Human Rights
...g treaty. Particularly, a divide developed between capitalist nations such as the USA, which favored civil and political rights, and communist nations which favored economic, social and cultural rights. To solve this problem, the two binding Covenants were created instead of one. The former is monitored by the Human Rights Committee, a group of 18 experts who meet three times a year to consider periodic reports submitted by member States on their compliance with the treaty. Members of the Human Rights Committee are elected by member states, but do not represent any State. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights contains two Optional Protocols. The first optional protocol creates an individual complaints mechanism whereby individuals in member States can submit complaints, known as a communication, to be reviewed by the Human Rights Committee. The second optional protocol abolishes the death penalty. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights currently has 149 States Parties. Over the last 50 years, the rights set fourth in the UDHR have been reiterated and affirmed in numerous international human rights treaties dealing with specific populations or with specific rights and freedoms. The rights have also been incorporated into regional human rights treaties and documents such as the ‘European Convention of Human Rights’, the ‘African Charter of Human and Peoples Rights’, and the ‘Helsinki Accords’. · The effectiveness of international legal measures in addressing human rights issues Although governments in states around the world have been promoting, publicising, and encouraging these human rights there are many barriers which limit the extent to which the protection of human rights can be achieved. These include; · Not all countries have signed the treaties – Human rights can only be enforced if they are accepted by the domestic law of the particular state. There for individuals in these countries are not protected by the treaties. However, a state may be obliged to protect human rights within its own territory solely by reason of its membership to the United Nations and its acceptance of its obligations under the Unite Nations Charter. · Lack of enforcement Mechanisms – The enforcement mechanisms of complaints and reporting do not apply to all human rights treaties, and some of them are optional rather than compulsory depending on the treaty. Even if a nation has agreed to the treaty they may not have agreed to the enforcement mechanisms of the treaty. Even when there are enforcement mechanisms their effect can be limited due to being open to bias within a state, and the complaint system can take a long time to produce a result. · Selectivity – As seen in the case of war crimes tribunals, only some human rights infractions have been targeted internationally. This has lead to the criticism that the UN is selective in its protection against human rights and investigates certain cases for political reasons while ignoring others. · Enforcement by consensus – Enforcement of any international law is problematic as it relies on consensus and legal responsibility. Nations do not always feel compelled by these reasons to follow international law. · War Crime Tribunals – The war crimes tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia represent a willingness by the international community to create structures to enforce human rights in the time of war. However, the effectiveness of the tribunals is hampered by the fact that they may actually entrench the conflict rather than end it. It is hoped that the recent establishment of the international criminal court will improve the enforcement of human rights where there is abuse against humanity. · Regional Organisations – These are more successful than the global human rights organisations as reporting to them is usually compulsory. Also their jurisdiction over a smaller number of states with similar c...