Interview with Luis Alfonso De Alba

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (871) ◽  
pp. 489-499

Ambassador Luis Alfonso De Alba was the first president of the United Nations Human Rights Council and held this mandate from 19 June 2006 to 18 June 2007. During that period the Council was entrusted by the General Assembly with the task of designing the new institutions of the international human rights system, while at the same time fulfilling its mandate to protect and promote human rights. Ambassador De Alba joined the Mexican foreign service in 1981 and since 2004 has been the permanent representative of Mexico at the United Nations and other international organizations in Geneva. Throughout his career he has participated in numerous multilateral meetings, both at global and regional levels. Among other posts, he was chairman of the Council of the International Organization for Migrations (IOM) at its 88th and 89th sessions (November 2004 to November 2005) and presided over the Disarmament and International Security Committee (First Committee) of the General Assembly during its 59th Session (2004).: : : : : : :

1967 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 592-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harold Karan Jacobson

Whether it is called an assembly, a conference, or something else, there is in most if not all international organizations an organ, for which the United Nations General Assembly is the prototype, in which the entire membership is represented. The importance of these bodies is generally acknowledged. Constitutionally, they usually have final authority in such matters as the appointment of the executive officer, the election of smaller organs, the adoption of the budget, and the determination of overall policy. Few studies of an international organization or of the interaction between a state or a group of states and an international organization can neglect the assembly of the organization under scrutiny.


Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith

This chapter examines the organizational structure of the United Nations, focusing on the principal entities impacting on, monitoring, and enforcing international human rights. These include the Security Council, the General Assembly, the International Court of Justice, the Economic and Social Council, the Human Rights Council, and the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The chapter explains the functions and responsibilities of these bodies, and highlights the financial and personnel constraints that negatively affect the performance of their duties. The UN treaty bodies will also be introduced.


1982 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 754-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodor Meron

One of the characteristic phenomena of contemporary international life is the proliferation of human rights instruments and systems of supervision. In addition to the Charter of the United Nations and comprehensive global conventions such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Economic Covenant) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Political Covenant), instruments have been adopted within the United Nations or the specialized agencies to govern particular aspects of human rights (e.g., racial discrimination, rights of women) and within regional organizations (e.g., the Council of Europe, the Organization of American States) to govern both general and particular aspects of human rights. In the United Nations, the general practice has been for each normative instrument to create its own system of supervision whenever such systems have been established. Typically, each organ of supervision applies only the norms adopted in the specific “founding” instrument, rather than the entire corpus juris of international human rights or even all of the instruments comprising the International Bill of Human Rights, i.e., the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Universal Declaration), the Economic Covenant, the Political Covenant, and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This proliferation of normative instruments and systems of supervision, which is similar to the proliferation that has given rise to difficult questions of coordination within and between international organizations in the fields of budget, programming, and administration, has led to overlapping jurisdiction and even to conflicts between the legislative and supervisory competence, or claims of competence, of various international bodies. The object of this article is not to compile or map out all the possible conflict areas or to undertake a detailed analysis of the conflicts, whether real or imaginary. Its more modest purpose is to present a broad panorama of the problems, directions, and policy. These matters merit attention, even though political and institutional reasons may make major reforms impossible for the time being. The questions to be discussed are relevant to three major fields of international law: treaties, human rights, and international organizations. While substantive problems of “legislation” or norm making are closely related to problems of supervision or implementation, normative problems will be focused upon first, and problems of supervision second.


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


2021 ◽  
pp. 002085232199756
Author(s):  
Julia Gray ◽  
Alex Baturo

When political principals send agents to international organizations, those agents are often assumed to speak in a single voice. Yet, various types of country representatives appear on the international stage, including permanent representatives as well as more overtly “political” government officials. We argue that permanent delegates at the United Nations face career incentives that align them with the bureaucracy, setting them apart from political delegates. To that end, they tend to speak more homogeneously than do other types of speakers, while also using relatively more technical, diplomatic rhetoric. In addition, career incentives will make them more reluctant to criticize the United Nations. In other words, permanent representatives speak more like bureaucratic agents than like political principals. We apply text analytics to study differences across agents’ rhetoric at the United Nations General Assembly. We demonstrate marked distinctions between the speech of different types of agents, contradictory to conventional assumptions, with implications for our understandings of the interplay between public administration and agency at international organizations. Points for practitioners Delegations to international organizations do not “speak with one voice.” This article illustrates that permanent representatives to the United Nations display more characteristics of bureaucratic culture than do other delegates from the same country. For practitioners, it is important to realize that the manner in which certain classes of international actors “conduct business” can differ markedly. These differences in tone—even among delegates from the same principal—can impact the process of negotiation and debate.


Author(s):  
Paul A. Rodgers

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is widely acknowledged as a landmark document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives from all over the world, the declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard for all peoples and all nations. The declaration sets out a series of articles that articulate a number of fundamental human rights to be universally protected. Article 23 of the declaration relates to the right to work and states that people have a human right to work, or engage in productive employment, and may not be prevented from doing so. The right to work is enshrined in international human rights law through its inclusion in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, where the right to work emphasizes economic, social and cultural development. This paper presents ongoing research that highlights how a disruptive co-design approach contributes to upholding UN Article 23 through the creation of a series of innovative working practices developed with people living with dementia. The research, undertaken in collaboration with several voluntary and third sector organizations in the UK, looks to break the cycle of prevailing opinions, traditional mindsets, and ways-of-doing that tend to remain uncontested in the health and social care of people living with dementia. As a result, this research has produced a series of innovative work opportunities for people living with dementia and their formal and informal carers that change the perception of dementia by showing that people living with dementia are capable of designing and making desirable products and offering much to UK society after diagnosis. In this ongoing research, the right to continue to work for people living with dementia post-diagnosis in creative and innovative ways has clearly helped to reconnect them to other people, helped build their self-esteem, identity and dignity and helped keep the person with dementia connected to their community, thus delaying the need for crisis interventions. This paper reports on a series of future work initiatives for people living with dementia where we have used design as a disruptive force for good to ensure that anyone diagnosed with dementia can exercise their right to work and engage in productive and rewarding employment.


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.


1966 ◽  
Vol 6 (63) ◽  
pp. 287-296
Author(s):  
Albert Verdoodt

On the 10th December 1948, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which had been drawn up by a series of meetings of the Commission of Human Rights and the Commission on the Condition of Women as well as major discussions which took place during the first seven sessions of the Economic and Social Council. The General Assembly presented this Declaration “as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education … and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance …”


2021 ◽  
pp. 419-434
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Haynes

This chapter is concerned with religion at the United Nations (UN), and in particular how it relates to the activities of the UN at its Geneva office. In recent years, the UN has experienced growing concern about religion, including a higher profile in the General Assembly, the Security Council, and several of the UN’s specialized agencies, among them the Human Rights Office, the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, the Population Fund (UNFPA), and the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations. For many, this was unexpected given that it followed decades of religion’s apparent marginalization at the UN. The increased presence of religious actors at the UN reflects a wider phenomenon: the deepening problems of global governance and increased calls for the UN to be ‘democratized’ by drawing on an array of, mainly non-state voices, both secular and religious, to supplement those of states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document