National Human Rights Institutions and the United Nations Human Rights Treaty Body System: A Rebuttal to the Skeptics

Author(s):  
Domenico Zipoli
2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 417-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osian Rees

AbstractThis article considers whether or not dealing with individual cases by means of an advocacy or investigatory function should be regarded as an essential function for national human rights institutions for children. Based on an analysis of international expectations, particularly the view of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, and the views and experiences of various institutions in practice, it is argued that the function is essential, due to its importance in addressing individual violations of children's rights, and its potential for bringing about systemic changes. Consideration is also given to the question of whether institutions should have quasi-judicial competence.


Author(s):  
Egan Suzanne

This chapter studies the initiatives mounted over the years by the United Nations to reform the operation of the treaty body system to respond to persistent difficulties. These have proceeded through a series of distinct initiatives which include the expert reports produced by Professor Philip Alston between 1989 and 1997; the ‘Unified Standing Treaty Body’ proposal championed by the former UNHCHR, Louise Arbour; and the so-called ‘Dublin process’ spearheaded by her successor to the post, Navanethem Pillay, which itself prompted the initiation of an inter-governmental process on treaty body reform. The chapter then traces the outcomes of the reform agenda as it has unfolded over the years, highlighting the nature of the processes adopted and culminating in a cautious prognosis for the future.


Refuge ◽  
1997 ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Brian Gorlick ◽  
Sumbul Rimi Khan

This article focuses on the relationship between international human rights standards and refugee protection. The foundational status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights treaties are surveyed in light of India's international legal obligations. The authors argue that international human rights law and practice have had a significant impact on the protection activities of the Ofice of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) both in countries of asylum, countries of origin and in relation to the United Nations and other human rights actors. In this context, courts and national human rights institutions are important players in safeguarding the rights of refugees. As none of the countries of South Asia is party to the international refugee instruments nor have any of them adopted a national refugee law or procedure, the activities of the Indian National Human Rights Commission stand out as a positive example of national institution expanding the legal protection of refugees in the region.


1996 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 479-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Sloan

In a recent article lamenting the perception of partiality created by an activist judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), one commentator observed the general lack of scrutiny to which the ICTY is being held in its treatment of the rights of the accused. He noted that it “is a court without legal critics: no complaint about its conduct may be made to the Human Rights Committee in Geneva or to the European Court [of Human Rights], and human rights lobbies have tended to look the other way.” Indeed, it is in a position that many governments, fatigued by what many of them consider to be cumbersome reporting obligations and troublesome individual complaints procedures under the United Nations treaty body system, would envy.


2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 628-688 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katerina Linos ◽  
Tom Pegram

AbstractSince 1993, the United Nations has promoted national human rights institutions (NHRIs); these have spread to almost 120 countries. We assess what makes NHRIs effective, using quantitative and qualitative methods. We find that formal institutional safeguards contribute greatly to NHRI efficacy even in authoritarian and transition regimes. Complaint-handling mandates are particularly useful because they help NHRIs build broad bases of support. Our findings show how international organizations can wield great influence with soft tools such as recommendations and peer-review mechanisms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document