HUMAN RIGHTS END SEM NOTES

WEEK 1: INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW OF

THE INT’L HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
The Concept of Rights and Human Rights
1. What is a right? What are human rights? Why do we have them?
o A right is a legal, moral, or social claim that individuals hold against others,
especially against the state, protecting their interests, freedoms, or dignity.
Human rights are rights inherent to all humans regardless of nationality,
ethnicity, religion, or other status, aimed at safeguarding basic human dignity,
equality, and freedom.
o Theories behind human rights suggest they stem from natural law, based on
the belief that certain rights are intrinsic to human beings. Modern human
rights derive from various philosophies, such as John Locke’s natural rights,
Immanuel Kant’s moral imperatives, and modern utilitarian ethics.
Additionally, they represent an ethical commitment of the global community
to uphold dignity and justice for all, especially post-WWII, as witnessed by
the UN's establishment in 1945.
Human Rights Definitions and Universality
2. Who counts as a human and on what grounds?
o Historically, definitions of who counts as "human" have shifted, influenced by
culture, religion, and politics. In some cases, marginalized or minority groups
(e.g., slaves, Indigenous peoples) were excluded from full human recognition.
o In IHRL today, the concept of humanity is inclusive; human rights law asserts
that all humans have equal moral worth. This recognition aims to prevent
discrimination and uphold universal principles, though challenges remain
regarding groups like refugees, stateless individuals, or those affected by
socio-political biases.
3. Is dignity the foundation of human rights?
o The idea of dignity is central to human rights, often cited as a moral
foundation for rights frameworks, such as in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR), where dignity is emphasized in the preamble.
o While dignity serves as a cornerstone in international agreements,
interpretations vary, with some cultures prioritizing community over
individual dignity. This raises questions about how universally "dignity" can
be applied as a foundation for rights, especially when cultural values differ.
4. Are human rights truly universal, global?
 o Universality is a fundamental principle of human rights, claiming that rights
apply to everyone, everywhere. However, there is an ongoing debate around
cultural relativism versus universalism. Critics argue that universal human
rights reflect Western values and may impose cultural standards incompatible
with local traditions.
o Efforts by IHRL to bridge these differences include frameworks that
acknowledge cultural contexts while maintaining core rights as non-
negotiable. This debate continues, especially in regions where cultural or
religious norms conflict with human rights norms, such as gender equality in
some conservative societies.
5. Does the disagreement about the meaning of human rights undermine it as a
political project?
o Disagreement can indeed pose challenges to implementing IHRL globally, as
it raises questions about legitimacy and cultural imposition. Yet, such debates
can also strengthen human rights by fostering dialogue and adaptation,
ensuring relevance across diverse societies.
o For instance, discussions around LGBTQ+ rights or gender equality illustrate
the tensions between universal norms and local resistance but also highlight
the adaptability of human rights norms to address varying global contexts.
Contemporary Challenges and Institutional Roles
6. What kinds of human rights problems does the world face today?
o Modern challenges include issues like forced migration, conflict-related
atrocities (e.g., in Syria, Myanmar, Palestine), climate justice, gender-based
violence, digital rights, and economic inequalities. Each of these reflects new
or evolving interpretations of what it means to secure human rights in a
globalized world.
o For example, climate change presents complex human rights issues—such as
the rights to life, health, and property—that traditional IHRL did not explicitly
anticipate.
7. What role do national and international judicial institutions play in addressing
these?
o National courts are vital in interpreting and enforcing human rights locally,
while international bodies like the International Criminal Court (ICC) address
violations that cross national boundaries or involve state-sanctioned abuses.
o Regional bodies, such as the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR),
provide additional layers of enforcement, though enforcement remains
challenging without political support or cooperation from states.
8. How did human rights come to shape the foreign policy imperatives of states in
the post-1945 era?
 o After WWII, human rights were integrated into foreign policy agendas,
particularly by Western democracies, as a response to the atrocities witnessed
during the war. Human rights promotion became a tool for diplomatic
influence and a means to establish moral leadership on the global stage.
o However, foreign policy motivations often mixed human rights advocacy with
national interest, leading to accusations of selectivity or “human rights
imperialism,” where countries promote rights abroad while overlooking
domestic issues.
Human Rights Treaties and State Compliance
9. What do human rights treaties require states to do?
o Treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
(ICESCR) obligate states to protect, respect, and fulfill specific rights for their
citizens.
o States must also regularly report to treaty-monitoring bodies and sometimes
face international scrutiny or sanctions for violations, though enforcement
mechanisms are often weak.
10. Why do states sign up to human rights treaties? Do they ever keep human rights
commitments?
 States join treaties to improve their international standing, demonstrate commitment
to global norms, or secure foreign aid. However, compliance varies; some states treat
treaties as symbolic, especially if enforcement is lax or domestic opposition is strong.
 While some states uphold their commitments, others exploit the flexibility within
treaties, only implementing provisions that align with their interests, raising questions
about the sincerity of their human rights commitments.
Civil Society and Selective Human Rights Politics
11. How do citizens and NGOs put pressure on states? Is human rights politics just
“selectivism”?
 NGOs and civil society groups play critical roles in documenting abuses, raising
awareness, and advocating for accountability. They use tactics like public shaming,
international lobbying, and legal action to influence state behavior.
 However, accusations of selectivism arise when powerful states prioritize human
rights issues aligned with their interests (e.g., focusing on rights in adversarial nations
while ignoring abuses by allies). This perception can undermine the legitimacy of
IHRL as a fair and impartial framework.
12. Why does the US promote human rights while refusing to sign on to major
human rights treaties?
  The U.S. often champions human rights in its foreign policy but refrains from
ratifying some international treaties (like the Convention on the Rights of the Child)
due to concerns over sovereignty, domestic legal challenges, or political opposition.
 This dual stance reflects the balance the U.S. seeks between promoting global norms
and protecting its domestic interests, though it often leads to criticisms of hypocrisy in
its human rights advocacy.
13. Is human rights just window-dressing for national interests?
 Critics argue that human rights often serve as a cover for advancing geopolitical
goals, especially when advocacy is inconsistent or selective. However, this doesn’t
entirely negate the positive impact of human rights norms, which have led to
meaningful reforms worldwide, despite such criticisms.
 Examining cases like humanitarian interventions or foreign aid tied to human rights
reforms reveals how states can use human rights rhetoric to justify political agendas,
which complicates but does not necessarily invalidate the human rights project.
Democracy and Human Rights Promotion
14. Should democracies promote democracy? Can outside interventions ever be
justified?
 Democracies often promote democracy and human rights internationally, viewing
these as essential for global stability and moral leadership. However, external
interventions are contentious, especially when they result in conflict or infringe on
sovereignty.
 Some argue that interventions should be permitted in cases of severe human rights
violations (e.g., genocide or ethnic cleansing), but the right to intervene remains
controversial, often sparking debates on whether interventions protect rights or
impose foreign values.
Summation: The Global Human Rights Framework
The global conceptual framework for IHRL is rooted in the idea of a common humanity that
transcends national borders. Yet, this framework constantly adapts to address new challenges,
such as digital rights, climate change, and economic inequality. IHRL remains a powerful
tool for advocating for justice and dignity but also faces persistent challenges from state
interests, cultural differences, and structural limitations.
As the field evolves, IHRL must address these critiques by strengthening enforcement
mechanisms, fostering genuine universality, and balancing state sovereignty with the global
commitment to human rights.
WEEK: 2 & 3 THE SOURCES OF IHRL AND
HUMAN RIGHTS MOVEMENTS IN
RETROSPECT
Foundations and Sources of International Human Rights Law (IHRL)
1. What are the legal foundations of human rights?
o The legal foundations of human rights are built upon international
conventions (like the ICCPR and ICESCR), customary international law
(CIL), and general principles of law recognized by civilized nations. Other
influential sources include juristic writings and regional treaties that provide
context-specific rights frameworks.
o Core UN treaties, such as the UDHR, ICCPR, and ICESCR, form the
backbone of modern human rights law, with UN bodies like the Human Rights
Council (HRC) and treaty-based committees enforcing these rights.
International humanitarian law (IHL) intersects with IHRL, especially in
conflict zones, to ensure protection for civilians and non-combatants.
o Peremptory norms (jus cogens) are essential, as they are universally
recognized prohibitions (e.g., against genocide and torture) that states cannot
violate or derogate from. These norms shape the baseline expectations for state
conduct and set universal standards that transcend state sovereignty.
2. What are the sources of international human rights law?
o International human rights law sources include:
 Treaties and conventions: The ICCPR, ICESCR, the Convention on
the Rights of the Child (CRC), and other treaties create binding
obligations for signatory states.
 Customary International Law (CIL): This source is based on
consistent state practice and a belief that such practices are legally
required (opinio juris).
 UN Declarations and Resolutions: Although non-binding, these are
critical as they influence state behavior and help solidify customary
norms.
 General principles of law: These principles, like equality before the
law, are recognized by many legal systems and reinforce human rights
norms.
 Regional treaties: Documents like the European Convention on
Human Rights (ECHR) and the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights provide frameworks specific to regional contexts.
3. How was international law applied through the end of World War II?
 o Before WWII, international law was largely limited to agreements between
states and did not focus on individual rights. The Laws of War, established by
treaties like the Hague Conventions, governed military conduct but offered
little protection for individuals.
o The Nuremberg Trials post-WWII marked a turning point, as they held
individuals accountable for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against
humanity, setting a precedent for individual responsibility under international
law and paving the way for the modern human rights framework.
Limits and Challenges in Modern IHRL
4. What limits do human rights impose on states combating terrorism?
o States face a balancing act between national security and human rights
obligations. Human rights laws limit actions by prohibiting torture, arbitrary
detention, and extrajudicial killings, even in the name of counterterrorism.
o Treaties like the ICCPR allow for certain derogations during public
emergencies but mandate that these be proportionate and non-discriminatory.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), for example, has ruled against
states for using excessive or unlawful measures in counterterrorism,
emphasizing the enduring nature of core rights like the right to life and
prohibition of torture.
5. Should states promote international justice for human rights violations?
o Advocates argue that promoting international justice deters future violations,
fosters accountability, and upholds the integrity of international norms.
Mechanisms like the International Criminal Court (ICC) seek to ensure that
perpetrators of severe crimes face justice, even if domestic courts are
unwilling or unable to act.
o However, political interests can complicate such initiatives. States sometimes
prioritize strategic alliances over accountability, leading to selective
enforcement, which can undermine the credibility of international justice.
Role of State Institutions in Human Rights Protection
6. What role do the legislative, judicial, and executive actions of states play in the
promotion and observance of human rights?
o The legislative branch enacts laws to protect rights domestically, often
incorporating international treaty obligations into national law.
o The judiciary interprets and enforces these laws, providing a check on the
executive and safeguarding citizens’ rights. Courts, especially constitutional
courts, play a critical role in interpreting human rights in line with both
national constitutions and international standards.
 o The executive branch is responsible for implementing policies that align with
human rights commitments. Internationally, it may represent the state in treaty
negotiations and set priorities in foreign policy related to human rights.
7. How has the spread of liberal constitutionalism helped these efforts?
o Liberal constitutionalism, with its emphasis on rule of law, separation of
powers, and individual rights, has encouraged the incorporation of human
rights into domestic legal systems. Constitutional provisions often guarantee
civil and political rights, while progressive states also integrate economic,
social, and cultural rights.
o This trend has supported the judicialization of human rights, allowing
individuals to bring rights claims before domestic and, in some cases, regional
courts.
Minority Rights and Self-Determination
8. Through what arrangements may minority groups exercise self-determination or
autonomy within a state?
o Minority groups often seek autonomy arrangements to preserve their
cultural identity and governance rights without fully seceding. These
arrangements may include:
 Federalism: Where regional governments have significant authority
(e.g., Canada’s approach to Quebec).
 Autonomy agreements: Providing regions control over local matters,
as in Spain’s autonomous communities or Greenland’s relationship
with Denmark.
 Cultural protections: Recognizing languages, traditions, and
educational rights specific to minority groups, as seen in the Sami
Parliament in Norway.
o However, self-determination remains a contentious issue, especially when it is
perceived as a threat to national integrity, as seen in cases like Catalonia and
Tibet.
9. Is there a trend within the human rights movement toward recognizing the
legitimacy of demands for internal self-determination?
o There is an increasing acknowledgment within human rights discourse of the
legitimacy of internal self-determination for ethnic and cultural groups,
especially when it promotes peace and stability. International frameworks, like
the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), reflect
this trend by affirming Indigenous groups’ rights to autonomy and cultural
preservation.
 o Nonetheless, the scope of self-determination claims often depends on state
willingness to accommodate these rights without viewing them as secessionist
threats.
Role of NGOs and INGOs in Human Rights
10. How do nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and international
nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) contribute to the promotion and
enforcement of human rights?
 NGOs and INGOs document violations, raise public awareness, and advocate for
policy changes, serving as critical actors in the human rights landscape. They operate
through:
o Advocacy and lobbying: NGOs influence national and international policies
by lobbying governments, contributing to human rights discourse, and offering
expertise to treaty bodies.
o Monitoring and reporting: INGOs like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty
International document abuses, which adds to the accountability mechanisms
and pressures governments to reform.
o Direct assistance: Many NGOs provide direct support to victims, whether
through legal aid, shelter, or access to resources, thereby improving their
quality of life.
11. How effective are they? How has their role changed and developed over time?
 NGOs have grown increasingly influential, leveraging globalization and technology to
reach global audiences and coordinate transnational advocacy networks. Their role
has evolved from passive observers to active participants shaping human rights
standards and holding governments accountable.
 However, their effectiveness can be limited by resource constraints, political
resistance, and accusations of bias or "selectivism." Governments in some regions
(e.g., Russia and China) have imposed restrictions on foreign-funded NGOs, seeing
them as threats to national sovereignty.
Summation: The Evolution and Institutionalization of Human Rights
Over the past century, IHRL has transformed from a loosely defined concept into an
organized body of law supported by treaties, norms, and institutions. Customary international
law and treaties form the bedrock of human rights obligations, while organizations like
NGOs, states, and international institutions play crucial roles in promotion and enforcement.
The evolution of human rights law reflects a growing acknowledgment of diverse demands
for rights protection, including minority rights and self-determination, while addressing
challenges like state sovereignty and counter-terrorism. The persistent commitment to
expanding and upholding these norms demonstrates the adaptability and resilience of the
human rights movement.
WEEK: 4& 5. INTERNATIONAL HUMAN
RIGHTS LAW AND GLOBAL SOUTH
PERSPECTIVES
Human Rights in Global South Perspectives
1. Where do human rights come from, and how have they changed world politics?
o Human rights, as a modern legal and moral framework, trace their origins to
Enlightenment ideals emphasizing individual freedom, equality, and justice.
Documents like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in
1948 solidified these concepts within international law.
o Human rights have transformed world politics by promoting norms that limit
state sovereignty in favor of protecting individuals. By establishing standards
that all states must uphold, human rights have created mechanisms for holding
states accountable for violations, reshaping relationships among states,
citizens, and international institutions.
2. What duties do universal human rights place on political authority?
o Universal human rights impose duties on states to respect, protect, and fulfill
the rights of individuals. Governments are expected to create laws and policies
that ensure the protection of fundamental rights (e.g., freedom from torture,
access to healthcare, education).
o International human rights frameworks also mandate states to cooperate in
promoting global justice and equality, requiring them to support development,
address inequality, and respond to human rights crises outside their borders.
3. Is the notion of “humanity” in human rights truly universal, or does legitimacy
depend on cultural conformity?
o This question addresses the Universalism vs. Cultural Relativism debate.
Universalists argue that human rights are inherent and applicable to all people,
regardless of cultural context. However, cultural relativists claim that rights
must respect and reflect cultural norms, as values differ across societies.
o For instance, certain interpretations of women’s rights in Western contexts
may conflict with traditional views in some Global South societies, suggesting
that a one-size-fits-all approach may not fully respect cultural nuances.
4. Contemporary Western Understanding of Rights and the Global South
o The Western perspective traditionally emphasizes individualism and
secularism, which sometimes conflicts with the collectivist or religious
values prevalent in many Global South societies. For example, Western
frameworks prioritize individual autonomy, while many non-Western cultures
emphasize community welfare and interconnected duties.
 o This divergence has led some Global South scholars and activists to critique
Western human rights frameworks as exclusionary or biased, emphasizing the
need for more culturally resonant approaches like Third World Approaches
to International Law (TWAIL), which highlights historical injustices and
prioritizes socio-economic rights.
5. Relationship between Rights and Duties in Different Traditions
o Different political and philosophical traditions see rights and duties as
interconnected. For example, in Hindu traditions, Dharma (duty) often
precedes individual rights, suggesting that individuals fulfill their obligations
within society as a path to achieving mutual well-being.
o Similarly, in Islamic approaches to human rights, the emphasis is on
balancing rights with responsibilities to family, community, and God. This
differs from the Western approach, which often places rights above duties.
Conflicts and Tensions in Cultural and Religious Contexts
6. Conflicts between Traditional Gender Roles and Universal Human Rights
Norms
o Many cultures maintain traditional gender roles that can conflict with the
universal human rights principle of gender equality. For example, practices
like female genital mutilation (FGM) or restrictions on women's public roles
challenge international standards.
o This tension highlights the struggle between cultural preservation and the
global push for equality. Some argue that external pressures for reform can be
seen as imperialistic, while others view them as necessary for promoting
universal human dignity.
7. State Sponsorship of Religion and Human Rights
o When states sponsor particular religions, it can lead to discrimination against
those of different faiths or non-religious individuals. In some countries,
blasphemy laws, restrictions on religious conversion, or discriminatory
citizenship laws based on religion can infringe upon freedoms guaranteed by
IHRL.
o This issue underscores the challenges of implementing secular human rights
norms in states where religion deeply influences governance, such as in
Islamic legal systems or countries with official state religions.
8. Do Human Rights Create Exclusion and Serve Powerful States?
o Critics argue that human rights can serve as tools of neo-imperialism, with
powerful states using them selectively to justify interventions in weaker
countries. For example, human rights criticisms may target regimes deemed
unfriendly to Western interests, while similar abuses in allied states are
overlooked.
 o The Marxist approach views human rights as reinforcing global power
structures, where economic inequality and exploitation undermine meaningful
access to rights for many in the Global South.
Multiple Approaches to Human Rights
9. Why Is There a Multitude of Approaches to Human Rights?
o The diversity of approaches reflects the different philosophical, religious, and
cultural underpinnings that inform conceptions of human rights around the
world. For instance:
 TWAIL critiques international law as a system created by and for
Western powers, advocating a perspective that prioritizes socio-
economic development and collective rights.
 Feminist and Third World Feminist approaches challenge both
universal human rights norms and local practices, arguing for gender
equity within culturally relevant frameworks.
 Cosmopolitanism advocates for a global citizenship model,
emphasizing that all humans have equal moral worth and that rights
should transcend state boundaries.
10. How Are Human Rights Values Promoted and Preserved in Multiple Legal
Orders?
o Many societies use legal pluralism to reconcile international human rights
with domestic cultural and religious laws. For example, in countries like India,
customary and religious laws often coexist with secular legal frameworks to
respect the cultural autonomy of diverse communities.
o However, challenges arise when these systems contradict, as in cases where
customary practices infringe upon internationally recognized rights (e.g.,
gender discrimination in inheritance under certain customary laws). This
highlights the need for ongoing dialogue between global and local legal orders
to adapt and balance rights and cultural practices.
11. Legal Pluralism and Human Dignity: Affinity or Antagonism?
o Legal pluralism—the coexistence of multiple legal systems within a single
state—can support human dignity by respecting cultural diversity. However, it
can also undermine human dignity if customary or religious laws allow
practices that violate fundamental rights.
o For instance, pluralism in family law may permit religious personal laws that
limit women’s rights in marriage or inheritance, creating tension between
cultural respect and gender equality.
Globalization, Development, and Human Rights
12. How Do Analysts Define Globalization and Its Impact on Human Rights?
 o Globalization is often seen as the increasing interconnectedness of economies,
cultures, and political systems. While it has promoted the spread of human
rights norms, it has also exacerbated inequalities by enabling economic
exploitation, which some argue undermines socio-economic rights.
o Economic globalization can impact rights to health, housing, and labor
protections, especially when multinational corporations influence local
policies that prioritize profit over public welfare.
13. Is There a Right to Socio-Economic Development?
o Many Global South perspectives emphasize socio-economic rights, arguing
that without a minimum standard of living, civil and political rights lack
substance. The UN Declaration on the Right to Development asserts that
development is a human right and should enable people to enjoy the full range
of human rights.
o The Global South often views development as essential to achieving social
justice and sees economic independence as a prerequisite for genuine human
rights. This position calls for rethinking human rights beyond traditional
Western frameworks to incorporate development and equity as fundamental
components.
Summation: The Global South and Human Rights
The perspectives from the Global South challenge the universality of human rights, proposing
instead a pluralistic view that respects cultural, economic, and political realities. By
incorporating diverse approaches—whether from TWAIL, feminist theories, or religious
interpretations—Global South scholars and activists advocate for a more inclusive and
adaptable human rights framework. This multiplicity of perspectives highlights that while the
ideals of human rights may be universal, their application and interpretation must be flexible,
fostering respect for cultural differences while upholding fundamental human dignity.

WEEK: 6. NORMATIVE FOUNDATION OF

CORE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS
TREATIES-CIVIL & POLITICAL RIGHTS &
ECONOMIC, SOCIAL CUTURAL RIGHTS -I
the focus shifts to the normative foundations of core international human rights treaties
and the classification and interaction between civil and political rights (e.g., freedom of
speech, right to a fair trial) and economic, social, and cultural rights (e.g., right to health,
education, and work). The foundation of modern human rights law is explored through the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), both of which expand
upon the ideals set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
Key Topics and Discussion Points
1. Civil and Political Rights as Human Rights
 Civil and political rights are fundamental freedoms and protections that prevent state
interference in personal freedoms and ensure individuals can participate fully in
political life. These rights include:
o Right to life, freedom of speech, freedom from torture, right to a fair trial,
right to privacy, and freedom of religion.
 These rights are primarily enshrined in the ICCPR (1966), which obliges states to
respect and protect these rights without discrimination. They are seen as immediate
and enforceable protections that do not depend on a country's economic resources.
2. Instruments for Protecting Civil and Political Rights
 The ICCPR is the primary treaty that formalizes civil and political rights, making
states legally bound to uphold these rights.
 Enforcement mechanisms include:
o The UN Human Rights Committee: Reviews state compliance through
periodic reports and can issue binding decisions on individual complaints in
countries that accept the Committee’s jurisdiction.
o Regional human rights frameworks such as the European Court of Human
Rights (ECHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights also provide
pathways for the protection and enforcement of civil and political rights.
3. Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ESCR)
 The ICESCR addresses economic, social, and cultural rights that protect individuals’
well-being and promote equitable access to resources and opportunities. Key rights
include:
o Right to adequate living standards, health, education, social security, and
participation in cultural life.
 Unlike civil and political rights, ESCR require “progressive realization”, meaning
states commit to achieving these rights over time, based on available resources. This
approach acknowledges that economic limitations may restrict a state's ability to
provide immediate fulfillment of all rights in the ICESCR.
4. Relationship Between Civil and Political Rights and Economic, Social, and Cultural
Rights
 Historically, civil and political rights were prioritized as “first-generation” rights,
often due to Cold War-era ideological divides. Economic, social, and cultural rights
were labeled as “second-generation” rights, reflecting differing views on state
responsibility.
 However, the Vienna Declaration (1993) affirmed that all human rights are
“universal, indivisible, and interdependent.” Civil and political rights cannot be
 fully realized without economic and social rights, as individuals need adequate health,
education, and economic security to participate fully in political life.
 For example, without the right to education, an individual may not have the means to
exercise free speech or participate effectively in governance.
5. The Role of Courts in Developing Economic and Social Rights
 Courts play a critical role in advancing ESCR by interpreting “progressive
realization” and determining when a state’s action (or inaction) is a violation of these
rights. Key issues involve:
o Justiciability: The extent to which economic and social rights can be legally
enforced in court. Some argue that rights such as healthcare and education are
political issues, but courts have increasingly upheld these as justiciable rights.
o Courts in countries like South Africa (notably in cases concerning the right to
housing) have set global precedents for recognizing ESCR and interpreting the
obligations of states under the ICESCR.
o Balancing resource constraints and political will: Courts often navigate
between a country’s budget limitations and the necessity of upholding rights,
holding governments accountable for failing to use resources effectively to
realize ESCR.
6. Social Mobilization and Political Will in Achieving ESCR
 Realizing economic, social, and cultural rights often relies on social mobilization and
political will rather than judicial enforcement alone. Non-state actors, including civil
society organizations, play an important role in advocating for ESCR, mobilizing
resources, and influencing policy.
 Social mobilization can pressure governments to allocate resources effectively,
address inequalities, and prioritize the protection of vulnerable populations.
Discussion Questions
1. Which civil and political rights fall under the category of human rights?
o Civil and political rights such as freedom from torture, the right to a fair trial,
and freedom of expression are considered fundamental human rights that are
immediately enforceable and necessary for individual autonomy and dignity.
2. What are the instruments for their protection?
o Primary instruments include the ICCPR, UN Human Rights Committee, and
regional bodies like the ECHR and the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights.
3. What is the relationship between civil/political and social/economic rights?
o Civil and political rights and economic, social, and cultural rights are
interdependent, with each set of rights essential for fully realizing the other.
The Vienna Declaration reinforced this interdependence, calling for a holistic
 view of human rights that supports individuals’ political and economic well-
being.
4. What roles do—and should—the courts play in developing the second set of
rights?
o Courts can play a transformative role in developing ESCR by interpreting
“progressive realization” and holding states accountable. By enforcing ESCR
through landmark judgments, courts can compel states to prioritize
fundamental needs and bridge resource gaps through equitable policies.
However, the justiciability of ESCR remains debated, with some critics
viewing these as political issues best addressed outside the judiciary.
This week’s focus invites a deeper understanding of how human rights treaties shape the
rights landscape globally, exploring the balance between immediate civil protections and
progressively realized socio-economic rights within the international legal framework.

WEEK: 7. NORMATIVE FOUNDATION OF

CORE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS
TREATIES-HUMAN RIGHTS OF WOMEN,
CHILD AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLES-II
focus is on the normative foundation of international human rights treaties that address
the rights of women, children, and indigenous peoples, exploring their unique challenges
and the legal frameworks developed to protect these groups. The central treaty discussed is
the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW), alongside broader discussions about the rights of children and indigenous
peoples.
Key Topics and Discussion Points
1. Women’s Rights and CEDAW
 CEDAW defines women's human rights as encompassing freedom from
discrimination, violence, and inequality in both public and private spheres. It aims
to address the multiple forms of discrimination that women face, which intersect with
socio-economic, cultural, and political contexts.
 The treaty provides a comprehensive framework for promoting women’s rights
and obliges states to adopt legislation, policies, and practices that eliminate
discrimination and advance gender equality.
2. CEDAW’s Approach to Protecting Women’s Rights
 CEDAW Committee: Oversees the implementation of the convention, reviews state
compliance, and issues recommendations.
 Core principles of CEDAW include the prohibition of discrimination, equal access
to justice, and protections in education, employment, health, and family life.
  The treaty emphasizes state accountability even in private matters, challenging
traditional boundaries between public and private spheres (e.g., cases of domestic
violence and cultural practices).
 Case Study – Citizenship and Identity: Issues like headscarves and other cultural
symbols raise complex questions about autonomy, cultural identity, and the balance
between religious expression and women’s rights within CEDAW's framework.
3. The Public-Private Divide and Non-State Actors
 Erosion of the Public-Private Divide: CEDAW recognizes that private actors (e.g.,
family members, employers) play significant roles in enforcing or violating women's
rights. Thus, the convention calls for state intervention in traditionally “private” areas
to ensure women’s rights are protected.
 Regulation of Non-State Actors: CEDAW urges states to regulate private actors
(e.g., workplaces, religious institutions) to prevent discrimination and uphold gender
equality. This regulation often raises controversy, especially where cultural norms
conflict with international human rights standards.
4. Customary Law, UN Resolutions, and the Development of Women’s Rights
 Customary International Law (CIL) and UN resolutions contribute to the global
norms around women’s rights. They complement treaties like CEDAW by promoting
widely accepted principles, such as prohibiting gender-based violence.
 CIL and UN resolutions create a normative framework that reinforces CEDAW’s
provisions, advocating for states to align their national laws with international human
rights standards.
5. Challenges in Developing a Feminist Perspective on Human Rights
 Intersectionality: Women’s rights issues intersect with race, class, culture, and
geography, making a universal approach challenging.
 Cultural and Religious Conflicts: Feminist perspectives often clash with traditional
and religious practices that subordinate women, raising the question of cultural
relativism vs. universalism.
 Feminist scholars argue for context-sensitive approaches to women’s rights that
respect cultural differences while upholding universal human rights principles.
6. Reservations to CEDAW
 State Reservations: Some states have made reservations to CEDAW, limiting its
application in areas that conflict with national law or religious practices, such as
inheritance rights or marriage age.
 Impact of Reservations: Reservations weaken the treaty’s effectiveness by creating
exceptions to its provisions, sparking debates on the balance between respecting state
sovereignty and upholding universal rights.
Rights of Children and Indigenous Peoples
  Rights of the Child: The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is the
primary treaty for children’s rights, addressing issues like child labor, education, and
protection from abuse. The CRC emphasizes the child’s best interests as a primary
consideration.
 Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Indigenous rights are recognized under instruments
like the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which
includes the right to cultural preservation, autonomy, and land. Indigenous rights
often conflict with state development goals, requiring careful balancing to protect
indigenous identity and sovereignty.
Discussion Questions
1. How does CEDAW define women’s human rights?
o CEDAW defines women’s human rights as encompassing protection from all
forms of discrimination and ensuring gender equality in all areas of life. It
addresses discrimination based on socio-economic, cultural, and political
contexts, obligating states to reform laws and practices that perpetuate
inequality.
2. How does CEDAW seek to protect women’s rights?
o CEDAW provides a comprehensive framework that calls for legislative
reforms, policy changes, and education to eliminate gender discrimination. It
encourages states to monitor compliance and ensure that women’s rights are
respected, even in private areas like the family.
3. What questions do international requirements concerning women’s rights raise
regarding the distinction between the public and private spheres?
o International women’s rights obligations often require state intervention in
traditionally private matters, like family dynamics and cultural practices. This
blurring of boundaries can create conflicts, particularly in societies where
cultural practices dominate family and community life.
4. What role do customary law and UN resolutions play in defining international
human rights law?
o Customary law and UN resolutions reinforce international norms on women’s
rights, contributing to a growing body of universally recognized standards.
These sources help legitimize and support CEDAW’s goals, encouraging
states to adopt gender equality measures even outside formal treaties.
5. What problems exist in developing a feminist perspective on human rights?
o Feminist perspectives face challenges like cultural resistance, intersectionality,
and the difficulty of applying universal standards to diverse cultural contexts.
This requires balancing respect for cultural diversity with the imperative to
eliminate gender-based oppression.
 6. What reservations have some states made concerning their acceptance of
CEDAW?
o Some states have reserved provisions of CEDAW, particularly around family
law, inheritance, and religious practices, citing cultural or religious reasons.
These reservations hinder full implementation and reflect tensions between
universal rights standards and local traditions.
This week’s theme emphasizes the importance of adapting human rights frameworks to
address the specific needs of women, children, and indigenous groups, illustrating how these
treaties expand international human rights protections while navigating cultural and political
challenges.

WEEK: 8&9. INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS

MONITORING INSTITUTIONS IN ACTION
focus is on international human rights monitoring institutions and their roles, challenges,
and impact on global human rights protection. The UN human rights system encompasses
Charter-based bodies, treaty bodies, the Security Council, and the High Commissioner
for Human Rights, each contributing uniquely to the monitoring and enforcement of human
rights. The lessons cover the functions of these bodies, as well as the tensions with state
sovereignty, the efficacy of humanitarian interventions and sanctions, and challenges
facing the UN treaty system.
Key Topics and Discussion Points
1. The UN Human Rights Monitoring System: Structure and Criticisms
 UN Charter-based Bodies: The Human Rights Council (HRC) and Office of the
High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) oversee global human rights
concerns, with mandates to address human rights abuses through mechanisms like
special procedures (rapporteurs and working groups).
 Failures and Criticisms: Criticisms of the UN system include its slow response,
politicization, and inconsistent enforcement of human rights norms. The complex
procedures and political pressures often result in inadequate responses to urgent
human rights crises.
2. Charter-Based Bodies and the Human Rights Council (HRC)
 Human Rights Council (HRC): A key UN body created to address human rights
issues, conduct universal periodic reviews of member states, and deploy special
procedures for specific issues.
 Special Procedures: Include thematic and country-specific mandates that allow
independent experts to investigate and report on human rights abuses. These can be
powerful tools but face challenges such as state non-cooperation.
  Confidential Procedures: Used for more sensitive human rights investigations,
although this often limits transparency and may lack impact due to insufficient public
accountability.
3. The Role of the UN Security Council in Human Rights
 Humanitarian Intervention: The Security Council can intervene in severe human
rights crises, often through sanctions or military intervention (e.g., Responsibility to
Protect - R2P). However, intervention decisions are subject to the veto power of
permanent members, often resulting in selective enforcement.
 Sanctions: The Council can impose sanctions to coerce states into compliance,
though sanctions sometimes negatively impact civilian populations and may be seen
as coercive tools of dominant states.
 Responsibility to Protect (R2P): A doctrine that obligates international intervention
to protect civilians when states fail to uphold their responsibilities. However, its
implementation remains inconsistent and contentious.
4. Treaty-Based Bodies: The ICCPR Committee and Other Treaty Regimes
 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Committee:
Monitors state compliance with civil and political rights through state reporting,
individual communications, and general comments. It provides recommendations but
lacks direct enforcement power.
 State Reporting: States are required to submit reports on their compliance, which are
then reviewed and commented on by the committee, although responses are often
delayed, and enforcement mechanisms are limited.
 General Comments and Individual Communications: These mechanisms allow the
committee to interpret rights and address specific violations. Individual complaints
allow the committee to address grievances, but states are not compelled to comply
with rulings.
 Other Treaty Bodies: Each human rights treaty has its own committee (e.g., the
Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights) with similar functions but
varying influence and authority.
5. The Treaty Body System in Crisis
 Resource Constraints: Limited resources have led to backlogs and inefficiency in
treaty bodies, with some states delaying reports or refusing to implement
recommendations.
 Reform Proposals: Efforts to streamline and strengthen treaty bodies include calls
for increased funding, consolidation of overlapping functions, and greater
accountability mechanisms.
 Impact and Effectiveness: Despite criticisms, treaty bodies are instrumental in
setting standards and promoting dialogue on human rights issues, though their
practical impact remains limited without stronger enforcement measures.
Discussion Questions
1. What are Global Protracted Human Rights Situations (GPHRS)?
o GPHRS refer to long-standing human rights crises that persist without
resolution due to complex political, social, and economic factors. Examples
include conflicts in places like Syria and Palestine, where human rights
violations are systemic and enduring.
2. What is the response of the UN to Crimes of Apartheid in Occupied Palestinian
Territories (OPT)?
o The UN has issued multiple resolutions condemning apartheid-like practices
and human rights violations in Palestine. However, responses are often limited
to statements and recommendations, with Security Council interventions
blocked due to political dynamics among member states.
3. Is the UN human rights treaty system in crisis?
o Yes, the system faces a crisis characterized by resource shortages,
politicization, inadequate enforcement, and state non-compliance. Reform
is needed to improve efficiency and accountability.
4. What role do international organizations play in developing, monitoring, and
enforcing international human rights?
o International organizations like the UN develop norms, monitor state
compliance, and apply pressure through reviews, resolutions, and
interventions. However, enforcement remains weak due to limited jurisdiction
and reliance on state cooperation.
5. What is state sovereignty?
o State sovereignty is the principle that a state has full authority over its affairs
without external interference. It often conflicts with international human rights
interventions, especially when states resist external monitoring or
enforcement.
6. How does the UN system deal with human rights?
o Through charter-based bodies (like the HRC), treaty bodies, and special
procedures, the UN monitors human rights, investigates violations, and
applies diplomatic pressure. However, the system’s impact is limited by
member states’ varying levels of cooperation.
7. What are thematic mechanisms? How does the Security Council use
humanitarian interventions and sanctions to protect and enforce human rights?
o Thematic mechanisms address specific human rights issues (e.g., torture,
freedom of expression) across regions. The Security Council can authorize
sanctions or humanitarian interventions, though these actions are often
controversial and dependent on the political interests of powerful members.
 8. What is a treaty organ?
o A treaty organ is a body established by a specific human rights treaty to
monitor its implementation, such as the ICCPR Committee for the ICCPR.
These bodies review state reports, provide recommendations, and consider
individual complaints.
9. How does the Human Rights Committee of the ICCPR function?
o It monitors compliance through state reports, interprets the treaty via general
comments, and addresses grievances through individual complaints. The
committee provides guidance but has no binding enforcement power.
10. What role does the ICCPR Committee play in the promotion and enforcement of
human rights?
o The committee promotes rights by clarifying legal interpretations,
reviewing state practices, and addressing violations through
recommendations. Its enforcement, however, relies heavily on state
cooperation and adherence.
11. What complaints are brought before the ICCPR Committee?
o Common complaints involve freedom of expression, fair trial rights, and
protections against discrimination. The committee’s decisions provide
important human rights benchmarks even though they lack binding authority.
12. How does it differ from other treaty regimes?
o Each treaty body focuses on a specific set of rights (e.g., economic, social, and
cultural vs. civil and political rights) with tailored mechanisms for review and
enforcement, reflecting the unique aspects and challenges of different rights
categories.
This week’s material highlights the strengths and weaknesses of international human rights
monitoring institutions, emphasizing both their normative contributions and practical
limitations in promoting global human rights amidst political and structural challenges.

WEEK: 10. EVOLUTION OF REGIONAL

APPROACHES AND ARRANGEMENTS OF
HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION
focus is on regional human rights systems and their distinct approaches to promoting and
protecting human rights. Regional systems, while diverse, often address cultural, political,
and historical contexts unique to their regions. These systems include European, Inter-
American, African, Southeast Asian, and Arab human rights frameworks.
Key Topics and Discussion Points
1. Regional Arrangements for Human Rights Protection
  European System: The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the
European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) are central to Europe’s human rights
framework. The Council of Europe oversees the ECHR, promoting human rights
through treaties and protocols. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe (OSCE) also contributes by addressing broader security issues that intersect
with human rights.
 Inter-American System: The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
(IACHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) work to
uphold human rights in the Americas. They investigate human rights abuses, offer
recommendations, and issue binding rulings on cases brought to the Court.
 African System: The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights guides this
framework, with the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights and the
African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights promoting and enforcing rights
within an African context. The African Union supports this system, which emphasizes
both individual and collective rights.
 Southeast Asian and Arab Systems: The Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) adopted the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration, which remains non-
binding but sets a regional human rights standard. The League of Arab States created
the Arab Charter on Human Rights, though it lacks a strong enforcement
mechanism.
2. Differences Between Regional and Universal Systems
 Universal vs. Regional Focus: The UN system applies universally, aiming to protect
human rights globally through treaties and charters. Regional systems focus on
specific regions, often adapting rights to cultural or political contexts.
 Enforcement and Accessibility: Regional bodies like the European Court of
Human Rights (ECtHR) allow individuals direct access, enhancing accessibility.
Universal bodies, such as UN treaty committees, typically require state cooperation
and rarely allow individuals to directly initiate cases.
3. Advantages and Disadvantages of Regional Systems
 Advantages:
o Cultural Relevance: Regional systems can tailor human rights standards to
local norms and issues.
o Greater Accessibility: Some regional bodies offer direct access to
individuals, as seen in Europe and the Americas.
o Focused Enforcement: Regional mechanisms can address issues specific to
their regions more quickly and effectively.
 Disadvantages:
o Inconsistent Standards: Regional variations may lead to discrepancies in
rights protection across different regions.
 o Political Interference: Regional bodies often face political challenges, as
states may interfere or limit their powers.
o Limited Enforcement Power: Enforcement varies, with some regions (e.g.,
ASEAN) lacking binding mechanisms for human rights rulings.
4. The European System: Structure and Key Functions
 European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR): This court allows individual and
interstate petitions and issues binding judgments on human rights violations. It
handles cases involving violations of the European Convention on Human Rights,
such as freedom of expression, the right to a fair trial, and prohibition of torture. High
compliance with ECtHR judgments strengthens Europe’s human rights enforcement.
5. The Inter-American System: Commission and Court
 Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR): This body receives
petitions, conducts investigations, and makes recommendations to states. It plays an
essential role in protecting rights, especially in cases where states fail to protect
individuals.
 Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR): The Court issues binding
judgments and provides reparations to victims. It has ruled on cases involving
indigenous rights, forced disappearances, and freedom of expression. The Court's
decisions are binding on member states that have accepted its jurisdiction, though
enforcement varies by country.
6. The African System: Commission and Court
 African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights: The Commission oversees
the African Charter and reviews reports, investigates abuses, and issues
recommendations. Its focus includes both individual rights and collective rights,
reflecting African social and political contexts.
 African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights: Established to strengthen
enforcement, the Court issues binding judgments. It often deals with cases involving
civil and political rights but faces enforcement challenges due to limited state
participation and acceptance of its jurisdiction.
7. Emerging Regional Systems in Asia and the Arab World
 Southeast Asia (ASEAN): The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on
Human Rights (AICHR) promotes human rights but lacks binding enforcement
power. The ASEAN Human Rights Declaration outlines standards, but
implementation remains a challenge due to non-interference policies.
 Arab Charter on Human Rights: The League of Arab States adopted this Charter,
though its effectiveness is limited by weak enforcement and the lack of a strong
judicial mechanism. It reflects the cultural and political sensitivities of the Arab
region, which can sometimes conflict with international human rights standards.
Discussion Questions
 1. What regional arrangements exist to protect and promote human rights?
o Key regional systems include Europe’s ECtHR, the Inter-American Court
and Commission, and Africa’s Commission and Court. Southeast Asia and
the Arab League have more limited frameworks with a focus on standard-
setting rather than enforcement.
2. How do they differ from universal systems?
o Regional systems often allow for direct individual petitions and can adapt to
local contexts. Universal systems apply broader standards but face challenges
with enforcement and individual access due to reliance on state cooperation.
3. What are their advantages and disadvantages?
o Advantages include cultural relevance, greater accessibility, and tailored
enforcement. Disadvantages include regional inconsistencies, political
constraints, and limited enforcement power in some systems.
4. How does the European system work?
o The European Court of Human Rights allows individuals to bring cases
directly, issuing binding judgments on violations of the European
Convention on Human Rights. It maintains a high degree of compliance,
making it one of the most effective regional systems.
5. What kinds of conflicts does the European Court handle? With what results?
o The ECtHR addresses issues such as freedom of expression, right to fair
trial, and prohibition of torture. Its rulings have led to significant human
rights improvements across Europe, though it faces challenges with backlog
and ensuring compliance in all member states.
6. How do the Inter-American Commission and Court promote human rights?
o The Commission investigates violations, issues recommendations, and takes
cases to the Court when necessary. The Court rules on these cases, providing
reparations and setting precedents that influence human rights standards in the
region.
7. How does the African System attempt to enforce human rights?
o Through the African Charter, the Commission promotes rights by reviewing
state compliance and issuing recommendations. The African Court provides
binding judgments, though its influence is limited by selective state
participation and challenges with enforcement.
These discussions provide insights into the strengths and weaknesses of regional human
rights systems, highlighting their unique contributions as well as challenges in achieving
universal human rights standards.
WEEK: 11. HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE
AMPHITHEATRE OF AI TECHNOLOGY, TRADE
AND DEVELOPMENT AND INTERPRETATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS INSTRUMENTS
examines human rights within the evolving landscapes of artificial intelligence (AI),
neuroscience, global trade, and international development. The role of AI and
technological advances raise significant ethical and human rights concerns, especially in
terms of governance, bias, privacy, and future impacts on human dignity. We also look at the
interpretation of human rights in relation to cultural perspectives, globalization, and
socio-economic development.
Key Topics and Discussion Points
1. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Human Rights
 AI and Human Rights Relationship: AI technologies, from machine learning to
neural networks, impact privacy, freedom of expression, equality, and autonomy—
core human rights areas. Facial recognition, predictive policing, and automated
decision-making are examples where AI can both enhance and threaten rights,
depending on its governance and usage.
 Asymmetrical Struggle: The rapid development of AI has outpaced regulatory
frameworks, creating a power imbalance between those who develop AI technologies
and the general public. This asymmetry can lead to privacy invasion, biased
outcomes, and exclusion, where vulnerable groups are disproportionately affected.
 Future Impact and Norm Adoption: As AI becomes more integrated, there’s debate
over whether it should be embedded into International Human Rights Law (IHRL)
as a new standard. For example, rights related to digital privacy and data security may
need explicit recognition to address AI-driven violations.
 Governance Gaps and Challenges: Existing human rights frameworks may not be
equipped to address AI’s complexities, such as algorithmic transparency, bias
mitigation, and ensuring accountability for AI-driven decisions.
2. Vertical and Horizontal Interpretations of Human Rights
 Vertical Interpretation: Human rights are traditionally seen as protecting individuals
from state actions. However, with AI, private corporations (e.g., tech giants) wield
significant power, impacting human rights horizontally between private entities and
individuals.
 Horizontal Interpretation: There is a push for corporations to adhere to human
rights standards, especially where AI impacts individual freedoms and equality. This
shift challenges traditional views of sovereignty, demanding greater responsibility
from private sectors in human rights protection.
3. Globalization, Right to Development, and International Distributive Justice
  Globalization and Human Rights: Economic globalization has contributed to human
rights advancements in some areas, yet it often exacerbates inequalities. Labor rights,
environmental rights, and socio-economic rights face challenges as global trade
prioritizes profit over protection.
 Right to Development: The right to development argues that socio-economic
development is a human right, essential for realizing other rights such as education,
health, and decent living standards. This perspective advocates that states, particularly
in the Global South, deserve equitable opportunities in the global economy.
 International Distributive Justice: Issues like climate change, trade imbalances, and
resource allocation call for fair distribution of global wealth. The Bretton Woods
Institutions (IMF and World Bank) and new economic alliances (e.g., Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank) play a critical role in determining how resources and
opportunities are distributed globally.
4. Cultural Perspectives on Human Rights
 Universal vs. Cultural Legitimacy: While human rights are considered universal,
some argue that they should align with cultural norms to be meaningful. For instance,
certain interpretations of gender equality or freedom of expression vary greatly
between societies, challenging a one-size-fits-all approach.
 Rights and Duties Across Political Traditions: Different political philosophies
interpret the balance of rights and duties uniquely. For instance, some Eastern
traditions emphasize collective well-being, whereas Western frameworks often
prioritize individual rights. This distinction influences human rights interpretations
worldwide.
 Contemporary Western vs. Alternative Understandings of Rights: In Western
contexts, human rights often center on individual freedoms, while other cultures may
prioritize communal responsibilities. This divergence raises questions about the
universality of human rights.
5. Gender and Human Rights
 Challenges of Universal Human Rights Norms and Gender: Traditional gender
roles in some cultures may conflict with universal rights, especially around issues like
gender equality, reproductive rights, and access to education for women and girls.
 CEDAW Reservations: The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) faces reservations from states that
prioritize cultural or religious interpretations over universal gender equality norms,
leading to partial implementation of women’s rights.
 Developing a Feminist Perspective on Human Rights: Feminist perspectives argue
for rights interpretations that go beyond the traditional focus on male experiences,
addressing issues like reproductive rights, gender-based violence, and economic
inequality.
6. Religious Beliefs vs. Universal Human Rights
  State Sponsorship of Religion: In countries where specific religions receive state
support, conflicts can arise over religious laws that may contradict universal human
rights, such as equality or freedom of belief.
 Balancing Rights and Cultural Norms: Human rights frameworks seek to respect
cultural diversity while promoting fundamental freedoms, a complex task when
religious beliefs influence state policies.
Discussion Questions
1. What is Artificial Intelligence (AI), and how does it relate to Human Rights?
o AI, through its capabilities in data analysis, decision-making, and automation,
has a profound impact on privacy, equality, and freedom. Its governance is
crucial to uphold these rights and prevent harm from biased or invasive AI
applications.
2. Is there an asymmetrical struggle between AI and human rights?
o Yes, AI development is often controlled by powerful corporations or states,
leading to imbalances where the rights of individuals are vulnerable to privacy
intrusions and discrimination due to lack of transparency or accountability.
3. Should the future adoption of AI be part of globalized IHRL?
o Some argue that AI governance norms should be integrated into IHRL,
potentially creating new standards to protect digital rights, data privacy, and
algorithmic transparency on a global scale.
4. Are human rights universal, or does their legitimacy depend on cultural
conformity?
o While human rights are theoretically universal, cultural norms and beliefs
sometimes challenge this universality, especially on issues like gender
equality, freedom of expression, and religious practices.
5. What conflicts exist between traditional gender roles and universal human rights
norms?
o Gender roles prescribed by certain cultures may conflict with international
human rights standards, particularly concerning women’s rights to work,
education, and freedom from discrimination.
6. What problems exist in developing a feminist perspective on human rights?
o Feminist perspectives advocate for a broadened human rights framework that
addresses gender-specific issues, such as reproductive rights and gender-based
violence, often overlooked in traditional rights frameworks.
7. Is there a right to socio-economic development?
o The right to development argues that socio-economic improvement is essential
to achieve a broad range of rights, supporting a framework where states are
responsible for promoting economic opportunities and equality for all citizens.
These discussions illuminate the complexities at the intersection of technology, culture,
gender, and economic development in shaping human rights practices and policies. As AI and
global interdependencies continue to grow, balancing these diverse factors will be essential in
fostering a fair and inclusive human rights framework.

WEEK: 12&13. UNDERSTANDING CLIMATE

CHANGE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
climate change and its profound implications on human rights. This discussion focuses
on how environmental issues—especially global warming and climate instability—directly
affect fundamental human rights and how human rights frameworks might be leveraged to
drive effective climate action.
Key Topics and Discussion Points
1. Human Rights and Climate Change Framework
 Interdependent Human Rights and Climate Change: Climate change affects
several fundamental human rights, including the right to life, health, food, water, and
housing. Vulnerable communities are disproportionately impacted by climate-driven
events, such as extreme weather, rising sea levels, and agricultural disruption, which
threaten basic survival and security.
 Human Rights Implications: Human rights are compromised as climate change
affects access to natural resources, public health, and environmental conditions. The
impact on food security, shelter, and livelihoods highlights the necessity of an HRBA
(Human Rights-Based Approach) to climate policy, ensuring that all policies
respect, protect, and fulfill human rights.
2. Human Rights-Based Approach (HRBA) to Climate Policy
 Progressive Recognition of Environmental Rights: Growing global consensus
suggests that a healthy environment should be recognized as a human right. Such
recognition would push states to integrate environmental protection directly into
human rights laws and hold states accountable for failing to prevent environmental
degradation.
 States' Obligations: States have both procedural obligations (e.g., public
participation, access to information, and environmental impact assessments) and
substantive obligations (e.g., taking active measures to prevent environmental harm).
States are called to address climate change proactively, balancing economic and
environmental priorities with human rights.
3. Climate Justice and Human Rights Mainstreaming in Policy
 Climate Justice: The climate justice movement argues for fairness and equity in
addressing climate change. Marginalized and low-income communities often face the
brunt of climate change impacts without contributing significantly to greenhouse gas
emissions, underscoring the need for policies that consider historical injustices and
current inequalities.
  Greening Human Rights: Mainstreaming human rights in climate policy means
embedding human rights principles in climate agreements, national policies, and
global frameworks. This approach ensures that climate actions do not inadvertently
infringe on human rights but rather protect and promote them.
4. Balancing Human Rights and Climate Policy
 Fundamental Rights as a Basis for Climate Policies: Climate policies should be
framed in a way that acknowledges and integrates human rights. For example, policies
aimed at reducing emissions should consider the rights to energy access, employment,
and indigenous land rights, so that climate solutions do not exacerbate social
inequalities.
 UNFCCC and Human Rights: The United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) serves as a global agreement for climate mitigation but
does not directly address human rights. There is a growing push to integrate human
rights language into UNFCCC documents and actions, as climate change impacts
directly intersect with the scope of human rights.
5. Key Rights Impacted by Climate Change
 Right to Life and Health: Climate change affects air quality, clean water, and
temperature extremes, posing direct risks to human health and longevity.
 Right to Food and Water: Climate instability leads to droughts, floods, and
unpredictable growing seasons, all of which threaten food and water security. These
shortages particularly affect the livelihoods of rural and agrarian communities.
 Right to Housing and Shelter: Rising sea levels and severe storms displace
thousands each year, infringing on the right to shelter and, in severe cases, leading to
climate refugees with limited legal protections.
6. Challenges in Integrating Human Rights and Climate Policy
 Overcoming the Universal Rights Divide: Balancing global climate goals with the
unique economic and environmental needs of individual nations poses a challenge.
Some developing nations advocate for a right to development, arguing they should
be permitted higher emissions to meet their citizens' basic needs.
 Barriers to Effective Implementation: Gaps in international and national
enforcement mechanisms make it difficult to hold states accountable for climate-
related human rights violations. Moreover, the political and economic interests tied to
resource extraction can impede environmental protections.
7. Regional Approaches and Advocacy Challenges
 Inter-American Human Rights System: While progressive in many areas, the Inter-
American system has been slower to integrate climate change as a human rights issue,
largely due to resource constraints and the complex nature of environmental issues.
 Advocacy Opportunities: Global climate strikes, legal cases for environmental
justice, and climate litigation highlight the role of civil society in pushing for
 environmental rights as human rights. Courts and organizations are increasingly open
to arguments linking climate and human rights, creating new avenues for advocacy.
Discussion Questions
1. How can human rights be placed at the center of climate change discourse?
o Recognizing climate change as a direct threat to fundamental rights shifts the
discourse from economic or environmental perspectives to one grounded in
human rights. Advocacy should highlight the connection between
environmental harm and violations of rights to life, health, and food.
2. Has the time come to formally recognize the right to a healthy environment?
o Many argue that as climate change increasingly threatens human well-being,
the right to a healthy environment should be universally recognized. Such
recognition would drive more concrete, enforceable policies that prioritize
environmental health in human rights protections.
3. What key rights central to human existence are affected by climate change?
o Rights impacted include the right to life, health, food, water, shelter, and self-
determination, especially as climate disruptions lead to resource scarcity,
displacement, and health risks.
4. Do anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions affect human rights?
o Yes, emissions from human activities drive climate change, which in turn
affects human rights through direct impacts on health, environmental stability,
and resource availability. Reducing emissions is thus not only an
environmental but also a human rights imperative.
5. Should fundamental rights shape climate policies?
o Yes, fundamental rights should guide climate policy, ensuring actions address
human needs and do not infringe on rights to livelihood, equality, and social
justice.
6. What is the relationship between the UNFCCC and human rights frameworks?
o Although the UNFCCC lacks explicit human rights mandates, there is
increasing dialogue on integrating human rights into its agreements. Doing so
would create binding obligations for states to consider human rights impacts in
their climate commitments.
7. How can we address the global divide between universal rights and climate
change?
o Bridging this gap involves recognizing shared responsibilities while respecting
states’ individual capacities and development needs. This balance is crucial in
achieving climate goals that are fair and uphold the right to development for
poorer nations.
 8. What opportunities and challenges exist for human rights advocacy surrounding
climate change?
o Opportunities lie in strategic litigation, public mobilization, and stronger
international norms recognizing environmental rights. Challenges include
political resistance, economic dependencies on fossil fuels, and lack of
enforceable mechanisms.
9. Why is the Inter-American Human Rights System lagging on climate change?
o Limited resources, competing priorities, and political complexities have
hindered the system’s responsiveness to climate-related issues, although there
are recent efforts to address these through new jurisprudence and advocacy.
Through these discussions, we can explore how human rights frameworks might effectively
guide climate policy, advocating for solutions that address both environmental challenges and
social justice. Balancing human rights with climate action remains essential to achieving a
sustainable future for all.

WEEK: 14. HUMAN RIGHTS FRAMEWORKS,

GAPS, ISSUES, VULNERABILITIES AND
CHALLENGES IN THE SAARC NATIONS
human rights frameworks, gaps, issues, and challenges in SAARC (South Asian
Association for Regional Cooperation) nations. This theme explores how human rights are
conceptualized and enforced in South Asia, the role of constitutional frameworks, regional
mechanisms, and civil society, and the broader debate surrounding "Asian values" in the
context of universal human rights norms. This session also addresses the potential for a
regional human rights charter under SAARC.
Key Topics and Discussion Points
1. Human Rights in Constitutional Order and Political Practice
 Constitutionalization of Human Rights: Many SAARC nations have enshrined
human rights within their constitutions. For instance:
o India: Fundamental rights (Articles 12-32) protect civil liberties like equality,
freedom of expression, and personal liberty.
o Bangladesh: Constitutional provisions (Articles 26-47A) cover fundamental
rights, including freedoms of speech and religion, as well as social protections.
o Nepal and Bhutan: These constitutions similarly provide for fundamental
rights, although levels of enforcement and interpretation differ significantly.
 Political Practice and Implementation: While constitutional protections exist, actual
enforcement can be inconsistent due to political instability, economic constraints, and
at times, government repression. Regional disparities and frequent conflicts
exacerbate human rights abuses in areas such as minority rights, gender-based
violence, freedom of expression, and political dissent.
2. Economic and Social Rights in SAARC
 Economic and social rights, such as those related to health, education, and economic
security, are essential to the human rights agenda in South Asia. However, poverty,
underdevelopment, and inequality hinder the fulfillment of these rights.
 Challenges include widespread poverty, caste and class disparities, gender inequality,
and limitations on access to essential services, which disproportionately affect
marginalized communities.
3. Role of Governmental and Civil Society Institutions
 National Human Rights Commissions: SAARC countries have established national
human rights institutions, such as India's National Human Rights Commission
(NHRC), which is tasked with investigating human rights violations. However, these
institutions often face challenges such as limited funding, lack of independence, and
political interference.
 Civil Society: Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) play a vital role in raising
awareness, providing services, and advocating for reforms. Civil society groups,
despite facing crackdowns in some countries, have been instrumental in promoting
public interest litigation (PIL) and documenting abuses.
4. Current Human Rights Issues and Challenges in SAARC
 Freedom of Expression and Press: Many SAARC countries have restrictive laws
that curtail freedom of speech and press. These include censorship, harassment of
journalists, and restrictions on internet freedom.
 Gender-Based Violence: South Asia has some of the highest rates of gender-based
violence, including domestic violence, human trafficking, and child marriage. Efforts
to address these issues are ongoing, but societal norms and legal enforcement remain
obstacles.
 Religious and Ethnic Minorities: Discrimination against religious and ethnic
minorities is a significant issue in several SAARC countries. This discrimination
affects access to resources, equal treatment under the law, and freedom of religious
practice.
5. "Asian Values" Debate and Universality of Human Rights
 Asian Values vs. Universal Rights: The "Asian values" perspective argues that
human rights norms should reflect cultural contexts rather than Western ideals. Some
South Asian leaders argue that Western-imposed human rights standards clash with
local traditions and values, prioritizing communal obligations over individual
freedoms.
 Challenges to Universality: This debate raises questions about the universality of
human rights. Are rights truly universal, or should they be adapted to align with
regional values? The SAARC nations’ emphasis on sovereignty and non-interference
complicates the push for universal human rights standards in the region.
6. Prospects for a South Asian Charter of Human Rights
 Feasibility of a Regional Human Rights Mechanism: Unlike other regions, such as
the African Union (AU) and the Organization of American States (OAS), which have
regional human rights charters and courts, SAARC lacks a unified human rights
mechanism. Barriers include geopolitical tensions, economic disparities, and differing
priorities among member states.
 Push for a SAARC Mechanism: Civil society advocates argue for a South Asian
Charter of Human Rights, which could offer a regional platform for addressing shared
issues, promoting human rights standards, and holding governments accountable.
However, skepticism about SAARC's political will and capacity remains a challenge.
7. Role of SAARC in Human Rights Protection
 SAARC’s Non-Interference Principle: SAARC's founding principle of non-
interference complicates the establishment of a regional human rights regime. While
this approach respects national sovereignty, it also limits SAARC's ability to
intervene in human rights matters across the region.
 Potential for Human Rights Promotion: Some argue that SAARC could play a
constructive role by supporting human rights education, fostering dialogue, and
encouraging best practices across member states, even without direct intervention.
Discussion Questions
1. What are the human rights concerns in South Asia?
o Key concerns include freedom of speech, gender-based violence, treatment of
minorities, poverty, and economic inequality. Each SAARC nation faces
unique but interconnected challenges in these areas.
2. How can a human rights culture be developed in South Asia?
o Building a human rights culture involves integrating human rights education
into public discourse, supporting civil society efforts, and encouraging
political and legal reforms. Enhancing collaboration among SAARC members
could also promote shared standards and address cross-border human rights
concerns.
3. Are Asian values compatible with international human rights norms?
o This is a critical debate within the region. While Asian values emphasize
community and respect for authority, many argue that these values can coexist
with international human rights norms by adapting implementation approaches
to regional contexts.
4. Does the concept of ‘Asian values’ challenge the universality of human rights?
o Proponents of Asian values assert that universal human rights are sometimes
incompatible with regional traditions, especially regarding individual rights.
This raises questions about reconciling human rights with cultural diversity
 and the potential for universal rights to be implemented in culturally sensitive
ways.
5. Is there feasibility for a South Asian Charter of Human Rights?
o While a South Asian charter could create a formal framework for human rights
cooperation, challenges include political fragmentation, prioritization of non-
interference, and resource limitations within SAARC.
6. How do national human rights commissions differ across SAARC jurisdictions,
and what are their successes and failures?
o National human rights commissions vary in effectiveness, with some facing
political interference or lack of resources. Successful cases often involve
public interest litigation and advocacy, while failures often arise from limited
enforcement power and insufficient independence.
7. Does SAARC's non-interference stance undermine its response to human rights
challenges?
o SAARC’s commitment to non-interference limits its capacity to address
human rights violations effectively. This stance conflicts with the need for
regional cooperation on issues like minority rights, freedom of expression, and
gender equality.
8. Would a regional approach to human rights be more effective than global
human rights standards in South Asia?
o A regional approach might better address specific cultural and political
contexts, enabling SAARC to address shared human rights challenges in a way
that aligns with regional values and priorities.
Conclusion
The human rights landscape in South Asia is complex, shaped by constitutional provisions,
regional challenges, and diverse cultural values. While SAARC faces significant obstacles in
advancing a unified human rights framework, there is potential for increased cooperation and
advocacy to protect rights within the region. Addressing these issues involves reconciling
"Asian values" with universal human rights norms, strengthening national human rights
institutions, and exploring the feasibility of a South Asian Charter of Human Rights. This
framework could promote a culture of human rights and justice across SAARC, addressing
both local and cross-border human rights challenges.

WEEK: 15. CURRENT KEY ISSUES, GAPS,

VULNERABILITIES AND CHALLENGES IN IHRL
current challenges and implementation gaps in International Human Rights Law
(IHRL) across several critical themes. These issues range from systemic discrimination,
global inequities, and weak institutions to the impact of modern developments in AI and
neuroscience on human rights. Here’s a structured overview of these themes, along with
suggested points for discussion:
Key Issues and Challenges
1. Human Rights Violations and Global Inequities
o Discrimination and Mistreatment: Marginalized groups, including
minorities, LGBTQI+ individuals, and indigenous peoples, continue to face
significant discrimination worldwide.
o Global Inequities: Issues like poverty, starvation, and apartheid are
compounded by systemic imbalances in wealth and resources, raising
challenges in enforcing economic and social rights.
o Weak Democratic Institutions: In regions with weak democratic
frameworks, impunity, lack of accountability, and democracy deficits allow
human rights abuses to persist.
2. Implementation Challenges in IHRL
o Information and Knowledge Gaps: Limited access to information hinders
the global understanding of human rights norms.
o Capacity and Commitment Gaps: Nations often lack sufficient resources or
political will to fully implement IHRL standards, while institutional gaps
undermine enforcement mechanisms.
o Security Gaps: In conflict zones or fragile states, security issues prevent
effective human rights protection.
3. Modern Developments in AI and Neuroscience
o AI and Neurotechnology: Emerging technologies pose ethical challenges,
such as privacy concerns, control over personal data, and potential misuse of
neurotechnological tools.
4. LGBTQI+ Rights and Cultural Relativism
o Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity: LGBTQI+ rights continue to face
resistance in certain cultural contexts, raising questions about cultural
relativism versus universal human rights.
o Minority Rights and Indigenous Peoples: Cultural rights and the right to
development are often compromised, with indigenous populations facing
discrimination from dominant social or political groups.
5. Freedom from Torture and the Death Penalty Debate
o Torture and Cruel Treatment: The prohibition of torture remains a
cornerstone of IHRL, but issues arise in contexts like "ticking bomb"
scenarios.
o Death Penalty: There’s an ongoing debate over its abolition versus retention,
intertwined with discussions on euthanasia and assisted suicide.
6. Global Security Issues and Accountability
 o Counter-Terrorism vs. Human Rights: Counter-terrorism efforts often clash
with human rights protections, especially when state security narratives lead to
increased surveillance or detention without trial.
o Truth Commissions and Transitional Justice: Mechanisms like truth
commissions aim to address past human rights violations, but they face
challenges around impartiality, reparations, and reconciliation.
Discussion Topics
 Terrorism, Counter-Terrorism, and Human Rights: A key question here is the
balance between state security and individual freedoms. Does counter-terrorism
justify temporary limitations on civil liberties, and if so, to what extent?
 Non-State Actors and Human Rights: Non-state actors, including corporations and
terrorist groups, play a significant role in human rights contexts. Should these actors
be held to international standards?
 Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: Implementation challenges arise due to
limited resources and global inequalities. The international community can look to
enhance support through financial aid, education, and capacity-building programs.
 Religion and Human Rights: The relationship is complex, especially where religious
beliefs conflict with international human rights standards, such as in gender equality
or LGBTQI+ rights. Engaging religious leaders in dialogue may help bridge these
gaps.
 Response to Mass Human Rights Violations: Truth commissions, international
tribunals, and universal jurisdiction are tools to address these violations. Truth
commissions, for example, offer a platform for victim voices, though they may face
challenges in enforcing recommendations or providing reparations.
In-Depth Focus Example: Truth Commissions
Truth commissions offer a form of transitional justice by documenting human rights
violations and offering some form of closure to victims. They aim to achieve truth,
accountability, and, where possible, reconciliation. However, they face significant challenges:
 Limited Authority: Often, truth commissions have no power to enforce
recommendations or prosecute violators, which can reduce their effectiveness.
 Risk of Political Manipulation: Truth commissions sometimes operate under
political constraints, limiting the depth and impartiality of their findings.
 Benefits: Despite these challenges, truth commissions have the unique advantage of
creating a public historical record that can help prevent future abuses and foster
societal healing.
Terrorism and Human Rights
A challenging question here is, "Do terrorists have human rights?" While some argue that
those who commit acts of terrorism forfeit certain rights, international law maintains that all
individuals, even those accused of terrorism, retain basic human rights, including fair trial
guarantees and protection from torture. This stance reinforces the principle of universality in
human rights while upholding legal standards even for those accused of severe crimes.
Final Reflection
The current global landscape presents a complex web of human rights challenges,
compounded by the emergence of new technologies, non-state actors, and sociopolitical
shifts. Addressing these issues requires innovative approaches, including strengthened
international cooperation, accountability measures, and a commitment to uphold human
rights standards across borders and contexts.
Each of these topics invites a deeper exploration into how the international community can
balance universal principles with localized approaches, ensuring that human rights remain at
the forefront of global governance.
key issues, challenges, and potential responses to improve the protection and enforcement of
human rights within each area.
1. Terrorism, Counter-terrorism, and Human Rights
 Key Issues: Balancing counter-terrorism efforts with human rights protections is
challenging, as security measures often risk infringing on civil liberties, such as
freedom of movement, expression, and privacy.
 Challenges: Ensuring that anti-terror laws do not lead to arbitrary detention, torture,
or discrimination against specific groups.
 Response: Develop counter-terrorism frameworks rooted in human rights principles,
ensuring fair trials, accountability for abuses, and independent oversight of counter-
terrorism agencies.
2. Non-State Actors and Human Rights
 Key Issues: Non-state actors, including multinational corporations and armed groups,
play a major role in either supporting or violating human rights.
 Challenges: These entities often evade direct accountability under international law.
 Response: Strengthen international mechanisms, such as the UN Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights, to hold corporations accountable for rights abuses.
3. Implementation of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights
 Key Issues: Economic and social rights, such as access to education, health, and
social security, are often deprioritized in favor of civil and political rights.
 Challenges: Lack of resources and political commitment limits effective
implementation, especially in low-income countries.
 Response: International support, increased aid, and capacity-building can empower
countries to implement these rights, alongside mechanisms for monitoring
compliance.
4. The Relationship of Religion and Human Rights
  Key Issues: Conflicts arise when religious norms contradict human rights principles,
such as gender equality or LGBTQ+ rights.
 Challenges: Balancing respect for cultural diversity with the universality of human
rights.
 Response: Promote intercultural dialogue and engage religious leaders in human
rights advocacy to find culturally sensitive solutions.
5. International Development, Global Impoverishment, and Human Rights
 Key Issues: Poverty is both a cause and effect of human rights violations, as
impoverished individuals often lack access to basic rights.
 Challenges: Global inequalities hinder the ability to address economic rights
effectively.
 Response: Address global economic disparities through sustainable development, fair
trade practices, and reducing debt burdens on developing nations.
6. Gender Challenges for International Human Rights
 Key Issues: Women and gender minorities face systemic discrimination, gender-
based violence, and barriers to economic and political participation.
 Challenges: Cultural and societal norms that perpetuate gender inequality.
 Response: Strengthen international conventions on women’s rights and promote
gender-sensitive policies globally.
7. Extraterritorial Application of IHRL on Civil and Political Rights
 Key Issues: Determining the scope of a state’s human rights obligations beyond its
borders, particularly for multinational corporations.
 Challenges: Lack of clear legal frameworks for extraterritorial human rights
obligations.
 Response: Clarify legal obligations under international law and promote greater
cooperation among states to ensure cross-border protection of rights.
8. Victims’ Participation and Reparations in International Criminal Proceedings
 Key Issues: Involving victims in legal proceedings is essential for justice and healing,
but it can be complex and costly.
 Challenges: Ensuring meaningful participation and fair reparations amidst limited
resources.
 Response: Strengthen reparations frameworks and provide psychological and
financial support for victims.
9. Evolution of the United Nations Treaty Bodies System
 Key Issues: Treaty bodies monitor compliance but face resource constraints and
significant backlogs.
  Challenges: Improving efficiency and ensuring state compliance with treaty
obligations.
 Response: Increase funding, streamline procedures, and enhance transparency and
accessibility.
10. Future of the United Nations Special Procedures
 Key Issues: Special Procedures mandate holders play a critical role in monitoring and
reporting on human rights abuses.
 Challenges: Political pressures, resource constraints, and limitations on enforcement.
 Response: Enhance support and independence of Special Procedures to strengthen
their impact.
11. The Role and Future of the Human Rights Council
 Key Issues: The Council’s effectiveness is often hindered by politicization.
 Challenges: Balancing state sovereignty with accountability for human rights abuses.
 Response: Reform membership criteria, limit veto power, and increase transparency
to ensure fair and unbiased evaluations.
12. Transitional Justice
 Key Issues: Transitional justice mechanisms (like truth commissions) are used to
address past human rights abuses.
 Challenges: Balancing the need for accountability with reconciliation.
 Response: Tailor approaches to specific country contexts, involving victims in the
design and implementation of transitional justice mechanisms.
13. Response to Massive Human Rights Violations
 Key Issues: Large-scale atrocities require coordinated international responses.
 Challenges: Political divisions and lack of enforcement mechanisms.
 Response: Employ mechanisms such as international tribunals, sanctions, and
humanitarian aid, and increase support for peacebuilding.
14. Principles of Responses to Human Rights Violations
 Key Issues: Human rights responses should prioritize accountability, transparency,
victim-centered approaches, and prevention.
 Response: Ensure that responses to violations are based on legal standards, fair
procedures, and consideration of victims' needs.
15. Responses to Past Violations
 Key Issues: Responses have included tribunals, truth commissions, and reparations
programs.
  Challenges: Maintaining political neutrality and ensuring resources are available for
meaningful impact.
 Response: International support and involvement of civil society are crucial in
implementing effective responses.
16. Response to the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda
 Key Issues: The international response was delayed and criticized for being
ineffective.
 Challenges: Limited resources and political will, along with complex social
dynamics.
 Response: The establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
(ICTR) provided a model for accountability, though challenges remain in addressing
root causes.
17. Truth Commissions’ Role in Massive Violations
 Key Issues: Truth commissions focus on documenting abuses and promoting
reconciliation.
 Challenges: Political resistance and limited capacity to enforce findings.
 Response: Strengthen support for truth commissions to enhance their effectiveness
and follow-through on recommendations.
18. Defining Terrorism
 Key Issues: Lack of a universally accepted definition complicates global anti-
terrorism efforts.
 Challenges: Differing national definitions and political considerations.
 Response: Seek a consensus-based definition through international dialogue.
19. Human Rights of Terrorists
 Key Issues: International law protects the basic human rights of all individuals,
including accused terrorists.
 Challenges: Balancing these rights with security concerns.
 Response: Ensure due process and fair trials for all individuals, maintaining human
rights standards even in cases of terrorism.
20. Terrorism as Theology of Liberation
 Key Issues: In some regions, terrorism is used as a form of resistance or liberation
against perceived oppression.
 Challenges: Complex socio-political dynamics and the appeal of terrorism as a means
of change.
  Response: Address root causes through socio-economic development, education, and
peaceful conflict resolution.
21. Difference Between Jihad and Terrorism
 Key Issues: Misunderstandings around “jihad” contribute to stigmatization and the
conflation with terrorism.
 Challenges: Cultural and religious misinterpretations can fuel discrimination.
 Response: Promote accurate understanding of cultural and religious concepts and
engage in intercultural dialogue to dispel misconceptions.

PROFOUND AREAS OF INTERNATIONAL

HUMAN LAW
1. Global South
 Historical Context and Current Dynamics: The term "Global South" often denotes
regions in Latin America, Africa, Asia, and Oceania, which have histories of
colonialism and struggle with socio-economic challenges. Historically, these regions
were marginalized in global decision-making processes, which led to disparities in
wealth, education, and access to rights.
 Influence on Human Rights: Countries in the Global South have advocated for a
more inclusive definition of human rights that prioritizes social, economic, and
cultural rights alongside civil and political rights. This perspective broadens the
understanding of rights to include basic needs like food, healthcare, and shelter,
shaping the global human rights framework.
 Challenges and Progress: Domestically, countries in the Global South continue to
face barriers in implementing universal human rights due to resource constraints,
political instability, and external debt burdens. The push for "Third World
Approaches to International Law" (TWAIL) by scholars and activists from the Global
South calls for international law reforms to redress historical injustices and empower
these regions within human rights frameworks.
2. Technological Developments and AI
 Impact on Privacy and Surveillance: Technology and AI have introduced powerful
surveillance tools, raising concerns over privacy rights, particularly as governments
and corporations can now monitor individuals on an unprecedented scale. Countries
with authoritarian regimes have been quick to adopt these technologies for social
control, often targeting activists and dissidents.
 Bias and Discrimination: AI systems have shown biases that can reinforce
discrimination, particularly against minorities, due to biased training data. This bias
impacts human rights in areas like employment, housing, and law enforcement, where
algorithms are increasingly used.
  Global and Domestic Efforts: The global community is working toward frameworks
to protect digital rights and privacy. The UN’s “Right to Privacy in the Digital Age”
initiative, and the EU’s GDPR, seek to set standards, though regulatory gaps persist.
Domestically, countries are exploring legislation to hold AI developers accountable
for human rights impacts, but enforcement is challenging given the rapid pace of
technological advancements.
3. Climate Change and Environment
 Human Rights Impact: Climate change has a direct effect on rights to life, health,
food, water, and housing, disproportionately affecting vulnerable communities.
Extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and resource scarcity threaten livelihoods
and displace populations, leading to a “climate refugee” crisis.
 Environmental Justice: Indigenous and low-income communities are often the most
affected by environmental degradation, as industries and pollutants are frequently
located near their homes. These communities face barriers to justice due to lack of
representation and resources.
 Legal and Policy Developments: Internationally, there is a growing recognition of
environmental rights as human rights. Countries like Ecuador have enshrined the
rights of nature in their constitutions. Domestically, courts have increasingly ruled on
cases linking environmental protection to constitutional rights, such as in India’s
ruling that the right to life includes the right to a clean environment. Movements and
litigation to hold corporations and governments accountable are gaining traction
globally, with cases brought before the UN and other bodies for “ecocide” and
environmental negligence.
4. Migration and Refugee Crisis
 Right to Asylum and Protection: Rising conflicts, economic instability, and climate
change have led to unprecedented migration and displacement. Many countries,
however, have tightened their asylum policies, leading to human rights abuses in
detention centers, denial of basic services, and mistreatment at borders.
 Statelessness and Rights Violations: Migrants and refugees often face statelessness,
lacking citizenship or legal recognition. This situation limits access to rights like
healthcare, education, and employment and leaves migrants vulnerable to exploitation
and trafficking.
 Global Response and Domestic Policies: While the Global Compact on Refugees
(2018) aimed to create a more robust framework for refugee rights, many countries
continue to prioritize national security over human rights obligations. Domestically,
nations vary significantly in their treatment of refugees, with some offering extensive
protections and integration programs, while others limit or deny asylum. The absence
of a cohesive international approach has exacerbated rights abuses, leaving migrants
and refugees at the mercy of national policies.
5. Authoritarianism
  Erosion of Civil Liberties: Authoritarianism often results in the curtailment of civil
and political rights, including freedom of speech, assembly, and the press.
Governments with authoritarian tendencies use legal and extralegal measures to
silence dissent, restrict information, and control public opinion.
 Impact on Minority Rights: In many authoritarian states, ethnic, religious, and
political minorities face systematic discrimination and repression. State-sanctioned
violence, imprisonment of activists, and lack of legal recourse create an environment
of fear and oppression.
 International Response and Domestic Movements: The international community,
through entities like the UN and NGOs, attempts to impose sanctions and condemn
human rights violations in authoritarian regimes. Domestically, citizen-led protests,
social media, and underground movements have emerged as means to advocate for
rights, though these efforts are often met with harsh crackdowns.
6. Neocolonialism
 Economic Dependency and Exploitation: Neocolonialism describes a modern form
of colonialism where powerful nations exert influence over weaker states, often
through economic means. This includes exploitative trade agreements, imposition of
austerity measures, and control over natural resources, which restrict the economic
sovereignty of developing nations.
 Influence on Self-Determination and Economic Rights: Neocolonial practices
hinder the ability of developing countries to make independent economic decisions,
impacting their social and economic rights. Resource-rich countries often face poverty
and inequality, as profits are funneled to foreign entities rather than local
development.
 Advocacy and Reform: Calls for reparative justice and fair trade have intensified as
awareness grows of how neocolonial structures affect human rights. Countries in the
Global South are increasingly calling for debt relief, fair trade policies, and more
equitable international financial systems to reduce neocolonial influences.
7. Pandemic
 Healthcare Rights and Inequality: The COVID-19 pandemic exposed stark
inequalities in healthcare access, especially affecting marginalized communities and
developing countries. Global vaccine distribution was skewed in favor of wealthier
nations, highlighting disparities in the right to health.
 Freedom of Movement and Expression: Many countries imposed lockdowns and
travel bans to contain the virus, which restricted freedom of movement and assembly.
While necessary for public health, these measures sometimes overreached, leading to
concerns about abuse of emergency powers.
 Social and Economic Impacts: The pandemic caused widespread job losses,
impacting rights to work and an adequate standard of living. The burden fell
disproportionately on low-income workers, women, and minorities, exacerbating
existing social inequalities.
  Legal and Policy Innovations: Some countries have enacted new health rights
protections in response to the pandemic, recognizing the need for accessible
healthcare. Internationally, there is growing discourse around a global “right to
health,” potentially paving the way for more robust international health regulations in
future crises.

Each of these areas has had a profound influence on the state of human rights both globally
and domestically. Together, they illustrate how human rights are deeply intertwined with
broader socio-economic, technological, environmental, and political forces, underscoring the
need for adaptable, inclusive, and forward-thinking human rights frameworks that can
effectively address these evolving challenges.
SHIVANGSHI NOTES
Comprehensive Overview of International Human Rights Law: Key Concepts,
Normative Frameworks, and Case Studies
1. International Order and Normative Principles
The international order is defined by agreements among states, often based on normative
principles, to create a set of binding and non-binding legal standards. These standards,
including covenants and treaties, aim to establish a structured framework for addressing
human rights violations. However, the current world order often frames the dynamics of
human rights in terms of victims and perpetrators, where states holding power may be seen as
violators and are called to remedy injustices.
Core Elements of International Human Rights Order
 State Responsibility: The state is responsible for both actions and inactions affecting
human rights. Violations lead to demands for redress, with the international
community holding states accountable.
 Universal Nature: Human rights transcend national boundaries and political
affiliations, aiming to protect all individuals regardless of citizenship.
 Non-derogable Rights: Certain rights, such as freedom from torture, are universally
protected and non-derogable, which means they cannot be suspended even in times of
crisis.

2. Evolution of Human Rights Law: Key Instruments and Principles

Foundational Documents
1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
2. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
3. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW)
These documents embody universal and inalienable principles of human rights. Over time,
the normative ideal of human rights has evolved, from a narrow concept of state-citizen
relations to an expansive framework encompassing all individuals and addressing global
inequalities.
Positivism and Contemporary Human Rights
Human rights law has largely moved toward a positivist approach, recognizing formally
codified norms within binding treaties. Economic, social, and cultural rights remain partly
justiciable, with differing levels of enforceability across states.

3. Binding Treaties and Customary International Law

Major Human Rights Treaties
 CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against
Women)
 CRC (Convention on the Rights of the Child)
 CRPD (Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities)
When states ratify these treaties, they are bound to uphold the protections within, and
violations invite both domestic and international accountability.
Customary International Law and State Responsibility
 Customary Law: Defined by consistent state practice and opinio juris (belief that an
action is legally obligatory). Customary laws, like the UDHR, have become nearly
universal, as states commonly cite them as normative standards.
 Persistent Objector Doctrine: Allows states to formally object to customary laws,
although this is rarely exercised due to the universal appeal of core human rights
norms.
Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) and Erga Omnes Obligations
 Jus Cogens: These are peremptory norms that no state may violate (e.g., prohibition
of genocide or torture). They override ordinary customary law and bind all states.
 Erga Omnes Obligations: These are universal duties owed to the global community,
including protecting fundamental human rights and preventing atrocities like
genocide.

4. Case Studies: Gambia and Myanmar

Gambia’s Accountability Measures and Role in Genocide Case
 Human Rights Violations: Gambia has faced scrutiny for past human rights abuses
under Yahya Jammeh’s regime. Allegations include torture, extrajudicial killings, and
disappearances.
 International Action: In 2019, Gambia initiated a case against Myanmar at the
International Court of Justice (ICJ), citing Myanmar’s failure to protect the Rohingya
from genocide. This marked a significant action by a nation to hold another
accountable under erga omnes obligations.
Myanmar’s Genocide Allegations
 Humanitarian Crisis: Myanmar’s treatment of the Rohingya population has led to
widespread displacement, and UN investigations have highlighted severe human
rights abuses.
 International Response: The ICJ ordered Myanmar to take protective measures for
the Rohingya. The international community has also enacted sanctions, and the
International Criminal Court (ICC) is investigating potential crimes against humanity.
5. Core Sources of International Law
Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)
Article 38 establishes the legal sources used by the ICJ to adjudicate cases, including:
1. Treaties and Conventions: Formal agreements establishing recognized rules.
2. Customary International Law: General practices accepted as law.
3. General Principles of Law: Universally recognized legal principles, such as
impartiality of judges.
4. Subsidiary Sources: Judicial decisions and scholarly writings provide guidance in
interpreting and evolving laws.
Example: UK v. Albania (Corfu Channel Case)
This case is a notable example where general principles of law were applied. When British
ships were damaged by mines in Albanian waters, it led to a precedent in interpreting state
responsibility for protecting others from harm in territorial waters.
Soft Sources and Subsidiary Guidance
 General Comments and Recommendations: These non-binding instruments, issued
by human rights committees, aim to clarify treaty obligations. Over time, they
influence treaty interpretation and may evolve into binding standards through
consistent application.

6. Dynamic Interpretation of Human Rights Law

While treaties and conventions provide a static framework, the interpretation of these
documents evolves through:
1. Judicial Decisions: Courts clarify treaty provisions, influencing how states enforce
human rights.
2. Scholarly Writings: Experts help refine legal theories and expand understanding of
human rights.
3. General Comments: Bodies like the Human Rights Committee issue comments on
treaty provisions, responding to societal changes and new interpretations.

7. Conclusion
The landscape of international human rights law is characterized by a combination of binding
treaties, customary laws, and universal principles. Central to this framework are peremptory
norms, erga omnes obligations, and the interplay between positive law and evolving
interpretations. Cases like Gambia v. Myanmar highlight the practical challenges and
possibilities within international human rights law, as the global community seeks
accountability for gross violations while upholding the inherent dignity and rights of every
individual.
The Global South and International Human Rights: A Critical Perspective
1. Exclusion of the Global South from Human Rights Discussions
 Historical Exclusion and Underrepresentation: International human rights (HR)
discussions have often excluded perspectives from the Global South, reinforcing a
hierarchy that privileges Western norms and ideas.
 Violations and Elite Interests: Some HR violations in the Global South are framed
within "cultural assumptions" that implicitly protect elite interests, both domestically
and globally, and prevent genuine reform.
2. Colonial Legacies and the Development of International Law
 Anghie’s Perspective on Sovereignty: Antony Anghie argues that the concept of
sovereignty, central to international law, was shaped by European powers through the
Treaty of Westphalia. This European concept of sovereignty categorized non-
European states as "non-sovereign," which justified colonial interventions.
 The Dynamic of Difference: This concept describes how international law has
historically acted as a tool to bestow "sovereignty" on non-European states
selectively, reinforcing Western hegemony under the guise of a "civilizing mission."
 Chimni’s View on Colonial Influence: B.S. Chimni points out that international law
is deeply rooted in colonial practices that perpetuate inequality and undermine efforts
to create a truly universal legal system.
3. Cultural Relativism vs. Universalism in Human Rights
 The Universality Argument: According to Yash Ghai, the universality of HR rests
on a supposed universal human nature. This nature, however, is often defined through
Western ideas of individualism, which conflict with many Global South cultures that
value community and collective identity.
 Critiques of "White Man’s Burden" in IHRL: The cultural relativist critique of
International Human Rights Law (IHRL) contends that it serves as a form of
ideological imposition—akin to the "White Man’s Burden"—wherein Western
nations dictate HR norms to other cultures, often disregarding indigenous values and
traditions.
4. Chimni’s Framework for a Decolonized International Law
 Decolonization as a Necessary Process: Chimni advocates for decolonizing
international law by acknowledging its colonial roots and fostering inclusivity for the
perspectives of the Global South.
 Self-Determination as a Core Principle: Self-determination goes beyond political
independence, embodying the right of Global South states to control their resources,
which supports fair development. This principle underpins the need for legal
structures that empower rather than subjugate these nations.
  Towards a New Paradigm: Chimni calls for a "Third World Approaches to
International Law" (TWAIL) that centers Global South experiences and promotes
justice, equality, and solidarity. This alternative paradigm prioritizes dignity and
equity for all nations.
5. Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources
 The Right to Resource Control: As discussed by Yogesh Tyagi, the principle of
"permanent sovereignty over natural resources" is essential for Global South
countries, granting them autonomy over their resources as a matter of self-
determination.
 Challenges of Free Trade and Investment Law: Despite its recognition in
documents like the UN Charter, this principle often conflicts with global trade and
investment laws that favor powerful economies, highlighting the persistent economic
inequities faced by developing countries.
6. Neocolonialism and Recolonization through International Structures
 Neocolonialism as Ideology vs. Recolonization as Process: Neocolonialism is an
ideological framework that sees Global South countries remain dependent and
subordinated within the global economy, while recolonization refers to ongoing
extractive practices enabled by international laws and institutions.
 The Role of Bretton Woods Institutions: Chimni argues that the International
Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and other Bretton Woods institutions serve as
"dominant articulations" of international law that sustain the economic subjugation of
Global South states, entrenching power imbalances.
 The Impact of Extractive Systems: Through mechanisms like structural adjustment
programs, these institutions often impose policies that strip Global South countries of
resource control, undermining economic sovereignty and perpetuating poverty.
7. Reframing Universality in International Law
 Al Attar’s Contextual Approach to Universality: Mohsen Al Attar suggests a
reimagining of "universality" to include diverse cultural, political, and historical
contexts. This approach acknowledges non-Western interpretations of justice and
human rights.
 Flexible and Inclusive Legal Frameworks: Al Attar proposes that international law
should be adaptable, inclusive, and considerate of cultural differences to promote
legitimacy and effective cooperation globally.
The Global South and International Human Rights: A Critical Perspective
1. Exclusion of the Global South from Human Rights Discussions
 Historical Exclusion and Underrepresentation: International human rights (HR)
discussions have often excluded perspectives from the Global South, reinforcing a
hierarchy that privileges Western norms and ideas.
  Violations and Elite Interests: Some HR violations in the Global South are framed
within "cultural assumptions" that implicitly protect elite interests, both domestically
and globally, and prevent genuine reform.
2. Colonial Legacies and the Development of International Law
 Anghie’s Perspective on Sovereignty: Antony Anghie argues that the concept of
sovereignty, central to international law, was shaped by European powers through the
Treaty of Westphalia. This European concept of sovereignty categorized non-
European states as "non-sovereign," which justified colonial interventions.
 The Dynamic of Difference: This concept describes how international law has
historically acted as a tool to bestow "sovereignty" on non-European states
selectively, reinforcing Western hegemony under the guise of a "civilizing mission."
 Chimni’s View on Colonial Influence: B.S. Chimni points out that international law
is deeply rooted in colonial practices that perpetuate inequality and undermine efforts
to create a truly universal legal system.
3. Cultural Relativism vs. Universalism in Human Rights
 The Universality Argument: According to Yash Ghai, the universality of HR rests
on a supposed universal human nature. This nature, however, is often defined through
Western ideas of individualism, which conflict with many Global South cultures that
value community and collective identity.
 Critiques of "White Man’s Burden" in IHRL: The cultural relativist critique of
International Human Rights Law (IHRL) contends that it serves as a form of
ideological imposition—akin to the "White Man’s Burden"—wherein Western
nations dictate HR norms to other cultures, often disregarding indigenous values and
traditions.
4. Chimni’s Framework for a Decolonized International Law
 Decolonization as a Necessary Process: Chimni advocates for decolonizing
international law by acknowledging its colonial roots and fostering inclusivity for the
perspectives of the Global South.
 Self-Determination as a Core Principle: Self-determination goes beyond political
independence, embodying the right of Global South states to control their resources,
which supports fair development. This principle underpins the need for legal
structures that empower rather than subjugate these nations.
 Towards a New Paradigm: Chimni calls for a "Third World Approaches to
International Law" (TWAIL) that centers Global South experiences and promotes
justice, equality, and solidarity. This alternative paradigm prioritizes dignity and
equity for all nations.
5. Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources
 The Right to Resource Control: As discussed by Yogesh Tyagi, the principle of
"permanent sovereignty over natural resources" is essential for Global South
 countries, granting them autonomy over their resources as a matter of self-
determination.
 Challenges of Free Trade and Investment Law: Despite its recognition in
documents like the UN Charter, this principle often conflicts with global trade and
investment laws that favor powerful economies, highlighting the persistent economic
inequities faced by developing countries.
6. Neocolonialism and Recolonization through International Structures
 Neocolonialism as Ideology vs. Recolonization as Process: Neocolonialism is an
ideological framework that sees Global South countries remain dependent and
subordinated within the global economy, while recolonization refers to ongoing
extractive practices enabled by international laws and institutions.
 The Role of Bretton Woods Institutions: Chimni argues that the International
Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and other Bretton Woods institutions serve as
"dominant articulations" of international law that sustain the economic subjugation of
Global South states, entrenching power imbalances.
 The Impact of Extractive Systems: Through mechanisms like structural adjustment
programs, these institutions often impose policies that strip Global South countries of
resource control, undermining economic sovereignty and perpetuating poverty.
7. Reframing Universality in International Law
 Al Attar’s Contextual Approach to Universality: Mohsen Al Attar suggests a
reimagining of "universality" to include diverse cultural, political, and historical
contexts. This approach acknowledges non-Western interpretations of justice and
human rights.
 Flexible and Inclusive Legal Frameworks: Al Attar proposes that international law
should be adaptable, inclusive, and considerate of cultural differences to promote
legitimacy and effective cooperation globally.

Week 1-3:
To say that human rights are socially constructed is to say that ideas and practices in respect
of human rights are created, re-created, and instanciated by human actors in particular socio-
historical settings and conditions. It is a way of understanding human rights which does not
require them to have any metaphysical existence (for example, through nature or God), nor
does it rely on abstract reasoning or logic to ground them. The emphasis on the potential
creativity of human actors in this understanding of social constructionism also stands in
contrast to forms of structuralist explanation that reduce the role of social actors to nothing
other than bearers of structural determination
how power is conceptualized also bears heavily on how human rights have been understood.
Within the western liberal tradition, the concept of power has often been used in a very
limited way: as the capacities of social actors located in the political sphere (the state,
government, political parties, etc.).
Indian constitution reflects UDHR, ICHR etc.
Indian govt. sought to maintain primacy of constitution vis-a-vis IHR obligations
renewed attention to the dynamics of customary international law is relevant for a number
of reasons:
first, not all states are parties to the relevant international treaties.
Second, reservations to treaties may preclude international jurisdiction under treaty law.
Third, customary international law is relevant to limit treaty derogations in situations of
armed conflict, states of emergency, and other internal disturbances.
Fourth, some human rights treaties may contain specific clauses which entitle the control
body to have regard to customary inter- national law.
Fifth, customary international law may take effect as the law of the land
Rules of customary law emerge when two essential criteria are met: first there must be some
unambiguous and consistent practice by a state in a particular field (state practice), and
second, the state must have followed that practice out of a sense of legal obligation (opinio
juris)
 In the field of human rights law, customary rules have evolved primarily from those
norms that are considered to be universal in character and that are proclaimed in
various international instruments. For example, several of the principles proclaimed in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have acquired the status of customary
international law, and are therefore legally binding.
Jus Cogen norms: Those peremptory norms that are clearly accepted and recognized include
the prohibitions of aggression, genocide, slavery, racial discrimination, crimes against
humanity and torture, and the right to self-determination’.10 Other examples included in
Commentary are ‘the slave trade...and apartheid...the prohibition against torture

Possess higher normative character

To fall within this Chapter of the ILC’s Articles (special obligations) the violations of the
peremptory norms have to involve ‘a gross or systematic failure by the responsible State to
fulfil the obligation’ (Article 40(2)).
Counter-measures may not affect jus cogens obligations (Article 50(1)(d)). In the words of
the Commentary, ‘for example, a genocide cannot justify a counter-genocide
Treaties: Any party to a human rights treaty can complain about a violation by another party.
The complaining party would not have to show that it was a direct victim or that it had an
interest in the alleged violation. In some cases, such as the Conventions on the Elimination of
All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), as well as the International Convention on the
Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, the treaty
includes a provision for the eventual settlement of unresolved disputes by the International
Court of Justice.30 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment (CAT) provide for an optional procedure of state complaints to the relevant
Committee, which can result in an ad hoc Conciliation Commission.

Some treaties at the regional level currently provide for inter-state cases to be determined
before the relevant regional body or court.34 For present purposes we simply highlight the
point that human rights treaties create multilateral regimes in which any member can insist on
compliance by any other member, even in the absence of actual damage to the complaining
treaty party.
Second, the human rights treaties also create rights for individuals and groups.

Third, human rights treaties may create reporting obligations for the states parties.
Fourth, treaty rights may give rise to rights which are effective at the national level. Of
course, in many situations states will pass implementing legislation in order to give the rights
effect in the domestic legal order. But it has also been suggested that it is possible that human
rights treaties create rights that are clear and precise enough for individuals to rely on at the
national level
Fifth, a treaty can oblige or permit states to exercise criminal jurisdiction over international
crimes such as torture or disappearances.

Erga Omnes Obligations:

The International Court of Justice asserted in the Barcelona Traction case that certain basic
human rights give rise to international obligations owed by states to all other states which the
Court characterized as erga omnes obligations

Week 4-5: universalism - cultural relativism -

problems with cultural relativism- how to
attain culturalism via universalism - Chimni
suggestions + claims

Universalism: Arguments against it

There is an assumption that international human rights law constitutes a neutral, non-
evaluative framework for securing some degree of morality, or at least decency in the
international sphere. If not neutral, it is at least supposed that human rights can operate
through a minimal consensus.
new legal order—whether illustrated by the agreements of the WTO or the actions of
international financial institutions—has forcefully acted as a channel for the dispersal of
neoliberal diktat.

In this way, neoliberalism, transnational law, or, in effect, aspirations to universal objectivity
were used to justify an indirect grab of the tools of emancipation of Third World states,
resulting in the hollowing out of their recently acquired sovereignty and precipitating
what Chimni describes as the “recolonisation” of the Third World

A century later, this time in Iraq, we see yet again the imposition of a self-serving economic
and regulatory model by a Euro-American alliance,

Ultimately, the same ethno-chauvinism evident in Simma’s casual dismissal of competing

perceptions of international law gave rise to the formula upon which today’s transnational
law has been fashioned: development = Western legal consciousness + neoliberalism =
freedom.

[t]he most effective aspect of hegemony is found in the suppression of alternative views
through the establishment of parameters which define what is legitimate, reasonable,
sane, practical, good, true, and beautiful.”

With pluralism, efforts are made to minimize hierarchical relations between differing legal
and social orders; the contention is that the accommodation of distinct cultural norms requires
a shift in our perception from international legal equality to international legal equivalence,
from objective norms to subjective priorities.

the idea of human rights is essentially Western, and not universal. It has developed in the
West and was imposed by the West on the rest of the world, first in 1948, and later by the
United
Nations system and other means of global domination, not excluding force. In a less drastic
formulation, a claim is made that the West uses force to impose human rights.

The paradox of the corpus is that it seeks to foster diversity and difference but does so only
under the rubric of Western political democracy.
Every culture will have its distinctive ways of formulating and supporting human rights.
Every society can learn from other societies more effective ways to implement human rights.
While honoring the diversity of cultures, we can also build toward common principles that all
can support. As agreement is reached on the substance, we may begin to trust international
law to provide a salutary and acceptable safeguard to ensure that all people can count on a
minimum standard of human rights.4

The failure of most universalists-particularly the most conventional thinkers and activists
among them-to positively engage in this debate unnecessarily antagonizes Third World
cultural pluralists and lends credence to charges of cultural imperialism.
The forceful rejection of dialogue also leads to the inevitable conclusion that there is a
hierarchy of cultures, an assumption that is not only detrimental to the human rights project
but is also inconsistent with the human rights corpus' commitment to equality, diversity, and
difference.
The fundamental texts of international human rights law are derived from bodies of domestic
jurisprudence developed over several centuries in Western Europe and the United States. The
dominant influence of Western liberal thought and philosophies are unmistakable.
In this paper we have argued that human rights arose to ameliorate the worst excesses of
Modernity, but are embedded within its dominant discourses, which are most fully expressed
in its reified legalistic language.
Universalism via Cultural Relativism
Perhaps what we have now is not universal human rights but one can certainly work
successfully to develop it. (Mutua)
The relentless effort to universalize-through Western intellectual crusades-what is essentially
a European corpus of human rights cannot succeed. Nor will it advance the cause to
demonize those who resist the corpus. The multifaceted critique of the corpus from Mricans,
Asians, Moslems, Hindus, and a host of critical thinkers from around the world are in fact
valuable resources which, if used right, can be the way for human rights to be redeemed and
truly universalized. "Multiculturalization'' of the human rights corpus could be attempted in a
number of areas: balancing between individual and group rights, giving more substance
to social and economic rights, relating rights to duties, and addressing the relationship
between the corpus and the particularities of various economic systems.
Universalism is irrefutable but it may have differing sources, meanings, implications, and
consequences.
Human rights universalism is not the 180 degree opposite of particular- ism or localism.
W e should resist the temptation (or assumed obligation) to take sides. The task is to seek the
best combination of components even if they originate in competing theorems. (Krygier)
Human rights universalism is of the kind that allows for taking contextual matters into
account. For Brems and Sadurski universality is contextual, at the same time they deny that
particularism is relevant to the status of human rights universalism. Sadurski in particular
finds the particularist claim unacceptable.
The key to such a position is dialogue, where different understandings of what it means
to be human can be validated and where individuals and groups are able to share and
accept these differences. From these constructions of ‘humanity’, different expressions
of human rights and human responsibilities can be derived, again embracing both
difference and commonality. This includes collective as well as individual
understandings of ‘humanity’, a problematising of the separation between the human
and the non-human (thereby potentially incorporating animal rights, environmental
rights, and Indigenous people’s connections to the land), a re-evaluation of the
connection between rights and responsibilities, and the incorporation of the spiritual
and the cultural, as well as the more conventional ‘rights’ as found in the UN
conventions.
The global human rights regime relies on national implementation of internationally
recognized human rights. Norm creation has been internationalized. Enforcement of
authoritative international human rights norms, however, is left almost entirely to sovereign
states.
Problems with Cultural Relativism
l and overlap ping consensus universality more voluntary or coerced? The influence of the
United States and Western Europe should not be underestimated. Example, however, has
been more powerful than advocacy and coercion has typically played less of a role than
positive inducements such as closer political or economic relations or full participation in
international society. Human rights dominate political discussions less because of pressure
from materially or culturally dominant powers than because they respond to some of the most
important social and political aspirations of individuals, families, and groups in most
countries of the world.
States may be particularly vulnerable to external pressure and thus tempted or even
compelled to offer purely formal endorsements of international norms advocated by leading
powers.

Consider claims that "Asian values" are incompatible with internationally recognized human
rights. Asian values like Western values, African values, and most other sets of values can be,
and have been, understood as incompatible with human rights. But they also can be and have
been interpreted to support human rights, as they regularly are today in Japan, Taiwan, and
South Korea.

First, it risks reducing "right" to "traditional," "good" to "old," and "obligatory" to "habitual."
Few societies or individuals, however, believe that their values are binding simply or even
primarily because they happen to be widely endorsed within their culture. Without very
powerful philosophical arguments (which are not to be found in this cultural relativist
literature on human rights) it would seem inappropriate to adopt a theory that is inconsistent
with the moral experience of almost all people especially in the name of cultural sensitivity
and diversity.
Second, the equation of indigenous cultural origins with moral validity is deeply
problematic.
Third, intolerant, even genocidal, relativism is as defensible as tolerant
relativism
Fourth, cultural relativist arguments usually either ignore politics or confuse it with culture.
The often deeply coercive aspect to culture is simply
ignored.
Fifth, these arguments typically ignore the impact of states, markets, colonialism, the spread
of human rights ideas, and various other social forces. conomic policy options that the
developed world has exercised or is exercising. Take the principle of free trade.
The first principle with respect to claims for recognition is that international law must
safeguard, to use the expression of Habermas, "the other of otherness. A second
principle is that we must take all human suffering equally seriously. For instance, the
egregious violation of international humanitarian laws that the world is witnessing today is in
great part due to misrecognition. The sufferings of Others is somehow less suffering.

Where claims for redistribution are concerned, the first principle I would propose is
that third world peoples must not be denied
A second principle of redistributive justice would call for establishing the practice of social
audit of international economic laws, in particular to assess their impact on the global poor.
To put it differently, the primacy of international human rights law over economic laws, in
particular those which internationalize property. The third principle I would propose is that
humanitarian assistance should be provided to all those in need without discrimination and
not be used to advance non-humanitarian ends.
Claims of representation
There is also, it deserves emphasis, an intimate relationship between the three claims for
recognition, redistribution, and
representation, explaining why I go beyond simply articulating the claims for redistribution
where principles of global justice are
concerned. For instance, the claims for global distributive justice will be difficult to realize
unless the claims for recognition and
representation are addressed. Misrecognition, for example, may eliminate the possibility of
realizing claims for redistribution, and
representation. Thus, in his seminal work Imperialism, Sovereignty and International
Law, Antony Anghie demonstrates how
international law continuously reproduces the structure of the "civilizing mission" that
informed the colonial project." Anghie's
work raises the crucial issue as to whether it is possible at all in the circumstances to create an
international law that is not imperial?45 Misrecognition in other words appears to greatly
reduce the possibility of creating a global law of welfare.

 Increasing Transparency and Accountability of International Institutions

 Increasing Accountability of Transnational Corporations
 Conceptualizing Permanent Sovereignty as Right of Peoples and not States
 Making Effective Use of Language of Rights
 Injecting Peoples Interests in Non Territorialised Legal Orders
 Protect Monetary Sovereignty Through International Law
 Ensuring Sustainable Development With Equity
 Promoting the Mobility of Human Bodies

The concept of the "minimum core"' seeks to establish a minimum legal content for the
notoriously indeterminate claims of economic and social rights. By recognizing the
"minimum essential levels" of the rights to food, health, housing, and education,2 it is a
concept trimmed, honed, and shorn of deontological excess.

It reflects a "minimalist" rights strategy, which implies that maximum gains are
made by minimizing goals.

long-standing criticism faults the minimum core for directing our attention only to the
performance of developing states,5 leaving the legal discourse of economic
and social rights beyond the reach of those facing material deprivation in the
middle or high income countries.

United Nations Committee on Economic and Social Rights ("the Committee"), the first
international body to articulate the concept, has, since 1990, variously equated the minimum
core with a presumptive legal entitlement, a non-derogable obligation, and an obligation of
strict liability

At base, these critics take two skeptical positions-that "universality" in the claims of
differentially situated people is an impossible goal, and that contextualized claims, advanced
locally, are too complex to be addressed by the discourse and institutions of rights.

Nevertheless, the Committee has

insisted that the "progressive realization" of the Covenant rights requires the taking of
"deliberate, concrete and targeted" steps. minimum core provides an understanding of the
direction that the steps should follow

Secondly, for those hoping to provide an objective standard across

different state systems of political economy, the minimum core concept purports to advance a
baseline of socioeconomic protection across varied

Thirdly, for commentators wishing to introduce a manageable legal

impetus to global redistributive debates, the minimalist connotations of the minimum core
concept signal an acceptable moderation.

In the first formulation, the minimum core reflects the aspects of the right which satisfy the
"basic needs" of the rights-holders, rather than any supplementary, elective, or more
ambitious level of interests.

This question may be answered instrumentally-for example, "basic needs" are the material
interests or resources required for basic functioning, or conversely for human
flourishing (two very different normative goals, the latter relating directly to our second
contested essence for the minimum core). Or we may answer this question categorically, 76
in the sense that "basic needs" are required for "a minimum condition for a bearable
life,' 77 or for "a decent chance at a reasonably healthy and active life

The determinations of "normal" life expectancy and mortality patterns, the adequate
caloric and nutritional food packages, and minimum room for housing space, all fail as
determinate universal content for the rights to food, health, or housing
A value-based core goes further than the "basic needs" inquiry by emphasizing not what is
strictly required for life, but rather what it means to be human. distinguish the value-based
core by its more pointed emphasis on human dignity, equality, or freedom.

The preamble of the Covenant, like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
acknowledges that the rights enunciated within them "derive from the inherent dignity of the
human person.

Nonetheless, the value of dignity creates its own challenges for substantiating the minimum
core. As recognized by commentators in both international law and constitutional law,
"dignity" can be measured subjectively or objectively

An objective notion of dignity removes these difficulties. In the past, Objective protections of
dignity for economic and social rights have tended to revert to the formulaic conceptions of
basic needs.

Nonetheless, the centrality of consensus shifts with respect to human

rights. For both treaty-based and customary human rights norms, the norm of consensus is
secondary to the higher moral goals suggested by these
conventions. For the obligations which flow from these moral goals, consent may be both
constitutive and destructive. 183 For example, while states'

Similarly, the peremptory norms of custom, which rely on a normative rather than consensus-
based hierarchy, are supposed to ameliorate the self-interest of sovereignty in international
law.' Some commentators seek to dissolve the tension between consensus and ethical
normativity by "universalizing"' 8 8 the norms themselves. Whether necessary for
sovereignty and self-government on the one hand, or for principled legality on the other, the
Consensus Approach to the minimum core is beset by several limitations.

The "lowest common denominator" implication is particularly problematic for approaching

the content of economic and social rights. The dearth of consensus is due in part to the late
secularization of the protection of material interests in human rights history compared with
other categories (or
"generations") of rights.

The shift to obligations reflects two constructive points in the economic

and social rights canon. The first is that a focus on the duties required to implement the
rights, rather than the elements of the rights themselves, enables the analysis of realistic,
institutionally informed strategies for rights protection: that is, of solutions for
"what it actually takes to enable people to be secure against the standard, predictable
threats to their rights." 221 The second is that an analysis of the duties that correlate to each
right confronts the erroneous dichotomy of "positive" and "negative" rights, making clear

The Essence Approach fails to deliver a determinate "core" to economic and social rights
because of the inevitability of disagreement in the ordering of both values and needs, and
because it is disengaged with the institutional background that impacts how legal rights are
realized and enforced. While the normative inquiry-and especially the focus on dignity- is
helpful in charting the substantive content of rights, it misfires when placed within the
minimalist and rigid "core" formulation. The Consensus Approach seeks to remove these
shortcomings, yet produces only a vague and conservatively articulated "core," which
conceals the troubling question of whose consensus counts and whose consensus (and
disagreement) is peripheral. The Obligations Approach is incompatible with a "core"
designation, due to the polycentric obligations that correlate with each economic and social
right, the relativity between their "negative" and "positive" formulations, and the danger of
capture into vocabularies of institutional jurisdiction or justiciability. how all rights--civil,
political, economic, social, and cultural-contain correlative duties of the state to both
("negatively") refrain from and ("positively" or affirmatively) perform certain acts in certain
circumstances. This analysis makes the equally significant point that the "negative"
nonintervention duties are not, a priori, more important than the "positive
Thus, "core obligations" are both negative and positive obligations and are actively addressed
to both judicial and other legal institutional settings.

For example, "core obligations" encompass both obligations of conduct, which

require a specific course of conduct (whether an act or omission), and obligations of result,
which are fulfilled by a course of conduct left to the state's discretion.

Some commentators have suggested that the minimum core concept relates
only to obligations of result because it is able to signal only the extent to which individuals
are enjoying (or will enjoy) their rights rather than assess the policies and procedures that
bring about that result.

CESCR General Comment No. 3 “Committee is of the view that a minimum core
obligation to ensure the satisfaction of, at the very least, minimum essential levels of each of
the rights is incumbent upon every State party. Thus, for example, a State party in which any
significant number of individuals is deprived of essential foodstuffs, of essential primary
health care, of basic shelter and housing, or of the most basic forms of education is, prima
facie, failing to discharge its obligations under the Covenant.”
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) differ in their obligations.
The ICCPR focuses on civil and political rights such as the right to life, freedom of
expression, and the right to a fair trial. The obligations under the ICCPR are mainly negative
obligations, meaning that States are obligated to refrain from interfering with individuals'
enjoyment of their rights.
On the other hand, the ICESCR focuses on economic, social, and cultural rights such as the
right to education, health, and adequate standard of living. The obligations under the ICESCR
are mainly positive obligations, meaning that States are obligated to take steps to ensure the
realization of these rights, such as providing access to education, healthcare, and social
security.
In summary, the ICCPR primarily requires States to refrain from interfering with individual
rights, while the ICESCR requires States to take active steps to ensure that individuals can
enjoy their economic, social, and cultural rights.

Week 8 &9

The six treaties are associated with six treaty bodies which have the task of monitoring the
implementation of treaty obligations. Five of the six treaty bodies meet primarily in Geneva,
and are serviced by the OHCHR. These are:
1. the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
2. the Human Rights Committee (HRC)
3. the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
4. the Committee Against Torture (CAT)
5. the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
One treaty body meets in New York and is serviced by the UN Division for the Advancement
of Women:
6. the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
The treaty bodies are composed of members who are elected by each group of states parties
(or through ECOSOC in the case of CESCR).
The six treaties are associated with six treaty bodies which have the task of monitoring the
implementation of treaty obligations. Five of the six treaty bodies meet primarily in Geneva,
and are serviced by the OHCHR. These are:
 1. the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
2. the Human Rights Committee (HRC)
3. the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR)
4. the Committee Against Torture (CAT)
5. the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC).
One treaty body meets in New York and is serviced by the UN Division for the Advancement
of Women:
6. the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).
The treaty bodies are composed of members who are elected by each group of states parties
(or through ECOSOC in the case of CESCR).

NO JUDGEMENTS- "VIEWS" by committee - not binding; politically and morally

weighing

Optional Protocol allows you to go to committee with the committee -- admissibility

Failure of domestic machinery- exhaust effective domestic remedies -- competent judicial,

administrative or legislative authorities

Total 10 treaty bodies - independent bodies

OHCHR provides support

Human Rights Council- 2006 (inter-governmental body)-- everybody can be elected and
regional cap based on seat allocation -- gave rise to Universal Periodic Review - each state
reviewed every 4 years

National report, compilation of stakeholder information and compilation of UN information

(collected by OHCHR) : form basis of UPR -> leads to Outcome report

Human Rights Committee (treaty body consisting of experts)

Mandate of treaty body to only assess obligations under specific treaty

Special procedures: special rapporteur

When you ratify, views are an obligation but not a judicial decision as no oral hearings or
rules of evidence -- impartiality is there though -- consistent negotiation

Committee is the interpreter of the covenant

Drawbacks of CEDAW:

 Relies fundamentally on a comparison between men and women

 Heteronormative in nature
 Treats women as a homogenous group

Vishaka : “In the absence of domestic law occupying the field, to formulate effective
measures to check the evil of sexual harassment of working women at all work places, the
contents of International Conventions and norms are significant for the purpose of
interpretation of the guarantee of gender equality, right to work with human dignity in
Articles 14, 15 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and the safeguards against sexual
harassment implicit therein. Any International Convention not inconsistent with the
fundamental rights and in harmony with its spirit must be read into these provisions to
enlarge the meaning and content thereof, to promote the object of the constitutional
guarantee”
 European Convention on Human Rights (1953)
 The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1986)
 The Inter-American Convention on Human Rights (1978)
 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (1990) (Organisation of Islamic
Cooperation)
 ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (2012) (ASEAN)
Regional courts play an important role in the development of human rights law as a whole.
Regional systems also allow for the possibility of regional values to be taken into account
when human rights norms are defined.
The existence of regional human rights systems allows for enforcement mechanisms which
can resonate better with local conditions than a global, universal system of enforcement.
A key strength of regional protection of human rights is its potential to act as a conduit in
making global human rights local.
 While India is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, it is still obliged to
observe the principle of non-refoulement as this is a part of customary international
law. It is binding on all States, irrespective of whether a State is or is not a party to the
1951 Convention or the 1967 Protocol.
 The obligation to observe the customary international-law principle of non-
refoulement is strengthened by the fact that India is a signatory to the 1984
Convention against Torture (CAT), albeit it is yet to ratify it. The CAT articulates a
wider legal basis for respecting the principle of non-refoulement.
 The Eurocentric definition of ‘refugee’ contained in the 1951 Convention is confined
to the violation of civil and political rights, and does not extend to social, economic,
and cultural rights.
 It is noted that the rights regime contained in the 1951 Convention is too burdensome
for third world countries like India to implement as it can barely meet the needs of its
own citizens.
 It is said that that once India becomes a party to the 1951 Convention it would allow,
intrusive supervision by the UNHCR of the national refugee regime.
 Chimni argues that India should not accede to the 1951 Convention at a time when
the North is violating it in both letter and spirit.
 Instead, along with the other countries of South Asia (none of which are parties to the
1951 Convention), India should argue that their accession is conditional on the
Western States rolling back the non-entrée (no entry) regime they have established
over the past two decades. The non-entrée regime is constituted by a range of legal
and administrative measures that include visa restrictions, carrier sanctions,
interdictions, third safe-country rule, restrictive interpretations of the definition of
‘refugee’, withdrawal of social welfare benefits to asylum seekers, and widespread
practices of detention.
 The dismantling of the non-entrée regime would also be in keeping with the principle
of burden-sharing, which has arguably evolved as a principle of customary
international law and requires that the responsibility of providing asylum be shared by
all States.
 At present, this is far from true, as third world countries, some of which are the
poorest ones, host the predomi- nant majority of refugees.
 Western states portray the non-entree regime as being composed of measures which
merely seek to check abuse of refugee status by individuals seeking a better life in the
affluent North. Coupled with the growing inability of impoverished Third World
states to carry the burden of refugees, the new approach led to the increasing
acceptance of involuntary repatriation and a focus on in-country protection and
internally displaced persons (IDPs
 General Comments
Provide guidance on general treaty obligations of state parties
Set out how the treaty bodies interpret the scope of application of substantive provisions
Wider thematic or cross-cutting issues i.e. role of NHRIs
 Inquiries (CAT and CEDAW Committee)
Committee may initiate inquiry upon the receipt of reliable report of violation by state party.
Report on inquiry is sent to state party with recommendations.
Complaints procedure:

 Inter-state complaints mechanism (state may complain that another state has breached
their obligations )
 Optional complaints mechanism (individuals complain about violation of convention
rights) quasi-judicial mechanism (six treaty bodies)
 Upon procedural verification, complaint is registered and transmitted to the state
party. Comments of the state party are then sent to the complainant for response.
 Interim measures of protection may be issues in cases of death penalty, extradition,
deportation.
 Treaty bodies require compliance with interim measures as inherent to treaty
obligations and failure to comply is a serious breach

Toonen v. Australia - ICCPR - Due to Tasmanian Laws Australia in breach of obligations

Benefits of regionalism:

 Enforcement (individual complaints mechanism with enforceable remedies, the three

key frameworks have courts)
 Localise global human rights
 Socio-politically sensitive

Drawbacks:

 Regional human rights law may develop in ways that openly conflict with global
human rights norms.
 2015 Human Rights Declaration of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the
Gulf (GCC Declaration) (Gulf Declaration of Human Rights)
 The Interpretation of Shariʿ̄ah (margin of appreciation accorded to the state)
  Case of Saudi Arabia (more than 60 people are currently behind bars in the kingdom
for expressing views that don’t align with the government)
 Deferment to Domestic Law
Complaints mechanism:

 Inter-state complaints mechanism (state may complain that another state has breached
their obligations )
 Optional complaints mechanism (individuals complain about violation of convention
rights) quasi-judicial mechanism (six treaty bodies)
 Upon procedural verification, complaint is registered and transmitted to the state
party. Comments of the state party are then sent to the complainant for response.
 Interim measures of protection may be issues in cases of death penalty, extradition,
deportation.
 Treaty bodies require compliance with interim measures as inherent to treaty
obligations and failure to comply is a serious breach
Universal Periodic Review - a new mechanism, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), was
created as a holistic review of a state’s human rights situation and launched in 2008. What set
this mechanism apart from the other UN mechanisms and made it so radical was, precisely,
its universal rather than selective character: all UN member states would be reviewed and all
fellow member states would be invited to do the reviewing.
 Each UN Member State is reviewed once every four years
 Done by UPR Working Group consisting of all members of the Council
 National Report
 Compilation of UN Information (OHCHR)
 Summary of Stakeholder Information (OHCHR)
 Outcome Report
 Complimentary to treaty body – cross-implementation

State Reporting
Legal, administrative, and judicial measures for giving effect to treaty provisions
Harmonize national law with international human rights law
Designated country rapporteur will prepare a ‘list of issues’ to update the state report
For CAT, a reply to list of issues becomes the state report
After examination, body adopts ‘concluding observations’ each concern is match with
specific implementable measure
States are invited to follow up on concluding observations
Unilateral review might be done for states with excessive reporting delays

 "Optional Protocols" which either provide for procedures with regard to the treaty or
address a substantive area related to the treaty.
 Optional Protocols to human rights treaties are treaties in their own right, and are
open to signature, accession or ratification by countries who are party to the main
treaty.