them and destruction of their
religious structures constituted a violation of this right.
• Amnesty International v Zaire
Expulsion of political activists constituted, inter alia, a denial of the right to
freedom of conscience in violation of article 8 of the Charter
• Articles 6, 7, 8 (paragraphs 1 and 2), 11, 15, 16 and 18 ICCPR, may not
be derogated from. These protect the right to life, prohibition of torture,
slavery, imprisonment for inability to fulfil a contractual obligation, the right
to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
• The Covenant also permits States to limit and restrict the rights it
proclaims, as long as the imposition of restrictions or limitation is not
30
aimed at the destruction of the rights or their limitation to a greater extent
than is provided for in the covenant (Article 5).
Illustrative cases
• The Human Rights Committee held that the breadwinner requirement in
the Dutch Unemployment Benefits Act- married women could receive
support only if they could prove that they were breadwinners- whereas this
requirement was not required of married man- constituted gender specific
discrimination in violation or art 26
• military regime in Uruguay, the Committee established serious violations
of the right to life, liberty and security of the person, of prohibition of torture
and inhuman and degrading prison conditions, of freedom of expression
and other political freedoms. Taken together these cases revealed a
consistent pattern of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights.
• The Committee also held that victims of human rights violations are
entitled to an effective remedy (see art 2 (3) (a).
• In respect of torture this entails an obligation on the state to carry out
official investigations, to identify the individual perpetrator and to grant
compensation to the victim.
• Amnesty laws are thus incompatible with the human rights obligations
attendant on a state in respect of acts of torture.
Other issues
• In 1994 the general prohibition of male homosexuality in the Australian
State of Tasmania was found to be in violation of the right to privacy in
article 17 of the Covenant
• In Lubicon Lake Band v Canada, the Committee made a pronouncement
to the effect that historical inequities as well as large scale expropriation to
the lands of the Cree Indian band for commercial interests threatened the
31
way of life and culture of that indigenous minority and thereby constituted
a violation of article 27 of the Covenant.
• It must be appreciated that many states in which serious human rights
violations occur are not parties to the First Optional Protocol which
provides for individual complaint mechanisms and only very few states
actually make convincing effort to comply with their obligations under the
Covenant and with legally non-binding decisions of the Committee
• The Human Rights Committee has adopted a General Comment to the
effect that the obligations assumed under the Covenant are of a
continuing nature.
• The Covenant has no provision on denunciation or withdrawal- However
Article 12 of the First optional protocol provides for denunciation. Jamaica
and Trinidad and Tobago renounced the First Optional Protocol and
thereafter acceded again with a reservation excluding the competence of
the HRC to consider individual complaints relating to the imposition of the
death penalty- this reservation appears incompatible with the object and
purpose of the Covenant.
32
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Right to Development in
Zimbabwe
Economic social and cultural rights are an integral part of human rights
law
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are included in the Universal
Declaration of Rights
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is the
basis of all international law on economic, social and cultural rights
At the regional level the African Charter provides protection for economic,
social and cultural rights
Human rights and fundamental freedoms are interdependent, indivisible
and interrelated.
There should be equal attention on the promotion and protection of all
categories of human rights
According to the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties a state should
perform its treaty obligations in good faith
Failure by a state to comply with treaty obligations is violation of the
provisions of that treaty.
The ICESCR contains a list of ESC rights, which are:
Article 6 on the right to work.
Article 7 on the right to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of
work.
Article 8 on the right to join and form trade unions and to strike.
Article 9 on the right to social security.
Article 10 on the right to protection of the family, marriage, maternity
protection and special measures of protection and assistance for children.
Article 11 on the right to an adequate standard of living, including
adequate food, clothing, and housing and the continuous improvement of
living conditions.
Article 12 on the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard
of mental and physical health.
Article 13 on the right to education.
Article 15 on culture and the benefits of scientific progress, and intellectual
property.
33
States must take concrete steps towards the achievement of the protected
rights. The steps must be appropriate in that they must include legislation,
must provide judicial remedies, and policy and administrative actions to
ensure that the rights are implemented.
States are required to engage in concerted national effort to invoke the full
participation of all sectors of society to be able to achieve progress in the
implementation of economic, social and cultural rights.
Particular attention should also be given to improve the living conditions of
the poor and others who are particularly vulnerable.
Although ECOSOC rights are generally supposed to be realized
progressively subject to availability of resources certain rights are capable
of immediate implementation.
States should take appropriate means including legislative measures,
administrative, judicial, educational and other measures necessary to give
meaning to the rights provided for.
NB legislative measures alone are not sufficient to implement ecosoc
rights.
34
Where a state has failed to guarantee enjoyment of the minimum core
obligations and argues that it has failed to do so because of a lack of
available resources, this must be judged against the state party having
allocated "all resources that are at its disposition in an effort to satisfy, as
a matter of priority, those minimum obligations."
States are under an obligation to effectively utilize the available resources.
Available resources refers to both resources within the state as well as
those available from the international community.
Non-Discrimination
The two articles on non-discrimination (Article 2(2)) and equality between
men and women (Article 3) apply to all rights within the Covenant and are not
subject to progressive realisation.
International law does not prescribe any political ideology as the preferred
method of implementation of ecosoc rights.
Whatever form of governance structure is chosen what is required is that
the rights provided for under treaty are fully realized.
35
The right to development can only be fulfilled if all human rights are
realised in a comprehensive manner based on principles of equity and
social justice through a process that permits active participation in a
transparent fashion in both the enjoyment of human rights and policy
implementation by everyone including minorities and vulnerable groups.
The focus on participation and accountability emphasises development
that is socially equitable, participatory, non discriminatory, accountable,
and transparent.
Beneficiaries are therefore to be decision-makers in the development
process and cannot simply be treated as recipients of aid. By placing the
emphasis on the rights of the individual the right to development attempts
to avoid perverse development and to ensure that the particular needs of
communities are met. From a practical perspective, when dealing with
individual projects, this means that projects should be developed in
proximity to partners and beneficiaries.
Participation implies the full ambit of civil and political rights, especially the
rights to information, freedom of expression and association
36
The Limburg Principles and Maastricht Guidelines
DR C. LUMINA*
1. INTRODUCTION
Ten years after the entry info force of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR), a group of experts in international law, convened by the International
Commission of Jurists, the Faculty of Law of the University of Limburg (Maastricht, The
Netherlands), and the Urban Morgan Institute for Human Rights, University of Cincinnati, USA,
adopted the Limburg Principles on the Implementation of the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (‘the Limburg Principles’)18. The group had been convened
to consider the nature and scope of the obligations of states parties to the ICESCR, the
consideration of states parties’ reports by the (then) recently established Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and international cooperation in terms of Part IV of the
Covenant. In 1987, the Limburg Principles were adopted as an official document of the United
Nations19.
On the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Limburg Principles, another group of experts
met in Maastricht to elaborate on the Limburg Principles with respect to the nature and scope
of violations of economic, social and cultural rights and appropriate responses and remedies.
The outcome of this meeting was the Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights (‘the Maastricht Guidelines’).
This paper outlines the key elements of the Limburg Principles and the Maastricht Guidelines.
As indicated above, the Limburg Principles were formulated by a group of international legal
experts as a means of assisting in the development and application of economic, social and
cultural rights. There are 103 individual Principles designed to address ‘the complexity of the
substantive issues covered by the ICESCR’, the provisions of which tend to be vaguely worded.
*
LLB (Zambia); LLM (Essex); PhD, GradCertHEd (Griffith); AdvDipIntHR (Abo Akademi); Advocate of the High Court for
Zambia; Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law (Howard College), University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa. E-mail:
[email protected]
18
The participants came from Australia, the Federal Republic of Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Mexico, Netherlands,
Norway, Senegal, Spain, United Kingdom, United States of America, Yugoslavia, the United Nations Centre for Human
Rights, the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
(UNESCO), the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Commonwealth Secretariat, and other organizations.
19
See E/CN.4/1987/17, Annex.
37
(a) The Nature and Scope of States Parties’ Obligations
The Limburg Principles commence with the recognition that economic, social and cultural
rights are ‘an integral part of international human rights law’ (Principle 1). Principle 6
recognises that the achievement of socio-economic rights may be realised in a variety of
political settings. The Principles also recognise the important role that non-governmental
organisations can play in promoting the implementation of the Covenant.
According to Principle 16, this provision imposes an obligation to take immediate steps towards
full realisation of the rights contained in the Covenant. At the national level, states parties are
required to use all ‘appropriate means, including legislative, administrative, judicial,
economic, social and educational measures, consistent with the nature of the rights’ and to
provide for ‘effective remedies’.
Progressive realisation
The obligation to ‘achieve progressively the full realisation of the rights’ requires states
parties to move as expeditiously as possible towards the realisation of the rights in the
Covenant. This is not to be interpreted as permitting states to defer indefinitely efforts to
ensure full realisation but as requiring states to take immediate steps to fulfil their obligations
under the Covenant. In terms of Principle 22, some obligations, such as the prohibition of
discrimination in Article 2(2) of the Covenant, require immediate implementation in full by all
states parties. The obligation of progressive realisation is not dependent on an increase in
resources.
Availability of resources
The provision ‘to the maximum of its available resources’, like the ‘progressive realisation’
standard, is used to justify the non-enjoyment of socio-economic rights. Nevertheless,
according to the Limburg Principles, the provision enjoins states parties to ensure minimum
subsistence rights for everyone, irrespective of the level of economic development in a given
country. The phrase ‘its available resources’ refers to both the resources with a state and
those available from the international community through international cooperation and
assistance. The use of the available resources to realise the rights in the Covenant requires
that cognisance be taken of the need ‘to assure to everyone the satisfaction of subsistence
requirements as well as the provision of essential services’.
Principles 29 and 30 stipulate that international cooperation and assistance should be directed
towards the realisation of all human rights including socio-economic rights. Principle 34
38
recognises the role of international organisations and the contribution of nongovernmental
organisations in the context of international cooperation and assistance.
According to the Limburg Principles, Article 2(2) of the ICESCR requires states parties to ensure
the provision of judicial review and other recourse procedures in the event that discrimination
in the enjoyment of socio-economic rights occurs. The grounds of discrimination listed in the
provision are not exhaustive. Further, special measures taken for the sole purpose of securing
adequate advancement of certain groups or individuals requiring protection in order to ensure
that they enjoy socio-economic rights equally are not considered discrimination, provided such
measures do not lead to the maintenance of separate rights for different groups and are not
continued after their objectives have been achieved. It is notable that the provision not only
enjoins governments to refrain from discriminatory behaviour and to change laws and practices
which allow discrimination, it also requires states to prohibit private persons and entities from
engaging in discriminatory practices in any field of public life.
Principle 42 states that the Covenant applies equally to nationals and non-nationals.
Article 3: Equality
Women often face substantial and disproportionate obstacles in enjoying human rights,
including economic, social and cultural rights. Article 3 of the Covenant guarantees that men
and women are equally entitled to enjoy the rights set forth in the Covenant and that, if
necessary, states employ special measures to ensure that women enjoy these rights on an
equal footing. In other words, there should be equal rights for men and women.
According to Principle 45, in the application of Article 3 of the Covenant, due regard should be
had to, inter alia, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women and the activities of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against
Women.
Article 4: Limitations
This provision was primarily meant to protect the rights of individuals rather than to permit the
imposition of limitations by the state, particularly those affecting the subsistence or survival of
the individual or integrity of the person. The phrase ‘determined by law’ meant that no
limitation on the exercise of the rights in the Covenant is permissible except where provided
for by a law of general application that is consistent with the Covenant. Further, laws limiting
socio-economic rights must not be arbitrary or unreasonable or discriminatory. In addition,
legal rules limiting socio-economic rights ought to be clear and accessible to everyone and
adequate safeguards and effective remedies must be provided by law against illegal or abusive
imposition in the application of limitations on socio-economic rights.
The phrase ‘promoting the general welfare’ refers to advancing the well-being of the people
as a whole while the expression ‘in a democratic society’ imposes a further restriction on the
application of limitations. The burden rests on the state to prove that any limitations do not
impair the democratic functioning of society. Compatibility with ‘the nature of these rights’
39
requires that a limitation is not interpreted or applied so as to endanger the essence of the
right in question.
Article 5
According to Principle 57, none of the provisions in a law purporting to limit the rights in the
Covenant may be interpreted in such a way as to nullify any of the rights and freedoms
guaranteed in the Covenant. The main purpose of Article 5(2) is to ensure that no provision of
the Covenant is interpreted so as to prejudice provisions of domestic law or any other legal
instrument already in force, or which may come into force, under which more favourable
treatment would be accorded to persons protected.
The right to form and join trade unions may only be limited in terms of a law that responds to a
pressing public or social need, pursues a legitimate aim, and is proportional to that aim. With
regard to national security concerns, the Principles emphasise that the systematic violation of
socio-economic rights undermines true national security and may endanger international peace
and security. National security may be invoked to justify measures limiting certain rights only
where such measures are taken to safeguard the existence of the nation or its territorial
integrity or political independence against force or threat of force.
Principle 70 makes it clear that a failure by any state party to comply with an obligation
imposed by the Covenant constitutes a breach of the Covenant. However, the Principles
recognise that states have a margin of discretion in selecting the means for fulfilling the
objects of the Covenant and that factors beyond the state’s reasonable control may adversely
affect its capacity to implement certain rights. Examples of violations include: failure to take
steps required by the Covenant, failure to remove promptly obstacles it is enjoined to remove
in order to facilitate the immediate fulfilment of a right; failure to implement promptly a right
which it is required to provide immediately; wilful failure to meet a generally accepted
international minimum standard of achievement which is within its powers to meet; attempting
to limit a right in a manner inconsistent with the Covenant; deliberately hampering or stopping
the progressive realisation of a right unless it does so due to a lack of resources or force
majeure or it is acting within a limitation permitted by the Covenant; and failure to submit
reports as required under the Covenant.
The remainder of the Principles are devoted to guidelines concerning the preparation and
submission of reports by states parties to the Covenant (Principles 74 – 82), the role of the
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Principles 83 – 91), and relations between
the Committee and the Specialized Agencies of the United Nations and other international
organisations (Principles 92 – 103).
40
3. THE MAASTRICHT GUIDELINES
The Maastricht Guidelines cover a variety of issues concerning socio-economic rights, including
the significance of economic, social and cultural rights (Part I); the meaning of violations of
these rights, including minimum core obligations (Part II); responsibility for violations (Part III);
victims of violations (Part IV); and remedies and other responses to violations (Part V).
The Guidelines begin by highlighting the growing disparities between the rich and the poor
since the adoption f the Limburg Principles in 1986 and the challenges of addressing the
multifaceted violations of socio-economic rights. The Guidelines also emphasise that the failure
by a state to fulfil a treaty obligation concerning economic, social and cultural rights
Economic, social and cultural rights, like civil and political rights, impose three different types
of obligations on states: the obligations to respect, protect and fulfil. Failure to perform any
one of these obligations constitutes a violation of such rights. The obligation to respect
requires states to refrain from interfering with the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural
rights. Thus, the right to housing is violated if the state engages in arbitrary forced evictions.
The obligation to protect requires states to prevent violations of such rights by third parties.
Thus, the failure to ensure that private employers comply with basic labour standards may
41
constitute a violation of the right to work or the right to just and favourable conditions of
work.
budgetary, judicial and other measures towards the full realisations of such rights.
Consequently, the failure of a state to develop and implement a reasonable plan of action for
achieving access to essential primary health care to those in need may amount to a violation of
The Guidelines also state that socio-economic rights involve both ‘obligations of conduct’ and
calculated to realise the enjoyment of a particular right. In the case of the right to health, for
example, the obligation of conduct could involve the adoption and implementation of a plan of
action to reduce maternal mortality. An obligation of result requires states to achieve specific
targets to satisfy a predetermined substantive standard. With respect to the right to health, for
instance, the obligation of result requires the reduction of maternal mortality to levels agreed
at the 1994 Cairo International Conference on Population and Development and the 1995
It is recognised that in selecting the means for implementing their respective obligations,
states enjoy a margin of discretion. However, the fact that the full realisation of most socio-
economic rights can only be achieved progressively, does not change the nature of the
obligations of states which requires that certain steps be taken immediately and others as soon
as possible. Consequently, the state bears the onus of proving that it is making measurable
progress towards the full realisation of the rights in question. A state cannot rely on the
42
‘progressive realisation’ provision in Article 2 of the Covenant as an excuse for non-
compliance.
The Maastricht Guidelines provide for minimum core obligations. At the very least, states are
required to undertake specific conduct such as the adoption of measures (including a plan of
action) reasonably calculated to achieve the minimum essential levels of each of the rights.
Thus, for instance, a state in which a large number of people are deprived of essential
foodstuffs, health care or basic shelter, is prima facie, violating the Covenant. These minimum
core obligations apply irrespective of the availability of a state’s resources or any other
factors.
A state may violate economic, social and cultural rights through commission or omission. Thus,
a violation will occur when a state pursues, by action of omission, a policy or practice which
deliberately contravenes or ignores obligations of the Covenant or fails to achieve the required
standard of conduct or result. Examples of violations through commission or omission are given.
The state within whose jurisdiction violations of socio-economic rights occur bears
responsibility for those violations. As such, the state responsible is required to establish
remedies for victims. In situations where violations occur in a territory under foreign
43
domination or occupation, the state exercising effective control over the territory bears
The obligation to protect also requires the state to ensure that private entities or individuals,
their socio-economic rights, particularly where the state fails to exercise due diligence in
As members of international organisations, states are obliged to ensure that such organisations
Both individuals and groups can be victims of violations of economic, social and cultural rights.
The Guidelines recognise that certain groups, such as lower income groups, women, indigenous
and tribal peoples, asylum seekers, refugees, minorities, elderly persons, persons with
disabilities, and the homeless, suffer disproportionately. The Guidelines recommend that
victims of violations should not be subjected to criminal sanctions purely because of their
44
The Guidelines provide that victims of violations should have access to ‘effective judicial or
other appropriate remedies at both national and international levels’ and are entitled to
adequate reparation which may take the form of restitution, compensation, rehabilitation and
satisfaction or guarantees that the violation will not be repeated. The Guidelines also provide
that national promotional and monitoring institutions should address violations of socio-
economic rights with the same robustness as they do civil and political rights, and that states
Neither the Limburg Principles nor the Maastricht Guidelines have any legal force. However,
they are considered an authoritative summary of the state of international human rights law on
the subject of economic, social and cultural rights. They provide a conceptual guide to the
interpretation of the rights guaranteed in the ICESCR. On numerous occasions, the Committee
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has referred to the Principles in its General Comments.
The inclusion of the Limburg Principles in Resolution 1993/14 of the UN Commission on Human
Rights underscores that the Principles have been accepted by the most important UN body in
5. CONCLUSION
Since their adoption by international legal experts in 1986 and 1997, respectively, the Limburg
Principles and the Maastricht Guidelines have been endorsed by the United Nations and become
45
important authoritative guide to interpretation of the provisions of the ICESCR. The key
international body responsible for monitoring states’ compliance with their international legal
obligations in regard to socio-economic rights has relied upon the Principles and Guidelines in
46
20
INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS MONITORING AND
ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS
Introduction
International law,21 which includes international human rights law, principally
applies to states rather than individuals. Therefore, how can international human
rights law be enforced?
Ordinarily, and ideally, the most effective way to enforce human rights is by
taking action in the domestic legal system where the alleged violation has
occurred. Generally human rights treaties require that states incorporate the
rights contained in the treaty into their domestic law and provide effective
remedies if they are violated. Thus human rights may be recognised as rights
under a state’s constitution and/or other domestic law, and remedies provided
accordingly. It is these domestic remedies that individuals and groups of
individuals seeking redress or protection, for or against human rights violations,
are ordinarily required to exhaust before they can have recourse to regional and
international mechanisms. That is, international and regional mechanisms can
only be resorted to when all available domestic remedies have been exhausted.
Human rights treaties are based on the principle that states will respect them and
that they will promote and protect the rights that they enshrine at the national
level. To monitor compliance by states with their obligations under the treaties,
the international community22 has put in place some mechanisms. These are
either Charter based or treaty based. Some regional communities23 have also put
in place mechanisms for monitoring and implementing the provisions of human
rights treaties that have been adopted at the regional level by the respective
regional communities.
Treaty-based Mechanisms
Committees or treaty monitoring bodies or supervisory committees or treaty
bodies, however they are termed, monitor the implementation of core human
rights treaties. The legal basis for the establishment of these treaty bodies is
found in the treaties themselves, with the exception of the Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which was established through a
resolution adopted by the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
20
As in the context of the African region.
21
International law, generally, is the law that governs relations between states.
22
I.e. states operating within the framework of the United Nations.
23
Such as Europe, the Americas and Africa.
24
Especially in the specific area covered by the treaty in question.
47
the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, with the exception of the
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, which is
serviced by the Division for the Advancement of Women in New York.
The UN treaty bodies have been established in accordance with, or for, the
following treaties:
• International Convention of the Elimination of all forms of Racial
Discrimination (ICERD),
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),
• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(ICESCR),
• Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (CAT),
• Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC),
• Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against
Women (CEDAW),
At the regional level, treaty bodies have also been established in terms of the
following regional treaties:
• African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR),
• European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms (ECPHRFF),
• American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR)
ICCPR – it established the Human Rights Committee (article 28), which monitors
and supervises implementation of the Covenant through:
• State party reporting (article 40)
• Inter-state complaints (articles 41 and 42)
• Individual complaints25
25
This procedure is provided for by the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.
48
CEDAW – the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
was established to review state party reports, on the legislative, judicial,
administrative and other measures they adopted to give effect to the provisions
of the Convention. The UN General Assembly in 1999 adopted an Optional
Protocol to CEDAW, in terms of which states ratifying or acceding to the Protocol
recognize the competence of the Committee to receive and consider
communications (article 1), submitted by or on behalf of individuals or groups of
individuals, under their jurisdiction, claiming to be victims of a violation of any of
the rights set forth in the Convention (article 2).
CRC - article 43 establishes the Committee on the Rights of the Child for the
purpose of monitoring progress made by states in achieving the rights enshrined
in the Convention. The only procedure it uses is the review of state party reports.
With the adoption of the Optional Protocol to the CRC on the sale of children,
child prostitution and child pornography and the Optional Protocol to the CRC on
the involvement of children in armed conflict, the Committee will now also
consider state party reports submitted in accordance with the Protocols. The
Protocols were adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1999 and they entered
into force in February 2002.
49
ACHPR - established the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
(article 30), which promotes human and peoples’ rights (article 450, and receives
and considers:
• Inter-state complaints (article 47),
• Other complaints (article 55), which could be from individuals or groups of
individuals
• State party reports on the measures they have taken to give effect to and
to implement the provisions of the Charter (article 62).
The AU has adopted the Protocol to the African Charter on the establishment of
the Africa Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights to complement the
Commission’s mandate, and while this has come into force it is too soon to
determine how effective this body will be.
Charter-based Mechanisms
The old Commission on Human Rights
• The Commission on Human Rights was set up by ECOSOC in 1946 for
the purpose of, among other things, the implementation of human rights.
• The Commission was a subsidiary body of ECOSOC, which is an organ of
the General Assembly
• The Commission met annually in Geneva in March/April for six weeks
• It was composed of 53 States members chosen on a regional and
rotational basis.
During its regular annual session, the Commission adopted around a hundred
resolutions, decisions and Chairperson's statements on matters related to human
rights.
• The Commission was assisted in this work by the Sub-Commission on the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, a number of working groups
and a network of individual experts, representatives and rapporteurs
mandated to report to it on specific issues.
• The Commission relied on a network of mechanisms – experts,
representatives and rapporteurs
• These mechanisms relied heavily on the work of NGOs for the provision of
information
• The Commission had a broad mandate, allowing deliberation of:
• the right to self-determination;
• racism;
• the right to development;
• the question of the violation of human rights in the occupied Arab
territories, including Palestine;
• the question of the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in
any part of the world;
• economic, social and cultural rights;
• civil and political rights,
50
• including the questions of torture and detention, disappearances and
summary executions, freedom of expression, the independence of the
judiciary,
• impunity and religious intolerance;
• the human rights of women, children, migrant workers, minorities and
displaced persons;
• indigenous issues;
• the promotion and protection of human rights, including the work of the
Sub-Commission, treaty bodies and national institutions;
• and advisory services and technical cooperation in the field of human
rights
Participation
• The Commission had broad guidelines on participation:
• Any state or entity present at its sessions could participate in its
deliberations on human rights activities,
• any state could be invited to participate in its deliberations of any matter of
particular concern to that state,
• UN specialised agencies and certain other inter-governmental bodies
could participate in its activities on issues that concern them
• NGOs with a consultative status with ECOSOC had an independent role
to playing the Commission’s proceedings.
Role of the Commission
• Standard Setting
• International Discussion on Human Rights
• Monitoring and Enforcement
Standard Setting
• One of the most important achievements of the Commission was the
elaboration of human rights standards.
• These include stadards relating to:
• the right to development,
• civil and political rights.
• economic, social and cultural rights,
• the elimination of racial discrimination,
• torture,
• the rights of the child and
• the rights of human rights defenders.
Forum
• A forum where all countries, non-governmental organizations and human
rights defenders met to voice their concerns regarding human rights
violations.
The Enforcement Procedures
• The Commission adopted two procedures for the monitoring and
enforcement of human rights.
• These were the 1235 and 1503 procedures, named after the resolutions
under which they were established.
The 1235 Procedure
51
• The procedure allowed public debate on human rights situations in any
part of the world showing consistent patterns of gross violations of human
rights.
• This procedure could culminate in an investigation being instituted such as
the appointment of a special rapporteur of the Commission on Human
Rights or a special representative of the UN Secretary-General.
• The matter could also be referred to the Security Council.
• The procedure was important because:
• it allowed naming and shaming;
• the procedure allowed NGOs an arena for lobbying influential states;
• the Commission was empowered to make statements and resolutions on
the human rights situation in different countries.
• Through this procedure the Commission could investigate particular
countries (country mechanisms or mandates) or particular human rights
issues (thematic mechanisms or mandates).
The 1503 Procedure
Resolution 1503 established a procedure that could be used by individuals and
NGOs to bring complaints of human rights violations directly to the Commission
on Human Rights, through the Sub-Commission.
• Communications needed to show a, “consistent pattern of human rights
violations”.
• Not strictly speaking an individual communications procedure
Consideration of Communications
• The Working Group on Communications, a working group of the Sub-
Commission, which consisted of five independent experts, considered the
complaints, as well as the government replies to the complaints.
• Communications considered to demonstrate consistent gross violations of
human rights were referred to the Sub-Commission
• The Sub-Commission would then refer any matter it agreed demonstrated
consistent gross violations to the Commission
• The Commission would report to ECOSOC and publicise any country that
was subject to the 1503 procedure (before this the whole procedure
would be confidential).
• Matters could then be decided on by ECOSOC and action could include
reference to the GA etc, or discussion under the 1235 procedure
Special Procedures
• Special procedures were usually the result of discussions under the 1235
procedure
• UN working Groups, Special Rapporteurs, Special Representatives,
Independent Experts, Missions and Studies made by the UN Secretary-
General.
• the mandate to receive information from anyone on human rights
situations and to submit such information to the relevant authorities in the
countries concerned and undertake urgent interventions on a strictly
humanitarian basis.
52
Criticisms of the Human Rights Commission
• 53 member states (too large)
• Resolutions drafted by Regional Blocks
• Block Voting
• Membership by countries accused of gross violations
• It was allegedly too large
• The Commission was not permanent
• The 1235 and 1503 procedures were not fully utilised under the
Commission. This was because:
• The 1235 procedure was politicised
• So, the 1503 procedure concentrated on gross and massive violations,
rather than individual violations
• Motions of no action
Successes
• Successful in developing standards and norms regarding the content and
implementation of human rights.
• The Commission was able to conduct studies or investigative procedures
The Human Rights Council
• Negotiations in 2005 culminated in a draft General Assembly resolution
being circulated on the creation of a Human Rights Council to replace the
Human Rights Commission
• A final draft was published on 23 February 2006 and was adopted by the
UN General Assembly
• The Human Rights Council is an organ of the General Assembly
(therefore at the same level as ECOSOC)
• It consists of 47 member states, elected on a simple majority of all
members of the UN
• Each member will be elected individually
• There will be no block voting for membership of the Council
• The membership of the Council will be open to all members of the United
Nations;
• Consideration should be given “the candidates’ contribution to the
promotion and protection of human rights and their voluntary pledges and
commitments made thereto.”
• Members can be removed by a two thirds majority of the GA for “gross
and systematic violations of human rights.”
• The new Council will meet throughout the year and will hold one main
session but will have to meet for at least ten weeks in the year.
• The Council will also be able to meet whenever it needs to throughout the
year
Universal Periodic Review
• the Human Rights Council will be expected to conduct a “universal
periodic review of the fulfillment … by each State of its human rights
obligations and commitments…”
• the members of the Human Rights Council will subject themselves to the
universal periodic review mechanism during their term of office.
53
Commission Procedures
• All procedures (including 1235 and 1503) are continued on and the
Council will, in its first year, attend to amending and developing the
procedures)
• The same rules for NGO participation are maintained
Comments
• 1. Membership rules are still relatively relaxed, should they be stricter?
• 2.The Council is still rather large, should it be smaller?
• 3. The Council is now a subsidiary organ of the GA, will this make it more
effective?
• 4. The USA voted against the Council and did not stand for election, will
this weaken the Council?
Was it worth it?
54
Protection of Human Rights under the African System
• The protection and promotion of human rights under the African system is
anchored on the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
• Adopted by the OAU on 27 June 1981 and entered into force on 21
October 1986. Currently has 52 member states.
• The charter sets up a system whose purpose is to promote fundamental
human rights, with particular emphasis on African tradition and the
peoples’ right to development.
• The preamble to the Charter mentions the UDHR as containing the
principles to which the state parties reaffirm their adherence. The Charter
of the United Nations is also mentioned as being relevant and applicable
to the African context
The Charter is of special significance in that it represents the beginning of African
States’ organized commitment to protecting human rights. Previously,
intervention in the realm of human rights had come almost exclusively from
Western states
• The African Charter first introduces the human and peoples’ rights to be
promoted and protected, and then lays out the individual duties to his
family and society.
• The charter also establishes the African Commission on Human and
Peoples’ Rights as a supervisory body to oversee the protection of the
rights enumerated, and then declares that the Commission shall draw
inspiration from international law on human and peoples’ rights- see art 60
Substantive content of the Charter
• Unlike other human rights instruments the African Charter provides for
both civil and political rights and economic social and cultural rights. It also
provides for collective rights.
• There is a general non discrimination clause which continues with an
equal protection clause and a guarantee of the right to life
• Slavery, torture inhuman and degrading or cruel punishment and
treatment is outlawed and so are arbitrary arrest and detention.
• The Charter protects the right to due process and provides for freedoms of
thought, religion, information, expression of opinion, and freedom of
association and assembly.
• The right to freedom of movement and the right to seek asylum is
recognized.
• Mass expulsion of non nationals is prohibited.
• The right to property is guaranteed and so are the right to work and to be
paid equally for equal work.
• The right to health, the right to education etc.
• The family is defined as the natural unit and basis of society, which shall
be protected and assisted by the family
• The rights of women, children as well as those aged and disabled are
designated for special protection
In its discussions of individual rights the Charter refers to and incorporates other
international human rights instruments- see article 18(3)
55
• Articles 19-24 provides for third generation peoples’ rights.
• The general equality clause precedes this section
• Duties
• The African Charter is somewhat unique in that it recognizes duties as
well as rights
• The American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of man take the same
approach (laws and duties are inseparable)
• The individual is deemed to have duties to his family and society, the state
and other legally recognized communities and the international
community.
• Article 28 deals with the individual’s duty not discriminate against others
Claw back clauses
• The charter is replete with claw back clauses
• These clauses detract from effectiveness of the Charter’s protection by
granting states unqualified power to infringe upon certain rights- see
article 8, the enjoyment of the right to freedom of conscience is
subordinated to what is permissible ‘subject to law and order’
• See also article 13 the right to participate in government ‘in accordance
with the provisions of the law.’
• Under article 10 you have the right to assembly ‘provided that you abide
by the law’
• NB the Charter has no general derogation clause
• The Charter emphasizes negotiations consistent with the African tradition
of preference for reconciliation over adjudication.
• To complement the supervisory role of the Commission a Protocol
establishing an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights has been
established.
Mandate of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
• Articles 30 -44 establishes and define the structure of the African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
• The Commission consists of 11 members (usually senior government
officials- but ideally these should be people of highest moral standing with
some knowledge on human rights) elected by the heads of states for a
renewable period of six years
• Once elected members serve in their individual capacities, rather than
representatives of their governments.
• The Commission is serviced by a secretariat which is based in Banjul
Article 45 sets the functions of the Commission as being
• Promotion of human and peoples’ rights
• Protection of those rights
• Interpretation of the Charter
• Performance of any other tasks which may be entrusted to it by the
Assembly of Head of State and Government.
• Promotional mandate is very broad and it is the least controversial
approach as it does not challenge directly the performance of any one
country.
56
• It consists of studies, convening of conferences, organize publication
programs, disseminate information, and collaborate with national, African
and International institutions concerned with human and peoples’ rights
(art 45(1) )
• The Commission may also give its views and make recommendations to
governments.
• The Commission may also formulate principles and rules for the solution
of human rights problems.
NGOs have a played an important role in the promotion and protection of human
rights- working in conjunction with the African Commission on Human and
peoples’ rights.
The protective functions of the Commission are provided for in articles 46- 54
• These provisions dictate the rules for filing of complaints which are also
known as ‘communications.’
• Communications can either be by individuals –which include all parties
other than States
• Or they may be inter-state complaints
• Inter-state complaints can either be a ‘negotiation communication’ or a
‘complaint communication’
• Article 56(4) provides for the requirement of exhaustion of domestic
remedies before any complaint can be brought to the Commission for
consideration- this is called admissibility
• Once the admissibility requirement is met the Commission has wide
investigatory powers when considering a communication- the Commission
may hear written or oral evidence and may obtain all other information it
considers necessary to adjudicate on a matter.
Article 52 obliges the Commission to explore all possible avenues to find an
amicable solution to the problem- if no friendly solution is found the Commission
will then prepare a report including its findings and make recommendations for
redress. This is submitted to Assembly of Heads of States before being made
public
• There are enforcement provisions to ensure compliance with the
recommendations of the Commission. (Any power to enforce
recommendations would seem to rest with the Heads of States)
Article 56 states the standard format for individual complaints
• The Communications must state the author even if he requests anonymity
• Must not be exclusively based on news articles
• Must not pertain to a matter that has been dealt with or settled under the
UN charter, the AU or the African Charter
• Must be compatible with the AU Charter
• Must not be written in disparaging language
• The Commission may only act on a complaint only when it targets a
‘series of serious or massive violations of human and peoples’ rights’- see
art 58(1)
57
• This seriousness provision frees the Commission from the burden of
dealing with isolated incidences of violations- it seems however that this
provision is not strictly applied in practice.
• The Commission in its rules of procedure provides for provisional
measures to deal with emergency situations. See rule 111
• Publicity is the Commission’s only sanction mechanism
• All proceedings of the Commission are confidential and only the Assembly
of Heads of States can make public the report of the Commission
• The protection of human rights is therefore largely left to the discretion of a
political body
The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
• In June 1998 the Assembly of Heads of State and Government adopted a
Protocol on the establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’
Rights. The Protocol is now in force.
• The main purpose of the Court is to complement and reinforce the
functions of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
58
Thematic Issues
59
conditions, while “sustainability” incorporates the notion of long-term
availability and accessibility.
• The Committee considers that the core content of the right to adequate
food implies:
• The availability of food in a quantity and quality sufficient to satisfy the
dietary needs of individuals, free from adverse substances, and
acceptable within a given culture;
• The accessibility of such food in ways that are sustainable and that do not
interfere with the enjoyment of other human rights
• Dietary needs implies that the diet as a whole contains a mix of nutrients
for physical and mental growth, development and maintenance, and
physical activity that are in compliance with human physiological needs at
all stages throughout the life cycle and according to gender and
occupation
• Free from adverse substances sets requirements for food safety and for a
range of protective measures by both public and private means to prevent
contamination of foodstuffs through adulteration and/or through bad
environmental hygiene or inappropriate handling at different stages
throughout the food chain;
• Cultural or consumer acceptability implies the need also to take into
account, as far as possible, perceived non-nutrient-based values attached
to food and food consumption and informed consumer concerns regarding
the nature of accessible food supplies
• Availability refers to the possibilities either for feeding oneself directly from
productive land or other natural resources, or for well-functioning
distribution, processing and market systems that can move food from the
site of production to where it is needed in accordance with demand.
• Accessibility encompasses both economic and physical accessibility:
• Economic accessibility implies that personal or household financial costs
associated with the acquisition of food for an adequate diet should be at a
level such that the attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are not
threatened or compromised
• Physical accessibility implies that adequate food must be accessible to
everyone, including physically vulnerable individuals, such as infants and
young children, elderly people, the physically disabled, the terminally ill
and persons with persistent medical problems, including the mentally ill.
Victims of natural disasters, people living in disaster-prone areas and
other specially disadvantaged groups may need special attention and
sometimes priority consideration with respect to accessibility of food.
60
• The right to adequate food, like any other human right, imposes three
types or levels of obligations on States parties: the obligations to respect,
to protect and to fulfil. the obligation to fulfil incorporates both an obligation
to facilitate and an obligation to provide.
• The obligation to respect existing access to adequate food requires States
parties not to take any measures that result in preventing such access.
The obligation to protect requires measures by the State to ensure that
enterprises or individuals do not deprive individuals of their access to
adequate food. The obligation to fulfil (facilitate) means the State must
proactively engage in activities intended to strengthen people’s access to
and utilization of resources and means to ensure their livelihood, including
food security.
• whenever an individual or group is unable, for reasons beyond their
control, to enjoy the right to adequate food by the means at their disposal,
States have the obligation to fulfil (provide) that right directly. This
obligation also applies for persons who are victims of natural or other
disasters.
• Violations of the Covenant occur when a State fails to ensure the
satisfaction of, at the very least, the minimum essential level required to
be free from hunger.
• In determining which actions or omissions amount to a violation of the
right to food, it is important to distinguish the inability from the
unwillingness of a State party to comply.
• Should a State party argue that resource constraints make it impossible to
provide access to food for those who are unable by themselves to secure
such access, the State has to demonstrate that every effort has been
made to use all the resources at its disposal in an effort to satisfy, as a
matter of priority, those minimum obligations.
• Any discrimination in access to food, as well as to means and entitlements
for its procurement, on the grounds of race, colour, sex, language, age,
religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth
or other status with the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the
equal enjoyment or exercise of economic, social and cultural rights
constitutes a violation of the Covenant.
• Violations of the right to food can occur through the direct action of States
or other entities insufficiently regulated by States. These include: the
formal repeal or suspension of legislation necessary for the continued
enjoyment of the right to food; denial of access to food to particular
individuals or groups, whether the discrimination is based on legislation or
is proactive; …
• the prevention of access to humanitarian food aid in internal conflicts or
other emergency situations; adoption of legislation or policies which are
manifestly incompatible with pre-existing legal obligations relating to the
right to food; and failure to regulate activities of individuals or groups so as
to prevent them from violating the right to food of others,
61
• While only States are parties to the Covenant and are thus ultimately
accountable for compliance with it, all members of society - individuals,
families, local communities, non-governmental organizations, civil society
organizations, as well as the private business sector - have responsibilities
in the realization of the right to adequate food. The State should provide
an environment that facilitates implementation of these responsibilities
62
the right to adequate food is especially fulfilled for vulnerable population
groups and individuals.
• Even where a State faces severe resource constraints, whether caused by
a process of economic adjustment, economic recession, climatic
conditions or other factors, measures should be undertaken to ensure that
the right to adequate food is especially fulfilled for vulnerable population
groups and individuals.
Monitoring
States parties shall develop and maintain mechanisms to monitor progress
towards the realization of the right to adequate food for all, to identify the factors
and difficulties affecting the degree of implementation of their obligations, and to
facilitate the adoption of corrective legislation and administrative measures
International obligations
In the spirit of Article 56 of the Charter of the United Nations, the specific
provisions contained in articles 11, 2.1, and 23 of the Covenant and the Rome
Declaration of the World Food Summit, States parties should recognize the
essential role of international cooperation and comply with their commitment
to take joint and separate action to achieve the full realization of the right to
adequate food.
• States parties should take steps to respect the enjoyment of the right to
food in other countries, to protect that right, to facilitate access to food and
to provide the necessary aid when required. States parties should, in
63
international agreements whenever relevant, ensure that the right to
adequate food is given due attention
• States parties should refrain at all times from food embargoes or similar
measures which endanger conditions for food production and access to
food in other countries. Food should never be used as an instrument of
political and economic pressure
64
(specifically in relation to children); article 27 of the Convention on the Rights
of the Child (CRC)(specifically in relation to children); and article 16 of the
Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) on
the Rights of Women in Africa (specifically in relation to women)
Forced Evictions
• Everyone has the right to a secure place to live in peace and dignity,
which includes the right not to be evicted arbitrarily or on a discriminatory
basis from one's home, land or community.
• The ultimate legal and political responsibility for preventing forced
evictions rests with governments.
• When, under exceptional circumstances, evictions are considered to be
justified, such evictions must be carried out in strict compliance with
relevant human rights provisions, and such evictions must not result in
individuals being rendered homeless or vulnerable to other human rights
violations.
• Forced evictions may often constitute gross violations of a broad range of
rights, in particular, the right to adequate housing, the right to remain, the
right to freedom of movement, the right to privacy, the right to property, the
right to an adequate standard of living, the right to security of the home,
the right to security of the person, the right to security of tenure, and the
right to equality of treatment.
Case Study
Operation Murambatsvina (Restore Order) was administrative action taken by
the government of Zimbabwe (both central and local) to remove structures
deemed by local authorities and the police to be illegal under planning bye-
laws; as well as the removal of all informal traders from city-centres and
informal markets across the country.
• The “operation” was conducted in 2005, shortly after Parliamentary
elections and was effected with no warning in the initial evictions although
some very short termed warnings were given after initial outcry against the
operation.
Hundreds of thousands of people were forcibly evicted from their homes and
were either forced to relocate to the rural areas, forced to squat in the urban
areas (or to join already overburdened families) or were transported to
holding camps where they were held in unsanitary conditions
65
• Goal becoming increasingly remote due to ‘formidable structural and other
obstacles in many states’
Universal standards
UDHR,CESCR (articles 13 and 14), CRC (Article 28 ), Convention against
Discrimination in Education; CEDAW (Article 10)
World Declaration on Education For All of 1990
• Article 17 (1) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
(ACHPR)
Non discrimination and Equal Treatment
• Non-discrimination is a cross-cutting right of immediate effect
66
• Economic accessibility - education has to be affordable to all.
Acceptability
• The form and substance of education, including curricula and teaching
methods, have to be acceptable (e.g. relevant, culturally appropriate and
of good quality) to students and, in appropriate cases, parents;
Adaptability
• Education has to be flexible so it can adapt to the needs of changing
societies and communities and respond to the needs of students within
their diverse social and cultural settings.
Primary Education
Primary education includes the elements of availability, accessibility, acceptability
and adaptability which are common to education in all its forms and at all levels.
• “Primary education must be universal, ensure that the basic learning
needs of all children are satisfied, and take into account the culture, needs
and opportunities of the community.” See the World Declaration for
Education for All.
• The Declaration defines "basic learning needs" as: "essential learning
tools (such as literacy, oral expression, numeracy, and problem solving)
and the basic learning content (such as knowledge, skills, values, and
attitudes) required by human beings to be able to survive, to develop their
full capacities, to live and work in dignity, to participate fully in
development, to improve the quality of their lives, to make informed
decisions, and to continue learning" (art. 1).
• Primary education has two distinctive features: it is “compulsory” and
“available free to all”.
• neither parents, nor guardians, nor the State are entitled to treat as
optional the decision as to whether the child should have access to
primary education.
• the education offered must be adequate in quality, relevant to the child
and must promote the realization of the child’s other rights.
Free of charge. The nature of this requirement is unequivocal. The right is
expressly formulated so as to ensure the availability of primary education without
charge to the child, parents or guardians. Fees imposed by the Government, the
local authorities or the school, and other direct costs, constitute disincentives to
the enjoyment of the right and may jeopardize its realization.
Secondary Education
Secondary education includes the elements of availability, accessibility,
acceptability and adaptability which are common to education in all its forms and
at all levels.
• Secondary education is not dependent on a student’s apparent capacity or
ability and, secondly, that secondary education will be distributed
throughout the State in such a way that it is available on the same basis to
all
• “[P]rogressive introduction of free education” means that while States
must prioritize the provision of free primary education, they also have an
67
obligation to take concrete steps towards achieving free secondary and
higher education.
Higher Education
• Higher education includes the elements of availability, accessibility,
acceptability and adaptability which are common to education in all its
forms at all levels.
• Must be made available on the basis of capacity
• Must be progressively offered free of charge
A school system; … material conditions of teaching staff
In practice the general working conditions of teachers have deteriorated, and
reached unacceptably low levels …. Not only is this inconsistent with article 13
(2) (e), but it is also a major obstacle to the full realization of students’ right to
education.
Educational Freedom
The right to educational freedom has two elements:
¾ The liberty of parents and guardians to ensure the religious and moral
education of their children in conformity with their own convictions,
¾ The liberty of parents and guardians to choose other than public schools
for their children, including the liberty of individuals and bodies to establish
and direct educational institutions.
Affirmative Action
¾ The adoption of temporary special measures intended to bring about de
facto equality for men and women and for disadvantaged groups is not a
violation of the right to non-discrimination with regard to education, so long
as such measures do not lead to the maintenance of unequal or separate
standards for different groups, and provided they are not continued after
the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved.
Academic Freedom
Academic freedom and institutional autonomy - the right to education can only be
enjoyed if accompanied by the academic freedom of staff and students.
Accordingly members of the academic community are free to pursue, develop
and transmit knowledge and ideas, through research, teaching, study,
discussion, documentation, production, creation or writing.
Discipline in Schools
• Discipline in schools - corporal punishment is inconsistent with the
fundamental guiding principle of international human rights law, the dignity
of the individual. Other aspects of school discipline may also be
inconsistent with human dignity, such as public humiliation.
Article 14 and national plans to realise universal primary education
• There is a clear and unequivocal obligation under article 14 on every State
party to present to the Committee a plan of action,
• In developing countries, 130 million children of school age are estimated
to be without access to primary education, of whom about two thirds are
girls.
Plans of action prepared by States parties to the Covenant in accordance with
article 14 are especially important as the work of the Committee has shown that
68
the lack of educational opportunities for children often reinforces their subjection
to various other human rights violations
• For instance these children, who may live in abject poverty and not lead
healthy lives, are particularly vulnerable to forced labour and other forms
of exploitation. Moreover, there is a direct correlation between, for
example, primary school enrolment levels for girls and major reductions in
child marriages.
The plan must cover all of the actions which are necessary in order to secure
each of the requisite component parts of the right and must be sufficiently
detailed so as to ensure the comprehensive realization of the right.
• Participation of all sections of civil society in the drawing up of the plan is
vital and some means of periodically reviewing progress and ensuring
accountability are essential.
State Obligations
• The right to education, like all human rights, imposes three types or levels
of obligations on States: the obligations to respect, protect and fulfil.
• the obligation to fulfil incorporates both an obligation to facilitate and an
obligation to provide.
States must take steps, "individually and through international assistance and
cooperation, especially economic and technical", towards the full realization of
the rights recognized in the Covenant, such as the right to education.
Immediate obligations in relation to the right to education, such as the
"guarantee" that the right "will be exercised without discrimination of any kind"
and the obligation "to take steps“ towards the full realization of article 13 of the
Covenant. Such steps must be "deliberate, concrete and targeted" towards the
full realization of the right to education.
• The realization of the right to education over time, that is "progressively",
should not be interpreted as depriving States' obligations of all meaningful
content. Progressive realization means that States have a specific and
continuing obligation "to move as expeditiously and effectively as
possible" towards the full realization of article 13.
• States parties are required to ensure that curricula, for all levels of the
educational system, are directed to the objectives identified in article 13
(1). They are also obliged to establish and maintain a transparent and
effective system which monitors whether or not education is, in fact,
directed to the educational objectives set out in article 13(1).
States must prioritize the introduction of compulsory, free primary education. The
obligation to provide primary education for all is an immediate duty.
• States must “take steps" towards the realization of secondary, higher and
fundamental education for all.
Conclusion
• About 142 countries make reference to this right in their national
constitutions.
69
• Poverty
• Cultural beliefs
70
• Constitutes severe pain or suffering;
• Is inflicted intentionally, that is, for a purpose;
• Is inflicted by a public official or other person acting in an official capacity,
or at his instigation or with his consent or acquiescence.
• Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment – is a ‘lesser’ form
of the act of torture. It involves acts, which do not necessarily constitute
torture but fall short of torture and are nonetheless cruel, or inhuman or
degrading acts. Any harsh or neglectful treatment that could affect a
person’s physical or mental health or any punishment intended to cause
physical or mental pain or suffering, or to humiliate or degrade a person,
constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
• According to studies by the UN and organisations such as Amnesty
International, torture can take various forms and the most common ones
include beatings, imposition of electric shocks, hanging by the arms or
legs, rape, sexual assault, or the threat of rape or sexual assault, and
mock executions. Torture can be perpetrated in places of detention, such
as a police station, a prison, a military camp, a secret detention place, a
hospital or mental institution, etc. On the other hand it can be perpetrated
against persons who are not necessarily in detention, such as the victim’s
home or even in the street or an open place. It can also take place in the
context of an armed conflict.
•
• States must take effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other
measures to prevent acts of torture (art. 2 (1) of CAT)
• No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a
threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency,
may be invoked as a justification of torture (art. 2 (2) of CAT)
• An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked
as a justification of torture (art. 2 (3) of CAT)
• No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to
another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he
would be in danger of being subjected to torture (art. 3 (1) of CAT).
• States must ensure that all acts of torture are offences under their criminal
law and the offences must be punishable by appropriate penalties which
take into account their grave nature. This also applies to an attempt to
commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or
participation in torture (art. 4 of CAT)
• States must take measures to ensure that they establish jurisdiction over
acts of torture committed within their territory or where the offender or the
victim is their national. They shall also take measures to ensure that they
establish jurisdiction over such cases where the offender is in their
territory and they do not extradite the offender to another state for
prosecution (arts. 5 and 7 of CAT)
• States Parties shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance
in connection with criminal proceedings brought in respect of any of the
71
offences related to torture, including the supply of all evidence at their
disposal necessary for the proceedings (art. 9 (1) of CAT)
• States must ensure that education and information regarding the
prohibition of torture are fully included in the training of law enforcement
officials and include this prohibition in their rules of instruction (art. 10 of
CAT)
• States must keep under systematic review interrogation rules and
methods and practices for the custody and treatment of persons subjected
to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment (article 11 of CAT)
• A State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a
prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to
believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its
jurisdiction (art. 12 of CAT)
• A State Party shall ensure that any individual who alleges he has been
subjected to torture in any territory under its jurisdiction has the right to
complain to, and to have his case promptly and impartially examined by,
its competent authorities. Steps shall be taken to ensure that the
complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment or
intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given (art.
13 of CAT)
• A State Party shall ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of
torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate
compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In
the event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his
dependants shall be entitled to compensation (art. 14 of CAT)
• A State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have
been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any
proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that
the statement was made (art. 15 of CAT)
Monitoring CAT
• The Committee Against Torture is entrusted with supervising the
implementation of the CAT
• It is made up of 10 experts, who must be of high moral standing and
recognised competence in the field of human rights.
• The Committee consider the reports of State Parties to the CAT, inter-
state communications, and individual communications. It may also carry
out an inquiry or investigation if it receives reliable information which
appears to it to contain well-founded indications that torture is being
systematically practised in the territory of a State Party
• The reporting procedure – CAT requires that State Parties must submit
periodic reports on the legislative, judicial, administrative and other
measures, which they have adopted for the purpose of giving effect to the
provisions of CAT, and on the progress made to implement those
provisions (art. 19 of CAT). The Committee will consider the report,
invariably in the presence of a delegation from the reporting State, and
72
make concluding observations or recommendations for consideration and
implementation by the reporting State
• The individual communications procedure – is used as an enforcement
mechanism by individuals and NGOs who allege violations of the
provisions of CAT by a State Party by a State in whose jurisdiction they
live or are subject to (art. 22 of CAT)
• Inter-state communications – this procedure enables one State Party to
raise a complaint against another State Party if the former is of the view
that the latter is violating or is not fulfilling its obligations under CAT (art.
21 of CAT)
• Investigation or inquiry procedure – if CAT receives reliable information
indicating grave or systematic violations by a State Party, of the provisions
of a treaty that it is responsible for monitoring, it may, with the cooperation
of the state, carry out an examination of the information and, to this end,
make observations with regard to the information concerned (art. 20 of
CAT)
73
International Criminal Law
• While international law essentially regulates affairs between countries,
there are circumstances in which international law takes an interest in an
individual
• Certain crimes are considered of such serious nature that they are subject
to international prosecution, either under the auspices of a United Nations
special court, or by the International Criminal Court or by individual states
“… there exist certain offences, which by their very nature, affect the the interests
of all states, even when committed in another state or against anther state, victim
or interest.”
Bassiouni M Crimes against Humanity in International Law (Second Edition) 229.
“A state has jurisdiction to define and prescribe punishment for certain offences
recognized by the community of nations as of universal concern, such as piracy,
slave trade, … , genocide, war crimes, …” Restatement of the Foreign Relations
Law of the United States(1987).
In The Attorney General of the Government of Israel v Eichmann (Dist. Ct.
Jerusalem) (1961), 36 Int’l L. Rep. 5.the Israeli government tried and convicted a
Nazi war criminal for offences committed in Germany and the occupied states
before the creation of Israel.
74
Crimes subject to universal jurisdiction
• Crimes against humanity
• Genocide
• War crimes
• Torture
• Slavery
Crimes against humanity
• This includes murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation or forcible
transfer of population, … torture, rape,… other inhumane acts of a similar
character
• However these crimes must be committed as "part of a widespread or
systematic attack against any civilian population."
Systematic
There are four factors identified as suggesting that the crime was systematic:
• the existence of a political objective, a plan pursuant to which the attack is
perpetrated or an ideology, in the broad sense of the word, that is, to destroy,
persecute or weaken a community;
• the perpetration of a criminal act on a very large scale against a group of
civilians or the repeated and continuous commission of inhumane acts linked to
one another;
• the preparation and use of significant public or private resources, whether
military or other;
• the implication of high level political and/or military authorities in the
definition and establishment of the methodical plan.
Widespread
• "refers to the scale of the acts perpetrated and to the number of victims."
• Implies "not an isolated act but a large scale action directed against
multiple victims."
•
Genocide
• After the second world war the international community had to face and
deal with the crime of deliberately trying to exterminate a race of humanity
• The crime has also been committed in Yugoslavia and Rwanda
• … any of the following acts committed with the intention to destroy,
in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, as
such,
• Killing members of the group,
• Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the
group,
c) deliberately inflicting on the group, conditions of life calculated to bring about
its physical destruction in whole or in part,
d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group,
e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
To successfully prosecute genocide you need to prove both that the proscribed
acts were committed against one of the listed groups and that the perpetrator
had the intention to destroy the group.
75
War Crimes
• Protection of civilian and non combatants during armed conflicts
“… violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not
be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labour or for any other
purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of
prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of private or
public property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not
justified by military necessity.” Article 6 of the Nuremberg Charter.
Torture
• Torture is an international crime
• Torture thus gives rise to universal jurisdiction, can lead to prosecution in
international tribunals, and can constitute crimes against humanity where
part of a widespread and systematic plan of attack
• Torture is any
a) Imposition of severe pain,
b) Intentionally imposed to obtain a confession or to punish,
c) Inflicted by or on behalf of a public official.
Prosecute or extradite
• The Convention against Torture imposes the requirement on states to
either prosecute alleged torturers in their territory or to extradite them to
countries that are willing to so prosecute
• The same obligation is imposed for grave breaches of humanitarian law
(war crimes) under the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949. The Genocide
Convention simply creates the duty to punish.
• Bassiouni is of the opinion that customary international criminal law
includes the duty to prosecute or extradite for crimes against humanity
Jurisdiction
• While international crimes can be prosecuted in any state on the basis of
universal jurisdiction, most legal systems require national legislation to
empower such prosecutions
• The International Criminal Court has been established on the consent of
states parties to try international crimes
• The ICC will only have jurisdiction where there is a connection between
the crime and a party to the ICC treaty – thus if genocide occurs in
Zimbabwe, which is not a state party, and the perpetrators and victims are
Zimbabwean the ICC would not have jurisdiction
• However, the Supreme Council may refer a case to the ICC for trial even
where there is no connection with a state party
• The ICC treaty also places a duty on states to prosecute the crimes in
their domestic jurisdictions and the ICC would only take over where this
does not happen
76