Tag Archive for ICESCR

The Key Differences between First and Second Generation Human Rights

February 18, 2013 Human Rights & Conflict, International Relations, Paid Content No comments

(C) Kapok Tree Diplomacy. Mar 2011. All rights reserved. Jeff Dwiggins.
4,880 words. 17 pages double-spaced. 13 references.  {Formerly} PAID CONTENT

Introduction

UNDHRThe recognition of individual human rights under international law took on a “formal and authoritative expression” following the end of World War II when the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 (Steiner, Alston & Goodman (SAG) 134). The UNDHR was designed to “take the form of a declaration – that is, a recommendation by the General Assembly to Member States that would exert a moral and political influence on states rather than constitute a legally binding document” (SAG 135).

Following approval of the UDHR, the UN Commission, General Assembly and Third Committee began work on a more “detailed and comprehensive” expression of human rights that emerged in the form of “two principal treaties – The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)” which were both approved in 1966 and both entered into force in 1976 through the required number of ratifications (SAG 136). The ICCPR and ICESCR were designed to be more legally binding than the UDHR. Collectively, these three documents are often referred to as the ‘International Bill of Human Rights’ (SAG 133).  Read more

International Law’s Expansion into Individual Affairs: A Tug of War over Tradition, Jurisdiction and Universal Human Rights

February 10, 2013 Free Content, International Relations, Intl Law No comments

Introduction – (C) Kapok Tree Diplomacy, July 2010, All rights reserved. Jeff Dwiggins, author.

FREE CONTENTFort Derussy Park, Honolulu

As international law extends beyond traditional state-to-state interactions into matters directly involving the rights and wrongs of individuals, its pervasive encroachment directly collides with domestic law on important issues of supremacy, customary norms, jurisdiction, human rights and sovereign immunity. Courts often struggle to navigate the chasm between the two realms of international and domestic law and produce cogent, universally accepted decisions that fall within uncontested limitations and clear jurisdictions.

This paper will explore the challenges, benefits and trade-offs of a non-traditional application of international law in cases involving individuals where the dynamics of tradition, jurisdiction and human rights interact in overlapping spheres of domestic and international law, producing a compelling tug of war between competing interests.  I’ll begin by examining the issue of international and universal human rights.

The posts, views and opinions expressed on this site are completely my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy (DON) or any of the Armed Forces.

Section One – International Human Rights v. The Interests of States

The Preamble of the United Nations (UN) Charter calls upon member states to “reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small,” while Articles 55 encourages member states to promote “universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion” (“Preamble” and “Chapter IX”). A thorough reading of the Charter, however, doesn’t uncover any definition or mandate for human rights which has complicated a universal embrace of uniform standards for human rights. Read more

 
%d bloggers like this: