The Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Work of the Committee

1992 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-23
Author(s):  
Marta Santos Pais

I would first of all like to thank you very warmly for having given me the honour to be here today, in this wonderful and historical city of Jerusalem, to talk about the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In particular, it is an honour for me to share this significant moment of the ratification and entry into force of the Convention in Israel, where its voice is joining so many other countries committed to bringing a better future to all children of the world.The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in November 1989, after ten years of a long study and consideration by a working group of the Commission on Human Rights. The Convention reflects the spirit of consensus which prevailed during the drafting process, as well as the compromise reached by different legal systems, cultures and traditions with respect to the human rights universally recognized.

2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugene Heideman

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, 10 December 1948, is the international affirmation of faith in fundamental human rights. As the most widely officially adopted creed in the world, it is of great significance for persons engaged in cross-cultural and international missions. As we have recently recognized the fiftieth anniversary year of its adoption, missiologists must continue to struggle with issues it raises, such as the relation of Christian liberty to human rights, the relation of “rights” to “duties,” and the theological basis for a doctrine of human rights.


2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 590-615
Author(s):  
Claire Fenton-Glynn

The right of the child to be heard in adoption proceedings flows directly from the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by almost every country in the world. In this paper, the interpretation of this principle across European jurisdictions will be analysed, both in terms of children who are old enough to make a determinative decision concerning their future, and those who are younger yet still possess the right to be heard. The wide variety of practices in Europe highlight the lack of progress in this field of law, which is not assisted by the conservative jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.


1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 709-715
Author(s):  
Reed Brody

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which met from January 28 to March 8, 1991, in the shadow of the gulf war, nevertheless completed what many observers considered its most productive session in recent history. The Commission took action on a record of nineteen country situations—creating new rapporteurs on Iraq and Iraqi-occupied Kuwait—began plans for a 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, and set up an intersessional working group to complete a draft declaration on disappearances. The most important long-term accomplishment of the Commission, however, was the creation of a five-member working group to investigate cases of arbitrary detention throughout the world.


2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Fenton-Glynn

The right of the child to be heard in adoption proceedings flows directly from the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by almost every country in the world. In this paper, the interpretation of this principle across European jurisdictions will be analysed, both in terms of children who are old enough to make a determinative decision concerning their future, and those who are younger yet still possess the right to be heard. The wide variety of practices in Europe highlight the lack of progress in this field of law, which is not assisted by the conservative jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.


1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 578-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tullio Treves

On December 9, 1988, the United Nations General Assembly adopted, without a vote, a “Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment.” The preparation of this text was started in 1976 within the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of the Commission on Human Rights. On the basis of a project prepared by Mr. Erik Nettel of Austria, the Sub-Commission approved a Draft Body of Principles in 1978. After being submitted to the General Assembly’s Third Committee, it was referred to a working group, which considered it in 1980 but could not complete its task. The item was then moved to the Sixth Committee, which entrusted it to an open-ended working group. This working group met during every session of the General Assembly from 1981 until 1988, and slowly progressed toward the completion of its task.


1994 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-62
Author(s):  
Susan Marks

The World Conference on Human Rights, which took place in Vienna in June 1993, was convened by the United Nations with three principal aims. The Conference was to evaluate progress made in the field of human rights in the period since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948; to consider the relationship between human rights and other priority concerns of the world community, such as development and democratisation; and to examine ways of strengthening the protection afforded human rights and improving the United Nations' human rights programme. An earlier UN conference on human rights had been held in Teheran in 1968 and the General Assembly decided that, 25 years later, reconsideration was appropriate. This decision, taken in 1989, seemed vindicated as events following the fall of the Berlin Wall opened up new opportunities, as well as new dangers.


1982 ◽  
Vol 38 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 334-343
Author(s):  
Anirudha Gupta

In South Africa's apartheid the United Nations has met with its own antithesis. For, apartheid repudiates almost universally everything that the United Nations stands for. It is not merely a “form of racial discrimination,”1 it is also a system that permanently denies, “through laws, administrative decrees and practices any…role for the 19 million Blacks (in South Africa) and confers on the 4.5 million Whites a monopoly of economic, political and social power,”2 Such a system, as stated by the International Court of Justice on the Namibian issue, “is a violation of a norm, or rule, or standard of the international community.”3 And, as the apartheid regime has over the years grown more aggressive both in its domestic and external policies, the world community has come to increasingly recognize the system to be a crime against humanity which “constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security.”4 The point is that despite its abhorrent “crimes,” South Africa continues to be a member of the. United Nations and, by logic therefore, also a member of the world community. This raises an interesting question: Should the United Nations in order to be consistent to its own Charter and declarations expel South Africa and technically resolve its anti-thesis in the system of apartheid? But would this be a real solution? Whether South Africa remains a member of the United Nations or not, the oppressed population under apartheid would still constitute apart of humanity. Hence, in order to liberate this “part” the world community must act in unison to uproot apartheid from the very face of the earth. This is enjoined as much by the Declaration on all Forms of Racial Discrimination adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1965 to the effect that: “any doctrine of differentiation or superiority is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous, and that there is no justification for racial discrimination in theory or in practice anywhere.” If this declaration has to be given a practical effect, the United Nations must deny South Africa under apartheid all attributes of an independent sovereign state. For human rights, as enshrined by the two covenants of 1948, are indivisible; hence it would depend on lawyers and jurists to provide for such rules in international law as would forfeit the right of a state to exist until it restores social, economic and political rights of its citizens in consonance with the principal ethics of the international community. To combat apartheid, we must isolate its political reality from its territorial base. In other words, the United Nations must declare that South Africa, as a territory, ceases to exist so long as apartheid has not been completely eliminated! As we shall see, this is a distinction which has not been given proper attention in the numerous debates and deliberations of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) over the means to combat apartheid.


1996 ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Editorial board Of the Journal

GENERAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS Adopted and proclaimed in resolution 217 A (III) of the General Assembly of the United Nations of 10.12.1948


2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Gilmour

Ever since the Charter of the United Nations was signed in 1945, human rights have constituted one of its three pillars, along with peace and development. As noted in a dictum coined during the World Summit of 2005: “There can be no peace without development, no development without peace, and neither without respect for human rights.” But while progress has been made in all three domains, it is with respect to human rights that the organization's performance has experienced some of its greatest shortcomings. Not coincidentally, the human rights pillar receives only a fraction of the resources enjoyed by the other two—a mere 3 percent of the general budget.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document