The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Ayse Cebecioglu Haldız

An Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 2008 and it came into force on 5 May 2013. The protocol gives individuals the right to raise complaints about violations of their rights which are enshrined by the covenant. Although, an optional protocol regulating the complaint procedure for its sister treaty, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, was entered into force in 1976, it was postponed for ICESCR until 2013 because of the historic debate discussing whether these rights are justiciable or not. This division between the treaties left the protection of the ESCR in the background. This essay will analyse the extent to which the protocol resolved the historical concerns about the protection of economic, social and cultural rights under international human rights law.

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-269
Author(s):  
Sarah Joseph

Abstract States have duties under Article 12(2)(c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to prevent, control and treat covid-19. Implementation of these three obligations is analysed, taking account of countervailing human rights considerations. Regarding prevention, lockdowns designed to stop the spread of the virus are examined. Control measures are then discussed, namely transparency measures, quarantine, testing and tracing. The human rights compatibility of treatment measures, namely the provision of adequate medical and hospital care (or the failure to do so), are then examined. Finally, derogations from human rights treaties in times of pubic emergency are discussed.


Author(s):  
Bielefeldt Heiner, Prof ◽  
Ghanea Nazila, Dr ◽  
Wiener Michael, Dr

This chapter emphasizes that the outer manifestations of freedom of religion or belief (forum externum) are not in any sense less important than the inner nucleus of a person’s religious or belief-related conviction (forum internum), even though only the latter is protected unconditionally under international human rights law. This chapter also discusses the largely overlapping elements of the right to manifest one’s religion or belief ‘in worship, observance, practice and teaching’. Furthermore, it analyses the implications of the religion-related reservations, declarations, and objections made by a number of States when signing, ratifying, or acceding to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 451
Author(s):  
Irawati Handayani

<p>Economic, social, and cultural rights are categorized as second generation of rights in the concept of international human rights law. Due to its distinction with first generation right, which is civil and political right, it leads to the differentiation of justiciability of second generation rights. It’s quite often that the fulfillment of economic, social, and cultural rights is postponed, while on the contrary civil and political rights have to be accomplished immediately. The query of justiciability of economic, social, and cultural rights rottenly links with the responsibility of state parties on implementing the rights enumerated in ICCPR or ICESCR. Referring to Article 2 of ICESCR, the implementation of rights stated in ICESCR could be in progressive manner and usually this article is used as an example to not fulfill the right immediately. This article will elaborate further the implementation of protection of economic, social, and cultural rights in another country particularly in South Africa and compare it with Indonesia in order to achieve an ideal form of justiciability of this second generation of rights.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 521-556
Author(s):  
Michael Hamilton

AbstractInformed by the ‘assembly’ jurisprudence of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, this article addresses fundamental questions about the meaning and scope of ‘assembly’ in Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In seeking to determine when the right of peaceful assembly might properly be engaged, the article explores the interrelationship of assembly with expression and association and proposes a definition of ‘assembly’—for the purposes of its protection—as ‘an intentional gathering by two or more people (including in private and online/virtual spaces)’. Such definitional reflection is particularly timely in light of the Human Rights Committee's drafting of General Comment No 37 on Article 21.


Author(s):  
Julie Ringelheim

This chapter examines the sources of cultural rights in international human rights law, describes their evolution, and highlights the major debates regarding their interpretation. Specifically, it discusses the content and meaning of the right to take part in cultural life, the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications, and the rights of authors and inventors to the protection of their moral and material interests.


1968 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 889-908 ◽  
Author(s):  
José A. Cabranes

On December 16, 1966, the General Assembly approved three agreements designed to establish a global system of enforceable treaty obligations with respect to fundamental human rights. These agreements are the second part of the “international bill of rights” proposed at the San Francisco Conference. Eighteen years separated the adoption of these agreements—the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights—and the approval in 1948 of the first part of the projected United Nations program for the protection of human rights, the non-binding Universal declaration of Human Rights.


2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 859-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lappin

AbstractThe right to vote is the most important political right in international human rights law. Framed within the broader right of political participation, it is the only right in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights not guaranteed as a universal human right but rather as a citizen's right. While limitations on the right to vote are permissible in respect of citizenship and age, residency-based restrictions are not explicitly provided. However, recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights endorse a view that voting rights may be conditioned on residency on the grounds of an individual's bond to their country-of-origin and the extent to which laws passed by that government would affect them. This article questions this proposition and explores whether disenfranchisement based solely on residency constitutes an unreasonable and discriminatory restriction to the essence of the right.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane F Frey

<p>The existence of a right to strike under international law has been challenged by the International Organization of Employers since the late 1980s. The employer group claims that no such right exists under international law and has been moving to undermine recognition of the right at the International Labour Organisation (ILO). This article examines the right to strike in international human rights law. It considers specifically the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and finds that the right to strike exists in both of these treaties. Further, the article demonstrates that while the ILO employers group may challenge the existence of the right to strike, its government members have overwhelmingly ratified international human rights treaties contradicting the employer group's position that there is no such right.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document