INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES: GENESIS AND PROGRESSION
International human rights treaties are vital legal instruments designed to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals on a global scale. These treaties are created through multilateral agreements between states and establish obligations for the parties involved to respect, protect, and fulfill specific human rights. Over the decades, these treaties have shaped the international human rights regime, influencing both national and international legal frameworks. This essay provides an in-depth exploration of the development, application, and impact of international human rights treaties, supported by relevant statutory provisions and judicial authorities.
The enforcement of these have been a subject of global concern however, this is as many believe that international laws are generally bull dogs that can only bark but cannot bite, especially when certain power blocs are involved.
Historical Background of International Human Rights Treaties
The modern international human rights framework emerged in response to the atrocities committed during World War II. The formation of the United Nations (UN) in 1945 marked a significant turning point, with the UN Charter emphasizing the promotion of human rights as a core objective. Article 1(3) of the Charter explicitly states the purpose of the UN to promote and encourage respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction based on race, sex, language, or religion.
The adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on the 10th of December, 1948 by the UN General Assembly laid the foundation for subsequent international human rights treaties. Although the UDHR is not legally binding, it has served as a moral and legal compass, guiding the drafting of numerous binding international human rights instruments.
Highlights of Human Rights Treaties
The international community has developed several key treaties that form the backbone of international human rights law. These treaties establish legally binding obligations for states that ratify them, covering a wide range of rights and protections.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
The ICCPR, adopted in 1966 and entering into force in 1976, is one of the most significant human rights treaties. It guarantees civil and political rights such as the right to life, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to a fair trial. The ICCPR also establishes the Human Rights Committee (HRC), which monitors the implementation of the covenant by its state parties.
One of the notable features of the ICCPR is its First Optional Protocol, which allows individuals to submit complaints to the HRC regarding violations of their rights under the covenant. The case of Toonen v. Australia (1994) is a landmark decision by the HRC, where it held that Tasmania's anti-homosexuality laws violated the ICCPR, particularly the right to privacy under Article 17. This decision underscored the treaty's influence on domestic legal systems and its role in advancing human rights.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
The ICESCR, adopted alongside the ICCPR in 1966 and also entering into force in 1976, focuses on economic, social, and cultural rights. These include the rights to work, social security, an adequate standard of living, health, and education. The ICESCR is monitored by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR).
The ICESCR operates on the principle of progressive realization, recognizing that states may achieve full realization of these rights over time, based on available resources. However, states are obligated to take deliberate and concrete steps towards this goal. The CESCR’s General Comment No. 3 (1990) elaborates on the obligations of states under Article 2(1) of the ICESCR, emphasizing that while resource constraints may limit immediate implementation, certain core obligations must be met.
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
Adopted in 1979 and entering into force in 1981, CEDAW is a pivotal treaty dedicated to eliminating discrimination against women. It provides a comprehensive framework for addressing gender inequality and advancing women's rights globally. CEDAW defines discrimination against women and outlines measures that states must take to eliminate such discrimination.
The case of A.T. v. Hungary (2005) before the CEDAW Committee highlights the treaty’s impact. The Committee found that Hungary had violated CEDAW by failing to protect a woman from domestic violence, demonstrating the treaty’s role in holding states accountable for gender-based violence.
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT)
CAT, adopted in 1984 and entering into force in 1987, is a key treaty aimed at eradicating torture and other inhumane treatment. The Convention requires states to take effective measures to prevent torture and to ensure that perpetrators are held accountable. CAT is monitored by the Committee Against Torture, which can consider individual complaints under its Optional Protocol.
In the case of *Soering v. United Kingdom* (1989), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) referenced CAT in its ruling that extraditing a person to a country where they would face a real risk of torture would violate the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This case illustrates how international treaties like CAT influence judicial decisions at both international and regional levels.
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
The CRC, adopted in 1989 and entering into force in 1990, is the most widely ratified human rights treaty, with almost universal acceptance. It sets out the rights of children, including the rights to life, survival, and development, protection from abuse and exploitation, and the right to participate in decisions affecting them.
The CRC has been instrumental in shaping national laws and policies on children's rights. In the case of González (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico (2009), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights cited the CRC in its decision, highlighting the state’s obligations to protect children from violence and discrimination.
Application of Human Rights Treaties
The enforcement and interpretation of international human rights treaties often occur through judicial decisions at both international and domestic levels. Courts play a crucial role in clarifying the scope of these treaties and ensuring that states comply with their obligations.
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
The ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, with jurisdiction over disputes between states concerning the interpretation and application of international treaties. Although individuals cannot bring cases directly before the ICJ, its rulings have significant implications for human rights.
In the case of *Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo)* (2010), the ICJ applied both the ICCPR and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, ruling that the DRC had violated the human rights of Mr. Diallo by unlawfully detaining and expelling him. This case exemplifies the ICJ’s role in upholding human rights norms at the state level.
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
The ECtHR, established under the ECHR, is one of the most influential regional human rights courts. It has jurisdiction over cases brought by individuals, organizations, or states alleging violations of the ECHR. The Court’s decisions are binding on the states concerned and have significantly shaped human rights law in Europe.
The case of *D.H. and Others v. Czech Republic* (2007) is a landmark judgment where the ECtHR found that the Czech Republic had violated the rights of Romani children by placing them in special schools for the mentally disabled, constituting indirect discrimination under Article 14 of the ECHR. This case demonstrates the Court’s role in addressing systemic discrimination and enforcing human rights standards.
Domestic Courts
Domestic courts are also key actors in the enforcement of international human rights treaties. In many countries, courts have the authority to apply international treaties directly or to interpret domestic law in conformity with international obligations.
In Nigeria, the case of *Fawehinmi v. Abacha* (2000) is a significant example of how domestic courts can enforce international human rights norms. The Supreme Court of Nigeria held that the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which had been domesticated into Nigerian law, took precedence over conflicting domestic legislation. This case highlights the potential for domestic courts to act as enforcers of international human rights treaties within their jurisdictions.
Recommendation
International human rights treaties have profoundly influenced the protection and promotion of human rights worldwide. These treaties establish binding legal obligations for states, which are enforced through a combination of international, regional, and domestic judicial mechanisms. The interplay between statutory provisions and judicial authorities ensures that these treaties are not merely aspirational documents but are actively applied to protect individuals' rights.
As the global human rights landscape continues to evolve, international human rights treaties will remain essential tools for safeguarding human dignity, promoting justice, and ensuring that all individuals enjoy the fundamental rights and freedoms to which they are entitled. The ongoing development and enforcement of these treaties are crucial for advancing the cause of human rights across the globe.
It is therefore respectfully recommended that the legal framework on enforcement of international human right treaties be strengthened globally as these are inalienable subject applicable to all humans irrespective of race, creed and greed.
References
1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948.
2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966.
3. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966.
4. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1979.
5. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984.
6. Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989.
7. Toonen v. Australia, Human Rights Committee, Communication No. 488/1992, UN Doc CCPR/C/50/D/488/1992 (1994).
8. Soering v. United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 14038/88 (1989).
9. Fawehinmi v. Abacha, Supreme Court of Nigeria, SC. 45/1997 (2000).
10. D.H. and Others v. Czech Republic, European Court of Human Rights, Application No. 57325
