Assessment - Section 3 Flashcards
United Nations - Promotion of Human Rights
UN = 193 member states - responsible for almost every aspect of international affairs
Main body for developing and implementing international law, especially human rights
UN has 5 organs, all of which serve to promote human rights
The UN Human Rights Council
The UN’s principal human rights body contains 47 member nations (3-year terms)
Addresses human rights violation and makes recommendations to General Assembly
UNHRC provides a complaints procedure for individuals to bring issues to the Council’s attention & conducts a compulsory periodic review of human rights in all member states
Positives
Human rights investigation can lead to the creation of international law (UNHRC interpretation of ICCPR → Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons)
Provides a mechanism for individuals to have their voices heard (Dujuan Hussan)
Holds all nations accountable for their human rights records
Negatives
Accused of acting according to political considerations rather than human rights (Russia & China hold considerable sway over Council actions)
Australia is allowed to sit on council despite poor human rights record
Council power weakened by the withdrawal of the US in 2018
The Security Council
Made up of 5 permanent and 10 non-permanent members
Charged with the preservation of international peace and security
Makes legally binding resolutions - has the power to authorise military actions, sanctions, or peacekeeping operations
Positives
Sanctions can deter human rights abuses - North Korea
Can intervene to prevent crimes against humanity - 2011 Libya no fly zone
Negatives
‘Toothless Tiger’ - reluctant to use intervention powers - 1994 Rwanda genocide
Veto power is outdated and often stalls progress - US & Israel
Judgement:
Effective at promoting human rights:
Creates international law - eg International Bill of Rights
Encourages cooperation & peace between states
Conducts investigations into human rights abuses - UNHRC
Makes recommendations to states - UNHRC & Declarations
Ineffective at enforcing human rights:
State sovereignty - states are not compelled to sign/follow treaties - success depends upon goodwill of nations
‘Toothless Tiger’ - reluctance to intervene in human rights abuses
Often concerned more with political considerations than human rights interests - hinders progress
IGOs - Effectiveness & Ineffectiveness
IGOs are international institutions made up of member states
They are created by international treaties that act as a charter
Today, there are over 300 IGOs, with prominent organisations being the UN & IMF
Highly effective at promoting human rights:
Founding documents promote human rights - Commonwealth of Nations aims to “promote democracy, good governance, the rule of law, human rights & liberty”
IGOs work together to harmonise laws relating to human rights
IGOs create treaties that encourage human rights - ASEAN Human Rights Declaration
Somewhat effective at enforcing human rights:
Create international instruments which enforce human rights- European Union→ European Convention on Human Rights → European Court of Human Rights
Have the power to expel nations that do not adhere to human rights - Commonwealth of Nations expels Zimbabwe in 2002
State sovereignty - actions of IGOs and their instruments are not legally binding
Some (ASEAN) have history of non-interference or non-action
Organisation of American States has frequent challenges to its authority → lack of funding
Courts, Tribunals & ISAs - Effectiveness & Ineffectiveness
Courts, Tribunals and Independent Statutory Authorities are established by intergovernmental organisations
For example, the European Union → European Convention on Human Rights → European Court of Human Rights
They have the power to hear & judge on matters involving human rights abuses
International Court of Justice
An organ of the UN established in 1946
Can hear and judge disputes between states
Issues advisory opinions on matters of international law
Positives:
Promotes human rights- Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory - upheld international humanitarian law
Negatives:
Member states must consent to jurisdiction - US & China often don’t recognise
Cases can’t be brought by individuals or private organisations
State sovereignty → nations can ignore unfavourable decisions - Palestine case
International Criminal Court
Permanent court established in 2002 under the Rome Statute
Hears prosecutions of the most serious human rights violations
Independent international organisation with a global jurisdiction
Positives
Prosecutes individuals rather than nation-states - greater chance of justice
Decisions are binding - 8 successful convictions
Negatives
ICC indictment is only as meaningful as a member state’s willingness to enforce it
Powers such as the US, Russia & China are not parties to the ICC
Often viewed as a ‘Western Court’ - only black Africans have been convicted
Judgment
Somewhat effective at promoting human rights:
Attempts to uphold international law - Palestine Case
Both individuals and states are able to be prosecuted
Acts as a potential deterrent for human rights abuses
Cases can only be heard if members consent
Can only act after a human rights abuse has taken place
Relatively ineffective at enforcing human rights:
State sovereignty - members must consent to jurisdiction - ICJ decisions do not have to be accepted
US, China & Russia do not accept jurisdiction - limits access to justice
Concerned with political considerations - ICC as a ‘Western Court’
NGOs - Effectiveness & Ineffectiveness
Organisations that are independent of and without representation of any government
Currently, there are over 100,000 NGOs
Examples include Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch & the Red Cross
Highly effective at promoting human rights:
NGOs play a vital role in informing the global community, governments and the UN of human rights violations - Viasana reports on 100 Belarus arrests
They investigate, research, document and publicise cases - Amnesty International investigates impact of justice system on Indigenous Australians
NGOs can shape public opinion on human rights cases
Limited effectiveness of enforcing human rights
NGOs are integral in ‘naming and shaming’ human rights violators - this can often be effective in getting governments to change their behaviour than legal means - 300 NGOs have petitioned China to end suppression of the Uighurs
States are under no obligation to listen to or implement the advice of NGOs
Cannot bring cases to ICJ or ICC or other international courts (with the exception of the European Court of Human Rights - their evidence can be used in cases
Any decisions of the above courts cannot be enforced
The Media - Effectiveness & Ineffectiveness
The media in the context of human rights refers to the organisations that reach and influence a large audience via mass communication
It serves to inform the wider society about current events
Examples include the Guardian, ABC News and Al Jazeera
Highly effective at promoting human rights:
The media can play a crucial role in informing the public about human rights issues - The Guardian exposed the NSA global surveillance that violated privacy
Acts as a check on the executive, legislature and judiciary - The Guardian keeps a tab on the Indigenous deaths in custody and the subsequent legal action
Not always independent when shaping public opinion - Murdoch press accused of painting a biased picture of human rights in China
Limited effectiveness at enforcing human rights:
Play a crucial role in the ‘naming and shaming’ of governments and human rights violators - ‘Kony 2012’ was seen by half of American adults, pushed pressure to bring him to trial
States are not obliged to act on the advice of the media
Do not bring cases to court - can encourage others to do so
Press freedom is restricted in many nations - AFP raids on Annika Smethurts and ABC - 2019, 15 journalists killed, 250 jailed, 63 missing
