The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties from 1969 is basically a big rule book that tells

countries how to make and follow agreements (treaties) with each other. When countries
sign this Convention, they are agreeing to its rules, just like they would for any other treaty.

What’s interesting here is that this rule book itself is a treaty. So, it's a bit like a game where
the instructions are also a part of the game itself.

Here's an easy way to think about it:

Treaties Are Like Promises : When countries sign a treaty, they are making promises to each
other. They have to do what they agreed to in the treaty.

The Vienna Convention Is the Guide : This Convention is like a guidebook on how to make those
promises correctly and what to do if there's a disagreement.

Binding Only If You Join: Just like you have to agree to play a game by its rules, a country has to
agree to a treaty for it to follow the rules. If a country didn’t sign up, technically, it doesn't have
to play by those rules.

Customary Law: But sometimes, even if a country hasn’t signed up, if enough countries are
following a treaty's rules and they do it for a long time, it becomes like a habit or custom. Then,
it's expected that even countries that didn't sign up will follow along because it’s become a
general practice.

So, in essence, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties organizes how treaties work and
shows how these treaties interact with the broader rules that countries follow, some of which
are based on customs that everyone generally accepts.

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948 ): This was
created after World War II to prevent future genocides. It defines genocide and makes it a
crime that nations must prevent and punish.

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965 ): This focuses on
ending discrimination based on race. Countries that sign this promise to eliminate laws and
practices that discriminate against people because of their race.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966): This treaty guarantees basic civil
and political rights such as the freedom of speech, religion, and the right to a fair trial.
Principle human rights treaties

International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1966): This complements
the above by focusing on economic, social, and cultural rights like the right to work, education,
and an adequate standard of living.

Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979 ):

Often referred to as CEDAW, this is like a bill of rights for women, aiming to eliminate all forms
of discrimination against women worldwide.

Convention against Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

(1984): This treaty is aimed at preventing torture and other inhuman types of punishment.
Countries that join this treaty must take measures to prevent torture within their borders .

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989): This treaty sets out the rights of children,
defined as persons under the age of 18. It includes the right to education, health, and
protection from abuse and exploitation.

UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006): This is a relatively recent
treaty that aims to protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities.

Foundational Statute of the International Criminal Court : This established the International
Criminal Court (ICC), which can try individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against
humanity, and aggression.

Hague and Geneva Conventions: These are a series of treaties that lay down the laws of war
and humanitarian aspects, protecting those who do not take part in fighting (like civilians and
medical personnel) and those who are no longer able to (like wounded soldiers and prisoners ).

African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights : Also known as the Banjul ( gambia ) Charter,
it sets out human and peoples' rights and establishes mechanisms for their protection in Africa.

European Convention on Human Rights: This has been a fundamental treaty in Europe, protecting
the human rights of individuals in countries that are members of the Council of Europe.

American Convention on Human Rights: Similar to the European one, this treaty applies to
the Americas and sets out a range of fundamental rights and freedoms that states must
respect.
 A treaty, according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) of 1969, is a
formal, written agreement between states that is governed by international law. Here's a
simplified explanation of what that means:

Written Form: A treaty must be documented in writing. While there can be agreements
between states that are not written down, these would not fall under the purview of the VCLT.

Between States: Treaties are typically agreements between sovereign states. They can also be
between international organizations and states, or between international organizations
themselves.

Governed by International Law: The agreement must be recognized as legally binding under
international law, rather than just being a memorandum of understanding or a gentleman’s
agreement.

Treaties can be:

Bipartite/Bilateral: This is an agreement between two parties, typically two states, like a peace
treaty or a trade agreement.

Multipartite/Multilateral: These involve multiple parties and can encompass broad areas of
governance, like environmental protection or human rights. An example would be the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Once a state has consented to be bound by a treaty, it becomes a "Contracting Party" to that
treaty. If a state has not consented, it is referred to as a "non-Contracting Party" and is not
legally bound by the treaty's provisions.

Understanding the Relationship Between Treaties and Customary

International Law

Overlapping Sources of Obligations

Treaties as Written Agreements: Treaties are formal, written agreements that states enter into
voluntarily. For example, if the U.S. signs a treaty with Canada to protect the Great Lakes, both
countries are legally bound to follow it.
Customary Law as Practice: Customary international law is derived from the consistent and
general practice of states followed by them out of a sense of legal obligation. For instance, the
principle of not harming the environment of other states has become a customary law due to
widespread acceptance.

Evolution of Law
Treaties Clarifying Custom: When treaties are drafted, they often clarify what was previously
customary law. If countries start to create treaties about cyber warfare, this may clarify the
customary laws around digital conflicts.

Custom Adapting to Treaties: Over time, what starts as an innovative treaty can become
customary law if widely practiced and accepted. For example, the Geneva Conventions on the
treatment of wartime prisoners have become customary international law, binding even
countries that have not ratified them.

Superseding and Conflict

Treaties Over Custom: Normally, a treaty will override any prior customary law that is
contradictory. If a new treaty on maritime boundaries is created, it would take precedence over
any earlier customary practices that differ.

Most Recent Prevails: If there is an inconsistency between a newer custom and an older treaty,
the most recent one generally prevails. For example, if a new customary practice of digital data
protection emerges, it might override older treaties that do not consider digital privacy issues.

Peremptory Norms and Legal Hierarchy

Peremptory Norms: These are fundamental principles of international law from which no
deviation is permitted, such as the prohibition of genocide. No treaty can go against these
norms.

Voiding Treaties with Peremptory Norms: If a new peremptory norm develops, any existing
treaty that conflicts with it becomes void. For example, if a treaty allowed for a form of
discrimination now considered a violation of peremptory norms, that treaty would be nullified.

Hypothetical Example

Hypothetical Case of Slavery: If Britain and France had a treaty in 1825 to trade slaves, and later a
peremptory norm emerged that slavery is illegal, that treaty would become void. Even though it
was legal at the time of its creation, it can no longer be enforced because it violates a
fundamental principle that the international community has universally recognized.
The interaction between treaties and customary international law is dynamic. Treaties can
crystallize and even modify customary laws, while customary laws can influence the
interpretation and application of treaties. The most recent and specific rules generally take
precedence, ensuring that the evolution of international law reflects contemporary values and
practices.

Understanding Reservations in International Law

The Concept of Reservations

Definition and Nature: A reservation is a statement by a state that it does not agree to be
bound by certain provisions of a treaty it is joining. For instance, a country might sign a human
rights treaty but place a reservation on the clause that requires it to change its domestic law in
a particular area.

Evolution of Reservation Practices

Traditional Consent vs. Modern Flexibility : Traditionally, reservations were only valid if all other
treaty parties consented. In the modern era, this rigid approach has given way to more flexibility,
allowing states to tailor their treaty obligations to some extent.

Key Examples
International Court of Justice (ICJ) Advisory Opinion: In 1951, the ICJ provided an
advisory opinion suggesting a more pragmatic approach to reservations, which acknowledged
the increasing diversity of states and their varying capacities to comply with treaty obligations.

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) Article 19 : This article reflects the ICJ's
flexible stance by setting out conditions under which reservations are permitted or not, making
room for states to formulate reservations unless specifically prohibited by the treaty or
incompatible with its purpose.

Reservations in Human Rights Treaties

Controversies and Challenges: In the field of human rights, reservations can be

particularly contentious, as they may be seen to undermine the universality of rights. For
example, if a state ratifies a treaty banning torture but makes a reservation that allows certain
interrogation techniques, this could be seen as incompatible with the treaty's object and
purpose.

Principles Governing Reservations

Acting in Good Faith (Pacta sunt servanda): The principle of good faith requires that
states enter into and abide by treaty obligations sincerely. This includes making reservations
that are genuine in intent and not aimed at subverting the treaty's core goals.

Object and Purpose Rule: A reservation must not undermine the fundamental rationale of
the treaty. If a reservation contradicts the primary aim of the treaty, it is likely to be considered
invalid. For example, a reservation to a disarmament treaty that allows for the continued
development of nuclear weapons would conflict with the treaty's main objective.

Operational Mechanisms

Acceptance and Objections: Other states party to the treaty may accept a reservation,
object to it, or even make their acceptance of the treaty contingent upon the acceptance of
their own reservations. This creates a complex web of interactions between states' obligations
and understandings under a treaty.

Conclusion
Reservations enable states to participate in the international treaty framework while managing
their specific legal and practical constraints. This pragmatism helps to increase participation in
treaties but also raises questions about the integrity and effectiveness of those treaties,
particularly in areas such as human rights where universal standards are sought. The ongoing
debate about reservations reflects the balance between the sovereignty of states and the
collective interests of the international community.

Understanding Ex Aequo Et Bono and Equity in

International Law
Definition of Ex Aequo Et Bono:

Ex aequo et bono is a Latin term that means "according to the right and good"
or "from equity and conscience."

It refers to a legal decision based on fairness, equity, and good conscience,

without being strictly bound by the letter of the law.

The Role of Equity:

Equity in legal terms refers to the application of principles of fairness and justice,
to supplement the written law when strict application of the law would result in
an unfair outcome.

Article 38 of the ICJ Statute:

Article 38 of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) Statute is a crucial part of

international law that lays out the law and procedures the ICJ must follow.

Paragraph 2 of Article 38 allows the ICJ to make decisions ex aequo et bono if all
parties involved agree.

Application and Non-usage:

Although Article 38(2) grants the ICJ the power to decide cases on the basis of
equity and conscience, this provision has never been applied.

The ICJ has the discretion to apply this principle but has not yet done so.

Example Case - Fisheries Jurisdiction:

In the Fisheries Jurisdiction case (ICJ Rep 1974), the ICJ clarified the difference
between reaching an equitable decision and an equitable decision derived from
applicable law.

The court explained that it is not just looking for a fair solution, but for a fair
solution that can be derived from the laws that are applicable to the case at hand.

Implications for International Law:

This principle implies that the ICJ can theoretically create solutions based on what
is fair and just, going beyond the strict interpretations of the law, provided that
such an approach is agreed upon by all parties involved.

Understanding Jus Cogens and Erga Omnes in International

Law
Jus Cogens: Normatively Superior Rules

Definition: Jus cogens are peremptory norms from which no derogation is permitted. They are
the highest-ranking laws in international law.

Characteristics: These rules are universally binding and are considered so fundamental that
they override all other international agreements and norms.

Non-derogable Nature: Jus cogens norms cannot be set aside or suspended; they persist unless
the international community as a whole adopts a new overriding norm.

Voiding Incompatible Acts: Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT, Article
53), any act that contradicts jus cogens norms is void.

Erga Omnes: Obligations Toward All States

Legal Interest of All States: Erga omnes obligations are duties that a state owes to the
international community as a whole, and any breach is of concern to all states.

Identification in ICJ: The concept was first highlighted in the Barcelona Traction case, where the
ICJ clarified the nature of these obligations.

Examples of Erga Omnes Norms: The prohibition of aggression, genocide, and the upholding of
basic human rights such as the protection from slavery and racial discrimination.

Hierarchy of Rights: There exists a recognized hierarchy within human rights norms, with some
being regarded as more fundamental than others.

Consensual Nature and Acceptance: While international law is consensual, erga omnes
obligations have been recognized without explicit consent from all states, indicating a general
acceptance of these fundamental prohibitions.

The clear delineation of jus cogens and erga omnes norms in international law establishes a
hierarchy of principles and obligations that all states are deemed to respect. These concepts
ensure that certain fundamental values, such as human rights, the prohibition of torture, and
the outlawing of slavery, are preserved and maintained across all jurisdictions, reflecting the
shared moral and ethical standards of the international community.

By understanding the distinction between ex aequo et bono and the application of equity, we
can appreciate the breadth and flexibility that the ICJ has in resolving disputes, even though this
power remains unexercised. The concept underscores the importance of fairness and moral
considerations in legal proceedings, which could potentially lead to more just outcomes in
international disputes.

Heading: Understanding Monism and Dualism in

International Law
Overview of Monism and Dualism:

Monism:

One Legal System: Monism views international law and domestic law as parts of a single legal
system.

Automatic Inclusion: In monist states, international law (like customary international law or
treaties) is automatically considered part of the domestic legal order.

Example State: The Netherlands is often cited as a classic example of a monist state.

Dualism:

Separate Legal Systems: Dualism sees international law and domestic law as two distinct
systems.

No Automatic Effect: In dualist states, international law doesn't automatically become part of
domestic law. It needs specific legislation to be effective domestically.

Example State: The United Kingdom is a classic dualist state.

Detailed Explanation:

Dualist Approach in the UK:

Lord Hoffman's Statement: In the UK, international treaties do not automatically form part of
English law. Courts in England cannot interpret or apply international treaties unless there's a
specific law passed by Parliament that mirrors the treaty's terms.

Treaties vs. Domestic Law: Even when a treaty is reflected in domestic law, it's the domestic
law, not the treaty, that is applied and interpreted by the courts.
Interpretation of Law: While there's a strong tendency to interpret English law in a way that
aligns with international obligations, courts are not bound to follow interpretations by
international courts unless explicitly stated in the domestic law.

Implications:

Monist Approach: In countries with a monist approach, international law has a more direct
impact on domestic law. This approach reflects a cohesive view of legal obligations, both
internationally and domestically.

Dualist Approach: In dualist systems, like the UK, a clear distinction is maintained between
international obligations and domestic law. This approach requires active legislative steps to
transform international obligations into domestic law, preserving the sovereignty and
distinctiveness of the domestic legal system.

Lecture: 5
Heading: Monism vs. Dualism in International Law with
Reference to R v Lyons
Overview of Monism and Dualism in International Law:

Monism:

Definition: Monist states see international law and domestic law as a single unified system.

Application: In these states, international law, including treaties and customary laws,
automatically becomes part of the domestic legal system.

Dualism:

Definition: Dualist states view international law and domestic law as separate legal systems.

Application: International law needs specific domestic legislation to be applied within the
country.

Key Case: R v Lyons and UK's Dualist Approach

R v Lyons [2003] 1 AC 976 - Lord Hoffman's Judgment:

Context: The case of R v Lyons provides insight into how the UK, a dualist state, approaches
international law.

Key Judgment: Lord Hoffman stated, "…it is firmly established that international treaties do not
form part of English law and that English courts have no jurisdiction to interpret or apply
them…"

Further Explanation: He clarified that even if Parliament passes a law mirroring an international
treaty, it is the statute, not the treaty, that forms part of English law. English courts are not
obligated to follow interpretations of the treaty by international courts unless expressly stated
in the statute.

Presumption in Favor of International Obligations: There is a presumption that English law

should be interpreted in a way that aligns with the UK’s international obligations, but this is not
a strict rule.

Implications of R v Lyons:

Separation of Legal Systems: This judgment highlights the UK's clear separation between
international treaties and domestic law.

Sovereignty of Domestic Law: It underscores the sovereignty of the UK's legal system, where
international obligations are not automatically enforceable unless translated into domestic
legislation.

Interpretation Nuances: While there is an effort to align domestic laws with international
obligations, the ultimate authority lies within the domestic legal framework, not international
treaties or courts.

In summary, the case of R v Lyons exemplifies the dualist approach in the UK, showing the
deliberate process required to integrate international law into the domestic legal system, and
the independence of the domestic courts in interpreting such laws.

The Legal Status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(UDHR) 1948
Understanding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
Background of the UDHR:

Adopted in 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly.

Aimed to establish a common standard of achievements for all peoples and nations in the
realm of human rights.

Inspired by significant historical human rights documents like the Declaration of the Rights of
Man and the United States Declaration of Independence.

Questioning the Legal Binding Nature of the UDHR:

Early Doubts:

Initially, many believed that the UDHR did not impose legally binding obligations.

It was seen more as a moral guideline or a statement of aspirations.

Eleanor Roosevelt's Vision:

As the chair of the UN Assembly and a representative of the United States, Eleanor Roosevelt
expressed hope that the UDHR might become a globally recognized moral authority, akin to an
"international Magna Carta."

Current Perspective:

Over time, the view on the UDHR's legal force has evolved.

It's argued that the UDHR, while not a treaty or a legally binding document in the traditional
sense, has greatly influenced international law and the legal systems of many countries.

Many principles of the UDHR have been incorporated into other legally binding international
human rights treaties, thus indirectly giving them legal force.

Conclusion:

While the Universal Declaration of Human Rights started as a non-binding declaration, its
principles have significantly shaped international human rights law and the legal frameworks of
states, elevating its status beyond just a moral guideline. It serves as a foundational document
that continues to influence and inspire human rights legislation and advocacy globally.
A Brief Overview of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR)
Article 1: The Foundation of Human Dignity and Equality

Content: Declares that all humans are born free and equal in dignity and rights, endowed with
reason and conscience, and should act towards each other in a spirit of brotherhood.

Interpretation: This is a philosophical statement emphasizing inherent human qualities and the
importance of community and mutual respect.

Article 2: Principles of Equality and Non-Discrimination

Content: Establishes equality in the enjoyment of rights and freedoms, forbidding any
discrimination based on race, color, sex, language, religion, political opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth, or other status.

Importance: Lays the groundwork for universal human rights, emphasizing equality and non-
discrimination as core principles.

Article 3: Right to Life, Liberty, and Security

Content: States the fundamental right to life, liberty, and personal security.

Significance: Seen as a cornerstone of the Declaration, forming the basis for subsequent civil
and political rights.

Articles 4–21: Civil and Political Rights

Content: Covers a range of rights including freedom from slavery, torture, arbitrary arrest, the
right to a fair trial, privacy, freedom of movement, asylum, nationality, marriage and family,
property, thought, conscience, religion, opinion, expression, assembly, association, and
participation in government.

Purpose: Details the specific civil and political rights essential for human dignity and freedom.

Article 22: Introduction to Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

Content: Introduces rights such as social security, work, equal pay, rest and leisure, an
adequate standard of living, education, and cultural participation.

Context: These rights are seen as vital for the fulfillment of human dignity, dependent on
national efforts and international cooperation.
Articles 23–27: Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

Content: Elaborates on the rights introduced in Article 22.

Understanding: Recognizes the importance of these rights in ensuring a dignified life for all,
acknowledging the varying capacities of states in realizing these rights.

Articles 28–30: Duties and Limitations

Content: Emphasizes that rights come with duties, and that exercising these rights should not
violate the rights and freedoms of others or the principles of the United Nations.

Article 30: Specifically states that no one can use the Declaration to destroy the rights and
freedoms it sets forth.

Conclusion:

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights outlines a broad spectrum of human rights, ranging
from fundamental freedoms to economic, social, and cultural rights. It establishes the principles
of equality, non-discrimination, and dignity as essential to the human experience. While not
legally binding in itself, the UDHR has profoundly influenced international law and the human
rights policies of nations worldwide.

Assessing the Legal Value of the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights (UDHR)
Initial Perception of the UDHR:

Not Legally Binding: When it was adopted in 1948, the UDHR was not intended to be legally
binding. It was a declaration, not a treaty.

Foundation for Future Treaties: The idea was to use the UDHR as a basis for creating legally
binding treaties later on, like the 1966 International Covenants.

Debate Over Its Binding Nature:

Customary Law Argument: Some argue that the UDHR represented binding rules of customary
international law, as it was agreed upon by representatives of the global community.
Opposition and Limitations: However, not all states voted for the UDHR, and many of those
who did were not fully representative of the global community. Issues like colonialism and
racial segregation at the time challenge the credibility of its universal acceptance.

UDHR's Role Over Time:

Evolution of Influence: Although not customary international law at its inception, the UDHR has
influenced the development of human rights over time.

Crystallization of Customary Law: Repeated adoption of similar declarations, resolutions, and

treaties has led to some of the UDHR’s provisions becoming customary international law, like
the prohibitions on torture and slavery.

Incomplete Coverage: Not all fundamental rights considered customary today are mentioned in
the UDHR. For instance, the right to self-determination is absent.

Conclusion:

The UDHR, initially not legally binding, has played a significant role in shaping the development
of human rights law. While it wasn't considered customary international law at its adoption,
many of its principles have gradually been integrated into customary law over time. This
process highlights the UDHR’s lasting influence on the global human rights landscape, despite
its non-binding origin.

Remedies for Breaches of Human Rights in International

Treaties
Providing Remedies Under Domestic Law:

Treaty Requirements: Some human rights treaties require contracting states to offer remedies
under their domestic law for any breaches of rights.

Additional to Treaty Mechanisms: These domestic remedies are in addition to any

enforcement mechanisms set by the treaty itself.

Varied Approaches Across Treaties:

Lack of Enforcement Mechanism: Not all treaties establish an enforcement body or require
domestic remedies. For example, the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Rights of Refugees does
not.
Recent Trends: Most recent major global human rights treaties have established an
enforcement body, but not all require domestic remedies.

Example of Domestic Remedy Requirement:

Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR):

States that everyone violated by the Convention should have an effective remedy before a
national authority, even if the violation is by official persons .

This complements the ECHR’s provisions establishing an international human rights court with
the power to award damages.

Seeking Damages for Human Rights Breaches:

Domestic Courts' Role: In some cases, victims can seek damages in domestic courts if:

An international agreement is incorporated into domestic law.

The rights are part of customary international law.

The rights are recognized under general principles of domestic law.

Complex Relationship: Whether a domestic court can provide a remedy depends on the
complex relationship between domestic law and international law in that state.

Conclusion:

The approach to providing remedies for human rights breaches varies significantly among
international treaties. While some treaties mandate domestic remedies, others rely solely on
international enforcement mechanisms. The possibility of seeking redress in domestic courts
depends on the interplay between international agreements, customary international law, and
domestic legal principles. The European Convention on Human Rights serves as a key example
where domestic remedies are explicitly required alongside international enforcement
mechanisms.

Monday
Chapter 3.1 Overview: "The Contested Nature of Human Rights"

Introduction to Universal Human Rights

Understanding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): This key document is
central to our understanding of human rights. It asserts that all people are born with dignity
and equal rights, which are fundamental for global freedom, justice, and peace. It's important
because it sets a global standard for how people should be treated.

Historical Perspectives on Human Rights

Influence of the United States Declaration of Independence (1776): This document marked a
significant point in history by stating that all people are born equal and have the right to life,
liberty, and happiness. This idea was groundbreaking at the time and influenced how we think
about human rights today.

The French Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789): Following the French Revolution, this
declaration furthered the idea of human equality and freedom. It emphasized that every person
is born free with equal rights, highlighting the universality of these concepts.

The Evolution of Human Rights Concepts

Expanding from Gender-Specific to Inclusive Rights: Earlier human rights declarations primarily
focused on men's rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights expanded this scope to
include every human being, making no distinction based on gender. This inclusivity was a
significant step forward in human rights evolution.

The Universality and Critique of Human Rights

Universal Human Rights: This concept suggests that human rights should apply equally to
everyone, no matter where they are in the world. The idea is that certain rights are so
fundamental that every person should have them.

Challenges to Universal Human Rights: Despite the idea of universality, there are criticisms.
Some argue that this concept doesn't consider cultural and societal differences, which can
impact how rights are understood and practiced.

Cultural Perspectives and Human Rights

Cultural Relativism in Human Rights: This perspective argues that human rights should be
interpreted differently based on cultural contexts. It suggests that what's considered a right in
one culture might not be seen the same way in another.

Examining Asian, Chinese, and Islamic Views on Human Rights: Here, we'll explore how
different cultures, like those in Asia, China, and Islamic societies, view human rights. Do they
align with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, or do they have their own unique
perspectives?

Chapter 3.2: The Nature of Rights

3.2.1 The Meaning of Human Rights

Essence of Human Rights: Human rights are fundamentally linked to the very notion of being
human. These rights are inherent to all individuals, irrespective of their societal status or
actions. They're inalienable, meaning these rights are innate and cannot be surrendered or
taken away.

Equality in Principle vs. Practice: Historical declarations, like the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR), emphasize that all humans are born equal. However, this equality is
more of a principle than a reflection of reality. Everyone, by virtue of being born, should have
the same rights, but in practice, these rights are experienced differently by different people.

Defining 'Human' for Rights: Biologically identifying a human is straightforward, yet the
extension of rights raises further questions. For instance, if certain qualities like intelligence or
emotional capacity justify human rights, then why shouldn't intelligent animals like great apes
also have similar rights? The general consensus is that human rights are for humans, but
societal divisions such as race, religion, gender, and caste influence who actually enjoys these
rights.

Determining Basic Human Needs and Rights: Identifying the basic needs of humans and the
corresponding rights is complex. Factors like religion, morality, and economic development
influence the perception of what rights should exist. A scientific definition of human nature is
challenging due to the intangible nature of qualities like faith and morality.

Social Sciences and Human Rights: While anthropology and other social sciences strive to
define humanity and establish a theory of human rights, it's noteworthy that historically,
societies have often been organized around the concept of 'inferior' classes without these
rights.
Philosophical Perspectives on Human Rights: Various philosophical views offer different
foundations for human rights, often based on inherent human qualities. However, these views
are not universally verifiable and leave open questions about the exclusion of women and other
animals from these rights.

Universal Definition of Human and Rights: The universal definition of what it means to be
human remains elusive. For instance, during the adoption of the UDHR, differing opinions arose
about the basis for the agreed-upon rights. Yet, the legal framework, grounded in the UDHR
and subsequent treaties, provides a basis for the universality of human rights, even though it
doesn't resolve all debates.

Ongoing Importance of the Human Rights Debate: The debate around human rights, while
unresolved, is crucial in shaping a culture that respects and upholds these rights. It highlights
the continual effort in different fields to define and value human rights universally.

Understanding the Legal Nature of Human Rights

Semantics of Rights in the English Language

Moral vs. Political/Legal Rights: In English, 'right' can mean morally correct (e.g., it's morally
wrong to steal) or legally enforceable (e.g., a right protected by law). The legal sense is stronger
because it involves a right that can be enforced through legal systems.

Legal Context of Rights

Rights in Private Law: In a legal context, rights can arise from contracts or equitable trusts. For
example, in a contract, rights and obligations are created and can be enforced by courts if not
upheld. Similarly, in a trust, beneficiaries have rights that can be legally enforced against the
trustee.

Public Law Rights

Derived from Constitutions or Legal Principles: Public law rights differ from private law rights
as they don’t originate from agreements but from constitutions or general legal principles.
These rights might include civil liberties or citizens' rights as stated in a country's constitution.

Paramount Nature of Human Rights in Law

Domestic Law Recognition: Whether human rights are legally enforceable depends on
domestic laws. For instance, in countries where Parliament is sovereign, like the UK, human
rights might not be legally enforceable if they conflict with parliamentary legislation.
Fundamental Rights in Constitutions: In countries with constitutions that entrench human
rights, these rights are fundamental and cannot be easily overridden.

Definition and Enforceability of Human Rights

Human Rights as Moral Standards: While human rights are based on our humanity, they might
not always be legally enforceable unless stated by law. They often serve more as political claims
about the desirability of certain states of affairs, acting as a moral standard.

Use in Global Politics: Human rights are often used selectively in international relations to
criticize certain states while overlooking the violations of allies. They have become a tool for
assessing the political and moral legitimacy of states.

Fundamental Legal Nature vs. Political Nature in International Law

Binding Nature of Human Rights: The extent to which human rights are binding and
enforceable depends on international recognition and legal mechanisms. Some rights are
recognized and enforceable by courts, while others may not be enforceable, at least not
through judicial means.

The Vienna Conference 1993: Reevaluating Human Rights

Background of the Vienna Conference

Anniversary and Follow-up: The Vienna Conference, held in June 1993, was conducted on the
45th anniversary of the UDHR. It served as a follow-up to the 1968 Proclamation of Teheran,
the first UN International Human Rights Conference.

Global Participation: Attended by representatives from 171 states and numerous NGOs, this
conference was a significant global assembly focusing on human rights issues.

Frustrations and Challenges in Human Rights

Limitations in Legal Mechanisms: A significant concern at the time of the conference was the
inadequacy of legal mechanisms to promote and enforce human rights internationally.

Need for Rethinking Universal Human Rights: Forty-five years after the UDHR, there was a call
for redefining and refining the concept of universal human rights due to perceived little
progress.

Main Themes of the Conference

Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights: The conference highlighted the overshadowing of
economic, social, and cultural rights by civil and political rights, emphasizing the need to
recognize the 'right to development' as a universal human right.

Cultural Relativism and Contextual Nature of Rights: A second major theme was the argument
against the universality of human rights, proposing that they are historically, socially, and
politically contextual. This perspective suggested that universal human rights were essentially a
cover for Western values, advocating for respect for non-Western values and cultures.

Debates and Divergent Views

Joint Stance by Certain Nations: Countries like China, Singapore, Malaysia, Cuba, and the
former USSR supported the views questioning the universal nature of human rights, expressing
skepticism about the project as a Western-dominated exercise.

Key Questions Raised:

The universality of human rights enforcement and whether it's influenced by Western
powers' strategic interests.

Prioritization of human rights and the reluctance to recognize a 'right to development'.

The ethnocentric nature of universal human rights and their impact on non-Western cultural
values.

The potential overlooking or ignoring of non-Western human rights traditions, such as those
in Islamic or Chinese cultures.

International Human Rights Instruments and the Vienna Conference 1993

1. Existing International Human Rights Instruments at the Time of the Vienna Conference

Instruments in Effect:

Prior to the Vienna Conference in 1993, several key international human rights instruments were
already in place. These included:

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) - 1948.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) - 1966.

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) - 1966.

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) - 1979.

Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) - 1989.

Other various conventions targeting specific issues like racial discrimination, torture, and rights of
specific groups.

2. Powers Accompanying These Instruments

Enforcement Mechanisms: These instruments, especially the Covenants, came with monitoring bodies
like the Human Rights Committee for ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ) and
the Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights for ICESCR (International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), which oversee compliance.

Reporting and Reviewing: States parties to these instruments are obliged to submit regular reports on
their implementation, which are reviewed by the respective committees.

Optional Protocols: Some instruments, like the ICCPR, have optional protocols allowing for individual
complaints to be brought before the committee, enhancing the enforceability of the rights.

Impact and Reaffirmation at the Vienna Conference

Reaffirmation of Universality: Despite dissenting views, the Vienna Conference strongly reaffirmed the
universality of human rights, characterizing them as “universal, indivisible, interdependent and
interrelated.”

Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action: Adopted at the conference's conclusion, this declaration
endorsed the notion that human rights are a legitimate international concern, challenging the traditional
view of absolute state sovereignty over internal affairs.

Balancing Universality and Cultural Relativism

Cultural and Relativist Perspectives : The Vienna Declaration acknowledged the importance of
national and regional particularities and diverse historical, cultural, and religious backgrounds. It
emphasized the duty of states to promote and protect all human rights within these diverse contexts.

Diverse Participation in Human Rights Development: Over time, an increasingly diverse body of states
has participated in the negotiation and adoption of human rights instruments, reflecting a broader range
of cultural and political perspectives.

Option for Reservations: States have the option not to ratify or to enter reservations to parts of treaties
they object to, allowing for some degree of cultural accommodation.

Rights in Islam
are a broad and diverse topic, and it's challenging to define one single Islamic viewpoint on
human rights. This complexity arises because Islam, like many religions, encompasses a wide
range of interpretations and practices. Different scholars, communities, and countries that
identify as Muslim may have varying views on what Islam says about human rights.

Here's a simplified explanation:

Diverse Interpretations: Islam does not have a single, unified stance on human rights issues.
This diversity is similar to other religions where different groups or sects might have different
views on specific topics like the right to life, death penalty, or abortion.

Searching for Common Ground: Some scholars have tried to find similarities between Islamic
law and international human rights law. However, these efforts often highlight the variety of
opinions within Islam rather than a single unified stance.

Use of Islamic Defense in International Relations: Some Muslim-majority countries use what
they call an 'Islamic defense' to justify their stances on international human rights issues.
However, during the drafting of international human rights treaties, Muslim-majority countries
have often shown contrasting viewpoints, all claiming to be based on Islamic principles.

Islamic Pluralism: The diversity within Islam is so broad that there isn't a single treaty on
human rights that is universally accepted by all Muslim-majority countries and rooted
specifically in Islamic teachings.

Participation in United Nations Treaties: Despite the diversity in views, most Muslim-majority
countries, whether they are theocratic, secular, or somewhere in between, are signatories to
some United Nations human rights treaties. These treaties are not specifically aligned with any
particular religious or cultural tradition.

Documents on Islamic Approach to Rights: There are several documents attempting to define
an Islamic approach to human rights, but each has its limitations and lacks universal acceptance
among Muslim-majority states.

In summary, the concept of rights in Islam is complex and varies widely, making it hard to
pinpoint a single, definitive Islamic perspective on human rights.

Top of Form

The Universal Islamic Declaration of Human Rights (UIDHR) is an important document for
understanding how human rights are interpreted in the context of Islamic principles. However,
it's crucial to note that the UIDHR is not an intergovernmental document; it was developed by
the Islamic Council of Europe, which is a private organization. The scholars, jurists, and
representatives who compiled the UIDHR were self-appointed, and the declaration does not
universally represent the views of all Muslims or Muslim-majority countries.

Key points about the UIDHR:

Roots in Islamic Beliefs: The UIDHR bases human rights on the belief that God is the ultimate
lawgiver. This means that human rights, as understood in Islam, are divine and cannot be
altered by any human authority.

Integral to Islamic Order: Human rights in Islam are considered an essential part of the Islamic
order, and it's the responsibility of Muslim governments and societies to implement these
rights in accordance with Islamic teachings.

Dignity and Justice: The UIDHR emphasizes dignity, honor, and the elimination of exploitation,
oppression, and injustice. These objectives are similar to those in Western human rights
discourses, highlighting the universality of certain human rights values.

Source of Rights: The UIDHR explicitly states that its source of rights is the Qur'an and the
Sunna, setting it apart from documents like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR),
which are influenced by natural law theory and secular principles.

Differences with Western Rights Concepts: While there are common goals between Islamic
human rights and Western human rights, like upholding dignity and justice, the UIDHR also
highlights differences. These differences mainly stem from the UIDHR’s reliance on religious
texts and principles specific to Islam.

Issues of Universality: The UIDHR raises questions about the universality of human rights
within an Islamic framework. While it suggests that Islamic rights are universal within the
Islamic community, it also differentiates between Muslims and non-Muslims, which can
complicate the application of these rights in a global context.

Evangelical Nature of Islam: The UIDHR implies that because Islam is an evangelical faith, its
concept of human rights could potentially be universal, as non-Muslims have the option to
convert to Islam.

Comparison with the Cairo Declaration: The UIDHR shares several themes with the Cairo
Declaration, another significant document in Islamic human rights discussions. Both documents
seek to articulate rights within an Islamic framework, though they may differ in specifics.

In summary, the UIDHR provides insight into how human rights are viewed within an Islamic
context. It underscores the importance of understanding different cultural and religious
perspectives when discussing human rights globally.
The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam is an influential document within the context of
Islamic human rights discourse. It was adopted under the auspices of the Organisation of the
Islamic Conference (OIC), which includes 56 Muslim-majority states. Here are some key aspects
of the Cairo Declaration:

Foundation on Religious Faith: The Declaration bases human rights on religious faith,
particularly Islam. It emphasizes that all human beings are united by their submission to God
and descent from Adam.

Rights as Means to Serve God: The rights stated in the Declaration are viewed as measures that
enable individuals to better serve God, highlighting the role of humans as ‘God’s vicegerents in
this world’.

Specific Rights Articulated:

Right to Life: The Declaration affirms the right to life, in line with many universal human rights
documents.

Rights in Conflict: It addresses rights applicable during times of conflict.

Marriage, Women’s, and Children’s Rights: The Declaration specifies rights related to marriage,
women, and children.

Legal Capacity and Education: It recognizes the right to legal capacity, education, and freedom
from forced religious conversion.

Colonialism and Self-Determination: Article 11 of the Declaration emphasizes the right to

freedom from colonialism and self-determination, reflecting the historical context of many
signatory states.

Economic and Property Rights: The Cairo Declaration includes rights to work, legitimate
earnings, prohibition of usury, property rights, and rights related to scientific and artistic
production.

Environmental and Social Care: It also covers rights to a clean environment and to social and
medical care.

Security, Equality, and Due Process: The Declaration includes rights to security, privacy,
equality before the law, and due process in legal proceedings.

Prohibition on Hostage-Taking and Right to Expression: It explicitly prohibits hostage-taking

and affirms the right to free expression.
Participation in Public Affairs: The right to participate in public affairs is also recognized.

Sharia as the Reference Point:

Articles 24 and 25: These articles assert that all rights and freedoms stipulated in the Cairo
Declaration are subject to Islamic Sharia. This implies that the interpretation and application of
these rights are grounded in Islamic law and principles.

Sharia as the Only Source for Clarification: The Islamic Sharia is declared the sole reference for
explaining or clarifying any of the articles in the Declaration.

The Cairo Declaration presents a framework for human rights from an Islamic perspective,
emphasizing the integration of these rights within the broader Islamic legal and moral order.
While it shares several commonalities with universal human rights principles, it also
incorporates specific Islamic viewpoints and interpretations. The declaration highlights the
diversity in the global understanding of human rights and the influence of cultural and religious
backgrounds on these interpretations.

The Arab Charter on Human Rights (2004)

Slide 1: Introduction

Today, we will examine the Arab Charter on Human Rights, a significant treaty that imposes
legal obligations on its member states.

This charter, distinct from the OIC's Cairo Declaration, came into force in 2008 and introduces a
supervisory mechanism.

Slide 2: Origin and Membership

The Arab Charter was adopted under the auspices of the Arab League, an international
organization of states with shared Arab culture and geography.

Although Arab League member states are mostly Muslim-majority, they include religious
minorities, with Lebanon being particularly diverse.

Slide 3: Limited Religious Emphasis

Surprisingly, given its context, the Arab Charter minimizes the role of religion, particularly Islam.

It explicitly refers to the universality of all rights, emphasizing human dignity, freedom, justice,
and equality.

Slide 4: Preamble Highlights

The preamble highlights the Arab nation's faith in human dignity, inspired by its rich history of
civilizations and religious values.

It acknowledges the influence of the Islamic religion and other divine faiths on promoting
fraternity, equality, and tolerance.

The charter emphasizes the Arab nation's commitment to freedom, justice, equality, self-
determination, and the rule of law as fundamental to societal value.

Slide 5: Substantive Rights

The Arab Charter addresses a wide range of substantive rights, reflecting a comprehensive
approach to human rights.

These include self-determination (Article 2); non-discrimination (Articles 3 and 11); right to life
(Article 5); prohibition of torture (Article 8); prohibition of slavery (Article 10); fair trial rights
(Articles 13 and 16); liberty and security of person (Article 14); privacy and family rights (Article
21); right to a remedy (Article 23); freedom of movement (Article 26); freedom of religion
(Article 30); freedom of expression (Article 32); family life (Article 33); right to work (Article 34);
right to association (Article 35); social security (Article 36); development (Article 37); and
education (Article 41).

Slide 6: Consistency with Universal Rights

The articulation of rights in the Arab Charter mirrors the approach found in universal human
rights treaties.

The inclusion of "restrictive clauses" in the charter aligns with international human rights
standards, emphasizing that the charter should not diminish rights and freedoms protected by
domestic laws or other international and regional human rights instruments (Article 43).

Slide 7: Contrasting Approaches

Contrasting with the Cairo Declaration, which interprets all rights in light of Sharia, the Arab
Charter firmly commits to other international human rights treaties.
While the Arab Charter may not be without its challenges, it exhibits a different approach to
relativity compared to the UDHR or the Cairo Declaration.

Slide 8: Conclusion

In conclusion, the Arab Charter on Human Rights presents a paradox, where arguments about
Islamic relativism persist, yet Muslim-majority states actively engage in the international
community.

These states play a vital role in shaping and influencing global norms, and this complex interplay
continues to shape the discourse on human rights.

3.6 The Bangkok Declaration: Asian human rights

The Bangkok Declaration, made by a group of Asian countries in 1993, offers a unique
perspective on human rights that is different from the common Western view. Let me break it
down for you in a simple way:

What is the Bangkok Declaration?

It's a statement by Asian nations saying they have their own way of looking at human rights.

They presented this at the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993.

What's Different About It?

The declaration says that while human rights are important, they should be understood in the
context of each country's culture, history, and values.

It suggests that there isn’t one universal way to see human rights. Instead, different regions
might have different views based on their unique backgrounds.

Key Points of the Declaration:

Cultural Differences :

It emphasizes that Asian values and traditions might lead to different interpretations of human
rights compared to Western views.

Economic and Social Rights:

It highlights the importance of rights related to development and economy, not just political
rights.

Sovereignty:

The declaration stresses that countries should have the freedom to decide their own political
systems and use their resources.

Why Did They Make This Declaration?

Asian nations felt that the concept of universal human rights was too influenced by Western
values.

They argued against what they saw as "double standards" in how human rights are applied,
suggesting that Western countries sometimes use human rights as a way to push their own
agenda.

Examples of Asian Perspectives:

Leaders like Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia have spoken about
prioritizing the society over individual rights for economic and social development.

In China, the focus is on rights that benefit the whole society, like economic growth and social
stability, alongside individual rights.

What About Today?

Although the declaration was made over 20 years ago, it still influences how some Asian
countries view human rights.

However, it's important to critically assess these views, especially when there are concerns
about human rights abuses, like the treatment of the Uighur minority in China.

In summary, the Bangkok Declaration represents a different way of looking at human rights,
one that takes into account Asian values and perspectives. It suggests that human rights should
be adapted to fit each country's culture and history, rather than following a one-size-fits-all
approach. However, this perspective is also subject to criticism, especially when it comes to
addressing human rights abuses.
Self-assessment question Considering the above discussion concerning China, what sort of
approach to values does it represent?

Activity 3.6 ‘To describe Asian articulations of human rights as relativist is only partially
helpful in understanding the tensions in international human rights law; they have to be seen
as political responses to specific situations.’ Discuss.

This self-assessment question invites you to think critically about the approach to values
represented by China, particularly in the context of human rights, as discussed above. Then, you
are asked to consider the broader issue of describing Asian articulations of human rights as
relativist and understand them as political responses to specific situations. Here's a way to
approach this discussion:

China's Approach to Values:

China's approach to human rights can be seen as a blend of universalism and cultural
relativism. Universalism is the idea that certain rights are universally applicable, while cultural
relativism suggests that the understanding and implementation of these rights can vary based
on cultural context.

China acknowledges the universality of human rights but emphasizes that the application and
interpretation of these rights must be aligned with each nation's unique historical, social,
economic, and cultural conditions.

This approach also reflects a collectivist orientation, prioritizing societal welfare and collective
rights over individual liberties. This is evident in China's focus on economic development and
social stability.

Understanding Asian Articulations as Political Responses:

The statement suggests that simply labeling Asian perspectives on human rights as "relativist" is
not entirely accurate or helpful. It's important to understand these perspectives as responses to
specific political, historical, and cultural contexts.

For instance, the Asian approach to human rights often emerges from a historical background
of colonialism, foreign intervention, and the struggle for national sovereignty and self-
determination. This history influences how Asian countries view the concept of human rights.

The Asian articulation can be seen as a way to assert political autonomy and resist perceived
neocolonial or Western hegemonic influences in the realm of human rights.
This perspective also highlights the importance of economic and social rights, often as a
counterpoint to the Western emphasis on civil and political rights.

3.7 Towards a conclusion: relativism, universalism, the politics of exclusion and

recognising new rights

This section discusses the complex debate between relativism and universalism in human
rights, emphasizing how this debate intersects with the politics of exclusion and the recognition
of new rights. Here’s a simplified breakdown of the key points:

Relativism vs. Universalism Debate:

Relativism: This view suggests that human rights should be interpreted based on cultural,
historical, and regional differences. Each society might have its own understanding of what
rights are important.

Universalism: This perspective argues that certain human rights are fundamental and should be
applicable to everyone, regardless of cultural or regional differences.

Problems with the Debate:

The debate is not clear-cut and might distract from understanding current human rights issues.
It’s more about the exclusion of certain groups from the definition of rights, rather than just
about cultural differences.

Combining Universalism with Cultural Sensitivity:

The modern approach to human rights tries to blend universalism (everyone should have
certain basic rights) with sensitivity to cultural and regional differences.

The UN Commissioner for Human Rights emphasized this blend by stating that while
recognizing cultural particularities is important, all states must promote and protect human
rights and freedoms.

Realities of Universalism:

Despite declarations like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), universal human
rights are not fully realized yet. Many countries still haven't ratified all human rights treaties,
and even those that have, don't always implement them effectively.
Addressing the Exclusion of Certain Groups:

The focus should be on protecting groups that have historically been excluded or marginalized,
like women, children, indigenous peoples, minorities, and others.

This involves not just recognizing new rights but ensuring that these excluded groups have their
rights recognized, elaborated, and protected.

Specific Issues and Developments:

Different groups face different issues. For example, indigenous peoples have unique challenges
concerning their identities and land rights.

There’s also growing attention to issues like discrimination based on sexual orientation,
showing that human rights norms are evolving to include a wider range of concerns

3.8 Conclusion: rights, desire and identity

The conclusion section, drawing on the ideas of Costas Douzinas, presents a nuanced and
complex view of human rights, linking them to identity, desire, and the limitations of law.
Here’s an explanation of the key points:

Human Rights as More Than Legal Enforcement:

Douzinas argues that human rights are not just about enforcing universal personality traits.
They constantly evolve, extending to new groups and areas, indicating their dynamic and
sometimes conflicting nature.

Human Rights and Identity:

The recognition of human rights is deeply connected to the core of human existence. It's about
how we see ourselves and how we want to be seen by others.

Human rights touch on the fundamental need for respect, appreciation, and self-esteem. They
are intertwined with our identity.

The Limitations of Law in Defining Identity:

While law and rights are necessary, they are not sufficient to completely define an individual’s
or a group’s identity. There's often a mismatch between how individuals or groups see
themselves and the identity that the law allows them to project.

Identity is not just based on the universal aspects of law but also on the ongoing struggle for
unique recognition and understanding from others.

Desire and Recognition Beyond Law:

Desire here refers to the aspiration for recognition of one’s individuality and cultural identity.
This desire goes beyond what the law can provide, although law plays a crucial role in
articulating these desires.

The concept of "political desire" can be seen in how different groups, like Islamic communities,
seek legal recognition of their unique cultural and religious identities.

Universalist-Relativist Debate and Contemporary Challenges:

The debate around universalism and relativism in human rights reflects that rights are not
universally accepted, even in the West.

Recent geopolitical shifts, like the rise of populism in various countries and the election of
leaders like Donald Trump, challenge long-established assumptions about human rights. These
developments indicate that the understanding and acceptance of human rights are continually
evolving.

In summary, this conclusion emphasizes that human rights are a complex interplay of law,
identity, and desire. They are not just legal tools but are deeply connected to our sense of self
and our ongoing struggle for recognition and understanding. The role of law in shaping identity
is crucial but limited, as identity encompasses more than what legal frameworks can define.
This complexity is further highlighted in the current geopolitical landscape, where the
understanding and acceptance of human rights are being continually challenged and
reevaluated.

Human rights and the international legal order

Human Rights and International Legal Order

Human Rights in International Law:

Human rights are part of global rules and agreements.

Focus on Section 4.3 in De Schutter's chapter for details.

Human Rights in Real Life:

Read Bantekas and Oette, especially chapters on practical human rights, poverty, non-state
actors, and globalization.

Development and Climate Change:

Alston and Goodman discuss how human rights connect with development and climate issues
(Chapter 17).

Understanding Human Rights and Globalization:

From Old Empires to Today:

After World War II, the world changed from European colonial rule to a system where countries
depend on each other.

Big organizations like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO help manage this global cooperation.

United Nations (UN) Background:

Created for peace after World War II.

Human rights weren't the main focus at first; more emphasis was on preventing war and
respecting each state's independence.

World War II Impact on Human Rights:

After the war, protecting individual rights became more important.

Nuremberg Trials after World War II showed that governments can be held accountable for
harming people.

Human Rights in the UN Charter:

The UN Charter started to include human rights, but its focus has grown over time.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR):

Made in 1948, not legally binding but sets goals for all countries.

Talks about all kinds of human rights being connected and equally important.

International Human Rights Treaties:

Legal agreements made later, like ICESCR and ICCPR, are part of the International Bill of Rights.

Other treaties focus on specific groups, like women and children.

Evolving Human Rights:

Human rights laws change as the world's political priorities change.

Vienna and Millennium Declarations show how rights are linked to big issues like development
and democracy.

What the Declaration Represents:

It's based on non-religious values.

Focuses on basic human rights like life, freedom, and being treated fairly.

Key Takeaways:

Human rights are a key part of how countries work together globally.

The UN and other big international groups play a big role in this.

Over time, protecting human rights has become more important in international agreements.

Notes on Categories of Rights and Their Transformation

Essential Reading:

Van Boven in Moeckli, Shah, and Sivakumuran (eds), Chapter 7 ‘Categories of rights’.

Understanding Human Rights Law:

Human rights law is growing and changing.

Think about these three things:

How does the UN and regional systems view human rights law?

How is human rights law part of other international groups' work?

What are the differences in how different organizations handle human rights?

Types of Human Rights:

First-Generation Rights: These are basic freedoms like speech and protection from torture.
They stop the state from harming individuals.
Second-Generation Rights: These include rights to food, shelter, and education. The state must
do something to ensure these rights.

Third-Generation Rights: Also called ‘solidarity rights’. These are rights enjoyed together, like
the rights of groups and development rights.

Challenges in Defining Rights:

The clear separation between these categories is not always there. Some rights overlap and
support each other.

For example, the right to free speech (a first-generation right) needs education (a second-
generation right) to be meaningful.

Economic and Social Rights Debate:

There's a debate whether these rights are different from civil and political rights.

Some see economic and social rights as goals or principles, not actual rights.

Others argue they are real rights but different because they need more resources and are about
policy choices, making them hard for courts to enforce.

UN’s Role and Obligations:

The UN says all human rights are connected and should be treated equally.

The ICESCR (a key treaty) talks about progressive realization of rights, meaning states should
work towards these rights as they can.

The Committee says states have duties to respect, protect, and fulfill these rights.

Key Points:

It's hard to draw clear lines between different types of rights.

Understanding human rights is about seeing how they all work together.

We need to remember that the way we think about rights is always evolving.

Human Rights Obligations of IMF, World Bank, and WTO

Essential Reading:
Leader, S.: "Human Rights and International Trade" in Sheeran and Rodley (eds).

Muchlinski, P.: "International Finance and Investment and Human Rights" in Sheeran and
Rodley (eds).

Joseph, S.: "Trade Law and Investment Law" in Shelton (ed.).

Key Points:

Background:

The IMF, WTO, and World Bank are international institutions created by treaties.

WTO: Regulates global trade.

IMF and World Bank: Regulate world finance, give loans, and help in economic development.

Focus on Human Rights:

How these institutions use human rights in their roles is crucial.

World Bank Overview:

Founded at Bretton Woods in 1944 for post-war reconstruction.

Criticized for inadequate support to developing countries and exacerbating debt crises.

Provides low-interest loans and grants, especially to poorer countries.

Human Rights and Economic Development:

Since the late 1980s, human rights became integral to the Bank’s mission.

Initially, the focus was separate – on economic goals like poverty relief.

Now, human rights are seen as essential to development but dependent on good governance,
democracy, and lack of corruption.

Emphasizes the interdependence of rights (civil, political, economic, social, and cultural).

Bank’s Approach to Rights:

Rights are effective only with proper social, legal, and economic infrastructures.

A functioning legal system and judiciary, free from corruption, are necessary for protecting
human rights.
Stresses the indivisibility of different types of rights.

Understanding the Institutions:

International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank:

Aim to stabilize global economy and assist in economic growth, especially in developing
nations.

Their policies often impact human rights through economic conditions and reforms they
propose or require.

World Trade Organization (WTO):

Oversees international trade rules and agreements.

Its policies can affect human rights by influencing global trade practices and labor standards.

Remember:

Understanding the role of these institutions in the context of human rights requires considering
both their economic actions and the broader human rights implications.

The shift towards integrating human rights into economic and trade policies reflects a holistic
approach to development and global governance.

IMF's Role in Human Rights

Overview of IMF:

International Monetary Fund (IMF): Established to coordinate global monetary cooperation.

Main Objectives:

Promote balanced international trade.

Encourage high employment and real income.

Support the development of national economies.

Maintain exchange stability and orderly exchange arrangements.

IMF's Economic Objectives:

Initially focused on economic goals like reducing poverty indirectly.

Offers temporary financial aid to countries struggling with balance of payments.

IMF and Human Rights:

Economic Development and Poverty Reduction:

By aiding economic development, the IMF contributes to reducing poverty, respecting human dignity.

Challenges:

Austerity measures imposed by the IMF may negatively affect the poor and vulnerable.

High inflation harms economic growth, affecting the poor significantly.

Trade and Governance:

Trade growth can improve living standards.

IMF supports creating governance structures that encourage poverty reduction.

Legal System and Investment:

A robust legal system that protects property rights is essential for attracting investments.

Investment treaties allow investments in reforming states, potentially bypassing national courts.

Investment Treaties and Human Rights:

Investment Protection:

Investment treaties protect foreign investments, but can neglect human rights implications.

Example – Chinese Investment in DRC:

Investments in natural resources without considering health, safety, fair wages, or local communities'
rights.

Private Sector Role:

Private sector and powerful states play a significant role in exploiting resources in impoverished states.

Key Takeaways:

IMF’s economic objectives intersect with human rights, especially in poverty reduction.

However, its measures can have both positive and negative impacts on human rights.

Investments and economic policies need to consider human rights implications more thoroughly.

The role of non-state actors in development and human rights is increasingly important.

World Trade Organization (WTO) and Human Rights

Origins and Purpose of WTO:

Began as GATT: General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947.

Creation of WTO: Established in 1994 after the Uruguay Round of trade talks.

Role: Regulates and coordinates world trade.

Key Principles of WTO:

Trade Without Discrimination: Nations should treat all trading partners equally.

Equal Treatment for Goods: Imported and local goods should face the same tariffs and taxes.

Promotion of Free Trade: Ongoing negotiations aim at the realization of free trade globally.

WTO and Human Rights:

Main Question: Should the WTO consider human rights in regulating world trade?

Complexity: Raises questions about the nature and scope of human rights.

Are organizations and companies subject to human rights obligations?

Independent Development: Human rights law and trade law have evolved separately.

Intellectual property rules have sometimes limited access to essential medicines.

Privatization policies have impacted access to education, water, healthcare, etc.

Challenges and Controversies:

Access to Medicines: Intellectual property rules have affected the availability of drugs for HIV/AIDS,
malaria, and TB in the developing world.

Impact of Privatization: In many countries, privatization has made basic services less accessible.

Legitimacy and Quality of Life: These issues have affected the trust in national and global institutions
and negatively impacted the lives of millions.

Key Takeaways:

The WTO focuses on free and fair trade but faces challenges in integrating human rights concerns.

There is a growing need to consider the impact of trade policies on fundamental human rights.

The interaction between trade and human rights is complex and requires careful consideration.

The NIEO and The Right to Development

 The NIEO (New International Economic Order)

 Start: The UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) started in 1964.

 Goal: In 1973, they wanted to make a new way for countries to do business with each other,
called the NIEO.
 Ideas Behind NIEO: They wanted fairness, countries to be equal, and to work together.
 Plans: They suggested fair trade between countries, especially those still developing. They also
thought about using money saved from reducing weapons to help countries develop.
 Problems: Countries couldn't agree on how to do this. So, the NIEO didn't become a big part of
international law and is not much talked about now.

The Right to Development (1986)

 What It Is: The UN said in 1986 that there's a human right to development.
 Meaning: It’s about solving economic, social, and cultural problems and promoting human
rights.
 Focus: This right is about improving life for everyone, making sure people have a say in their
community, and sharing the benefits fairly.
 How It's Different: Unlike the NIEO, this focuses more on individual people rather than just
countries working together.
 What It Says:
 Article 1: People should be involved in development and control their resources.
 Article 2: Development is about helping people in a fair way.
 Article 3: Countries should help each other.
 Article 4: They should work together on development plans.
 Article 5: It’s against apartheid and human rights abuses.
 Challenge: It's a challenge for both developed and developing countries.

After 1986

 Changes: There have been more plans to help developing countries.

 Sustainable Development Goals: These are new goals set by the UN to help the poorest
people.
 Debt Relief: Campaigns like Jubilee 2000 helped reduce debt for poor countries. The World
Bank and IMF also worked on this.

Conclusion

The NIEO and the Right to Development were about making the world fairer, especially for
developing countries. They talked about how countries trade and help each other. The Right to
Development changed the focus a bit more towards people and not just countries. There have
been many efforts since then to keep working on these ideas.
 International Civil Society and Its Role

Introduction to International Civil Society

 What is it?: International civil society is like a big group of organizations that are not part of any
government. These groups, often called NGOs (non-governmental organizations), work on
different issues like human rights, health, or the environment.

Background

 Start: It began with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in
1964.
 Purpose: These groups want to help people and make the world a better place, focusing on
different areas of society.

Different Types of NGOs

 Local vs. International: Some NGOs work in just one country, while others (INGOs) work all
over the world.
 Different Focuses: Some focus on human rights, others on specific issues like helping children
(Save the Children), fighting poverty (Oxfam), or providing medical help (Médecins Sans
Frontières).

The Role of NGOs

 Promoting Human Rights: These groups play a big part in protecting and promoting human
rights.
 Variety of Tasks: They do many things like helping people in need, talking about important
issues, and trying to make changes in laws or policies.
 Not Always Good: Not all NGOs are doing good things. Some might work for businesses like
oil or tobacco companies and protect their interests.
 Influence: NGOs can influence what people think about issues and can help change laws and
policies.

Funding and Structure

 Where Money Comes From: NGOs get money from donations, governments, or other
organizations.
 How They Work: They have their own rules on how they are run and who makes decisions.

Historical Context
 Jürgen Habermas’ Ideas: He was a thinker who talked about how groups of people in society
come together to discuss and solve problems.
 Public Sphere Development: Over time, people started to have more say in politics and
business. This led to the growth of civil society.

Civil Society Beyond Borders

 International Focus: Some groups focus on issues that go beyond one country, like ending
slavery or changing trade laws.

Conclusion

 International Civil Society Today: These groups are important in talking about and solving big
world issues. They help people understand important topics and can lead to big changes in how
countries work together and make laws.