scholarly journals INTERNATIONAL LEGAL MECHANISM FOR ENSURING HUMAN RIGHTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 117 (4) ◽  
pp. 26-35
Author(s):  
MYKHAILOVSKYI Victor
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
International Protection ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Occupied Territories ◽  
The Government ◽  
High Level

Background. The problem of protecting human rights has existed throughoutthe existence of mankind. Modern globalization affects the effectiveness of international institutions in the field of human rights. After all, the rapid processes of development and adoption of international documents in the field of human rights require not only worldwide recognition, but also unquestioning implementation. In this regard, the study of the mechanism for exercising the powers of the UN Human Rights Council in the temporarily occupied territories of Crimea and Donbas is especially relevant. The aim of the article is to establish a mechanism for exercising the powers of the UN Human Rights Council to respect and ensure human rights in Ukraine, in particular in the temporarily occupied territories of Crimea and Donbas. Materials and methods. Both general and special legal methods of cognition were used during the research. The normative basis of the study were international treaties, international law and the work of domestic and foreign scientists. Results. International protection of human rights is one of the most important branches of public international law. The creation of the United Nations has opened a new page in the field of human rights institutions. In order to promote and ensure human rights in Ukraine, in particular in the temporarily occupied territories of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Donbas, the UN Human Rights Council implements a number of mechanisms: closely cooperateswith the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. periodic inspections. The UN Human Rights Council serves as a forum for discussing thematic issues on all human rights. Thus, within the high-level segment of the UN Human Rights Council, on February 23, 2021, for the third year in a row, the UN General Assembly debated on the agenda item «Situation in the Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine» initiated by our state. Within the framework of this event, support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine was expressed. Conclusion. Ukraine’s cooperation with the UN Human Rights Council is increasing pressure from the international community to respect the rights of indigenous peoples, national minorities, social human rights, democracy and the rule of law. During the Russian aggression on the territory of Ukraine, the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution «Cooperation with Ukraine and its assistance in the field of human rights», an agreement was concluded between the Government of Ukraine and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Ukraine. Thus, despite the recommendatory nature of the powers of the UN Human Rights Council, this international institution significantly affects the level of human rights in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, and contributes to the further development of human rights in Ukraine. Keywords: human rights, UN Commission on Human Rights, UN HumanRights Council, Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission.

Protecting minorities in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) process

1994 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan E. Helgesen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Historical Evolution ◽  
International Protection ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Individual

AbstractThis article gives an analysis of the protection of minorities in the CSCE documents. It explains the historical evolution of the set of norms pertaining to the minority question in the CSCE Process. The author shows how this kind of questions, form the beginning, played a modest role in the crusade for the protection of human rights. Emphasis was on the protection of the individual, not on the group as such. Gradually, however, more importance has been given to the protection of minorities. The author is convinced that the CSCE is an interesting option for those wanting to enhance the international protection of the rights of minorities. He puts particular emphasis on the establishment of the CSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities.

scholarly journals Attributing Wrongful Conduct of Implementing Partners to unhcr

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 42-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maja Janmyr
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Refugee Camps ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Host State ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
International Responsibility

Refugee camps are often managed by a wide set of actors other than the Host State. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (unhcr), tasked under international law to provide “international protection” to refugees and to seek “permanent solutions for the problem of refugees”, often sub-contracts the daily management of camps to non-governmental organizations (ngo). In 2013, unhcr collaborated with 733 ngos worldwide. Together with unhcr, these “implementing partners” often perform public powers normally exercised by the Host State. But when human rights violations occur following the conduct of a unhcr implementing partner, which actor(s) are responsible under international law? This article focuses on unhcr’s international responsibility for the conduct of ngo implementing partners. By exploring unhcr’s standard sub-contracting agreements through the lens of the International Law Commission’s (ilc) Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations (ario), it answers questions such as: Which human rights requirements does unhcr place on implementing partners? Under what circumstances may unhcr be held responsible under the ario for the acts of its implementing partners? It finds that an application of the ario would make unhcr internationally responsible for the wrongful conduct of implementing partners, even when sub-contracting agreements include clauses absolving unhcr from any liability.

Contributory Fault under International Law: A Gateway for Human Rights in ISDS?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farouk El-Hosseny ◽  
Patrick Devine
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Enterprises ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Government ◽  
Bear Creek ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract The intersection between foreign investment and human rights is gaining attention, as is evident from an increasing number of investment treaty awards analysing legal issues relating to human rights. In the recent International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) arbitration of Bear Creek v Peru, Philippe Sands QC posited, in a dissenting opinion, that the investor’s contribution to events—ie protests against its allegedly adverse environmental impact and disregard of indigenous rights, namely resulting from its ‘inability to obtain a “social licence”’—which led to the unlawful expropriation of its investment, was ‘significant and material’. He further noted that the investor’s ‘responsibilities are no less than those of the government’ and found that damages should thus be reduced. Last year, the Netherlands adopted a new model bilateral investment treaty (BIT), which allows tribunals to ‘take into account non-compliance by the investor with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises’ when assessing damages. These recent developments shed light on how states and tribunals, as part of their decision-making process, can take into account human rights in practice, and crucially in respect of damages analyses. By first dissecting the concept of contributory fault, then shedding light on the intersection of investment treaty law and human rights, as elucidated in recent jurisprudence, this article questions whether there now exists a gateway for human rights obligations (soft or hard) in the investment treaty arbitration realm through the concept of contributory fault.

An International Relations Perspective on the Reform Needs of the Human Rights Council

2021 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-80
Author(s):  
Wolfgang S. Heinz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Structure And Dynamics ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
Local Actors ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Subject

Abstract: This article approaches the matter of institutional reform of the United Nations Human Rights Council from an international relations perspective. A well-known tension exists between State representatives acting for their governments in international organisations, but whose decisions are presented as UN policies. The latter should be guided primarily by the UN Charter and public international law. However, in reality, different worldviews and foreign policy considerations play a more significant role. In a comprehensive stock-take, the article looks at four major dimensions of the Council, starting with structure and dynamics and major trends, followed by its country and thematic activities, and the role of key actors. Council reform proposals from both States and civil society are explored. Whilst the intergovernmental body remains the most important authority responsible for the protection of human rights in the international sphere, it has also been the subject of considerable criticism. Although it has made considerable progress towards enlarging its coverage and taking on more challenging human rights crises, among some of its major weaknesses are the election of human rights-unfriendly countries into its ranks, the failure to apply stronger sanctions on large, politically influential countries in the South and North, and lack of influence on human rights crises and chronic human rights problems in certain countries. Whilst various reform proposals have emerged from States and NGOs, other more far reaching propositions are under sometimes difficult negotiations. In the mid- to long-term, the UN human rights machinery can only have a stronger and more lasting impact if support from national/local actors and coalitions in politics and society can be strengthened.

scholarly journals ONE OF THE IMPORTANT ROLES OF INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL ACT IN THE PROCESS OF MAINTAINING INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
Barbu Denisa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Peace ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

Through the functions it performs, the judicial act has an important role in the maintenance of international peace and security, the prevention and repression of crime, as well as of the international protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Even the duties of public international law coincide with these goals.

Human Rights

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Ewing
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Municipal Law

This article begins with a brief discussion of what human rights are. It then considers the international treaties which have emerged to protect human rights in national legal systems, focusing on aspects of the scholarship which has developed alongside the cascade of these rights from international law to constitutional law to ordinary municipal law. This is a process which has been controversial as human rights and democracy are seen by some to be mutually dependent, but by others to be engaged in an abrasive struggle for superiority on the battleground of ideas.

On Behalf of the United Nations

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Falk
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Special Rapporteur ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
Occupied Palestinian Territory ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Palestinian Territory

This chapter reflects on the role as special rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC), which investigated the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The chapter first provides an overview of the role and office of special rapporteur, noting that UN concerns about Israel and responses to Palestinian grievances are highly politicized within the organization, before discussing some of the characteristics that distinguish the mandate established by the HRC and made applicable to Occupied Palestine. It also explains what was accomplished in six years as special rapporteur of the HRC and details the controversies and pressures attached to that job. It shows that the “UN” comprises different layers, agendas, and interests. The chapter claims that while the United Nations secretary-general in New York permitted personal attacks against the special rapporteur, the leadership and professionals of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva strongly supported his efforts in what the chapter calls the “legitimacy war”.

Palestine, the Third World, and the UN as Seen from a Special Commission

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori Allen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Third World ◽  
Special Committee ◽  
Emancipatory Politics ◽  
Occupied Territories ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Third World ◽  
Global War ◽  
Palestinian Territory

This chapter examines the United Nations's engagement with Palestine through its Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories (“Special Committee”) in a broader Third World context of “global war against the forces of imperialism and neo-imperialism.” It first discusses the history of Palestinian commitment to UN special commissions as a means to the just resolution of the conflict with Israel before turning to the symbolic aspects of UN politics. It then provides a background on the UN Special Committee, whose stated mission was to investigate human rights violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. In particular, it considers the key challenges faced by the committee, such as the refusal of the government of Israel to cooperate with it. The chapter suggests that UN special commissions came and went in Palestine, but little progress was made in terms of an emancipatory politics.

scholarly journals The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in the age of global backlash

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Seiderman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Effective Leadership ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
High Level

Before leaving his post in 2018, the outgoing UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein, made a series of critical remarks, both publicly and internally, regarding what he considered weakening of the integrity and effectiveness of the UN in its human rights mandate. Zeid’s comments highlighted retrogressive tendencies making the task of a strong and independent High Commissioner exceedingly difficult. The post of High Commissioner, established in 1994 following decades of advocacy, to give a high level voice to human rights promotion and protection as well as to manage a secretariat for most UN human rights functions, has enjoyed mostly robust and effective leadership by its post-holders. Any High Commissioner faces challenge inherent to the job in balancing the functions of diplomat, human rights advocate for “the voiceless”, and agency manager working with an insufficient and patently unfair budgetary allotment. The new High Commissioner, Michelle Bachelet, will have her work cut out, as she faces an apparent retreat from prioritizing human rights, particularly by some States that previously championed them; ambivalence by a wider UN bureaucracy; and a wave of authoritarian populist leaders and movements around the globes that take a hostile view to the human rights paradigm. The new High Commissioner would do well to keep her energies squarely focused on independently tackling urgent substantive and possibly existential human rights challenges, rather than any project of administrative restructuring of the OHCHR, even as she may pursue a working methodology that is distinct from the approach of her predecessors.

scholarly journals United States Withdraws from the UN Human Rights Council, Shortly After Receiving Criticism About Its Border Policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 745-751 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Undocumented Families ◽  
Border Policy ◽  
The United Nations

On June 19, 2018, the United States withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council. Announcing this decision, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley characterized the Council as “a protector of human rights abusers and a cesspool of political bias.” U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo observed that while “the United States has no opposition in principle to multilateral bodies working to protect human rights,” nonetheless “when organizations undermine our national interests and our allies, we will not be complicit.” The withdrawal occurred one day after the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights criticized the United States in a speech at the Human Rights Council for its “unconscionable” practice of forcibly separating undocumented families entering the United States. In August, U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton stated that in addition to withdrawing from the Council, the United States would also reduce its assessed contribution to the United Nations by the amount that would ordinarily flow to the Human Rights Council and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document