Architects of Their own Making: National Human Rights Institutions and the United Nations

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 1109-1134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katerina Linos ◽  
Tom Pegram
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.


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.


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.


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


2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 298-318
Author(s):  
Roman Girma Teshome

The effectiveness of human rights adjudicative procedures partly, if not most importantly, hinges upon the adequacy of the remedies they grant and the implementation of those remedies. This assertion also holds water with regard to the international and regional monitoring bodies established to receive individual complaints related to economic, social and cultural rights (hereinafter ‘ESC rights’ or ‘socio-economic rights’). Remedies can serve two major functions: they are meant, first, to rectify the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage sustained by the particular victim, and second, to resolve systematic problems existing in the state machinery in order to ensure the non-repetition of the act. Hence, the role of remedies is not confined to correcting the past but also shaping the future by providing reforming measures a state has to undertake. The adequacy of remedies awarded by international and regional human rights bodies is also assessed based on these two benchmarks. The present article examines these issues in relation to individual complaint procedures that deal with the violation of ESC rights, with particular reference to the case laws of the three jurisdictions selected for this work, i.e. the United Nations, Inter-American and African Human Rights Systems.


Asian Survey ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 217-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Peek

Author(s):  
Emilie M. Hafner-Burton

In the last six decades, one of the most striking developments in international law is the emergence of a massive body of legal norms and procedures aimed at protecting human rights. In many countries, though, there is little relationship between international law and the actual protection of human rights on the ground. This book takes a fresh look at why it's been so hard for international law to have much impact in parts of the world where human rights are most at risk. The book argues that more progress is possible if human rights promoters work strategically with the group of states that have dedicated resources to human rights protection. These human rights “stewards” can focus their resources on places where the tangible benefits to human rights are greatest. Success will require setting priorities as well as engaging local stakeholders such as nongovernmental organizations and national human rights institutions. To date, promoters of international human rights law have relied too heavily on setting universal goals and procedures and not enough on assessing what actually works and setting priorities. This book illustrates how, with a different strategy, human rights stewards can make international law more effective and also safeguard human rights for more of the world population.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document