Пропаганда війни в імперативних нормах і зобов’язаннях erga omnes

The Nuremberg tribunal was the expression and the beginning of states' recognition of their duty to prosecute genocide and other gross human rights violations. It was a first step towards fulfillin...

'Gender Comment': Why does the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights need a General Comment on Women?

The UN Human Rights Committee is an independent body of 18 experts, which was established in 1976 to monitor State party compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and to act as a quasi-judicial organ with competence to examine complaints from individuals, pursuant to the Optional Protocol to the Covenant (OP). Bearing in mind that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has no competence to examine cases submitted by individuals, the Human Rights Committee (HRC) is the closest the world has ever come to an international court of human rights. According to rule 92 of the Committee’s rules of procedure the Committee may inform the State party that interim measures of protection may be desirable to avoid irreparable harm to the victim of the alleged violation. Keywords: Human Rights Committee (HRC); ICCPR; international court of human rights; International Court of Justice (ICJ); Optional Protocol (OP); State party; UN Human Rights Committee

In 1994 the Human Rights Committee, the treaty body acting under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),106 adopted its General Comment No. 24 (52)107 on issues related to reservations made to the Covenant or its two Optional Protocols.108 The General Comment did not break new ground as to the regime on reservations under human rights treaties but it certainly made explicit some of the tensions that existed between the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Vienna Convention)109 and the approach taken to reservations under human rights treaties. The General Comment triggered off critical comments by certain States,110 and still after ten years it still remains an important background factor for the ongoing work of the International Law Commission (ILC) under the theme of reservations to multilateral treaties.111

The Quest for Information Privacy in Africa: A Review Essay

In defence of human rights

Human rights — Procedure — United Nations Human Rights Committee — Availability of legal aid for proceedings before CommitteeInternational tribunals — United Nations Human Rights Committee — Nature of Committee — Whether a judicial authority — Whether exercising adjudicative functions — Whether part of judicial machinery of State which has accepted its jurisdiction — Availability of legal aid from national legal aid fund for proceedings before CommitteeRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Optional Protocol — United Nations Human Rights Committee — State party to Optional Protocol — Whether Committee exercising adjudicative functions of the State — The law of New Zealand

29The individual in international law — In general — Human rights and freedoms — Persecution for trade union activities — Detention without trial — Abduction — Arbitrary arrest and detention — Detention incommunicado — Allegations of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment — Forced confessions — Delay of trial — Proper legal representation — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Optional Protocol — U.N. Human Rights Committee — Procedure — Findings of facts in absence of evidence from State party — Whether derogations from Covenant justifiable — Allegations of violations on territory of another State — Whether considerations by Committee barred — Whether violations within scope of application of Covenant

256 The individual in international law — In general — Human rights and freedoms — Detention without trial — Detainee held incommunicado — Inhuman and degrading treatment — Detainee held for one month after release ordered — Habeas corpus not available — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — Optional Protocol — U.N. Human Rights Committee — Procedure — Findings of fact in absence of evidence from State Party — Whether derogations from Covenant justifiable

How effective has the Human Rights Committee been in encouraging domestic human rights protections? The Committee, oldest and irost established of the expert human rights treaty bodies, officially oversees the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee plays a number of different roles in the course of its work, some more subtle than others. It sets standards for interpretation of the Covenant. It draws the attention of the world community to human rights issues. It engages in a dialogue with states parties, pointing out domestic human rights issues that they may not have been aware of or that they would have rather ignored. Under the Optional Protocol, the Committee considers individual cases.' One of its most important roles, however, is to urge and steer Covenant implementation by states parties using the report system. Under this system, states parties present a report to the Human Rights Committee every five years, informing the Committee of the domestic status of, and developments with regard to, issues addressed by the Covenant.

The Quest for Information Privacy in Africa

Armed Conflict and Human Rights in Colombia

The following remarks do not address the full range of issues connected with the problem of reservations entered by States when signing, ratifying or acceding to a human rights treaty. They will only focus on a statement of the Human Rights Committee contained in General Comment No. 24 (1994) on ‘Issues relating to reservations made upon ratification or accession to the Covenant or the Optional Protocols thereto, or in relation to declarations under article 41 of the Covenant’.155 Paragraph 8 of this General Comment reads: ‘Reservations that offend peremptory norms would not be compatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant. Although treaties that are mere exchanges of obligations between States allow them to reserve inter se application of rules of general international law, it is otherwise in human rights treaties, which are for the benefit of persons within their jurisdiction. Accordingly, provisions in the Covenant that represent customary international law (and a fortiori when they have the character of peremptory norms) may not be the subject of reservations. Accordingly, a State may not reserve the right to engage in slavery, to torture, to subject persons to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, to arbitrarily deprive persons of their lives, to arbitrarily arrest and detain persons, to deny freedom of thought, conscience and religion, to presume a person guilty unless he proves his innocence, to execute pregnant women or children, to permit the advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred, to deny to persons of marriageable age the right to marry, or to deny to minorities the right to enjoy their own culture, profess their own religion, or use their own language. And while reservations to particular clauses of article 14 may be acceptable, a general reservation to the right to a fair trial would not be.’

Final Report on The UN Human Rights Committee and other Human Rights Treaty Bodies

This chapter explores the existence and persistence of religious offences in the case of artistic expressions that are considered to be blasphemous, offensive, defamatory, irreverent and otherwise transgressive. Drawing on the jurisprudence of human rights bodies, it examines the international legal framework applicable to blasphemous arts and the human rights principles pertinent to controversies over creative freedom involving incitement to religious hatred. Moreover, drawing on the jurisprudence of the UN Human Rights Committee, the UN Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the European Court of Human Rights, it discusses the application of general principles of human rights law (such as the element of intention to stir religious hatred, or the impact of particular expression on religious minorities) on artists and artworks. Last but not least, the chapter discusses the international politics of blasphemy drawing on controversies of global scale such as Danish cartoons and Charlie Hebdo, and incidents related to the rise of Islamic extremism. In this respect the author emphasizes the need to avoid undermining the value of free speech in the human rights edifice, while also emphasizing the need for a better, cross-cultural understanding of both religious and artistic traditions.