Civilian forces and counterterrorism nexus in Africa: A human rights and security dilemma in Burkina Faso

Beyond Claim‐Rights: Social Structure, Collectivization, and Human Rights

У статті розглядається вплив міжнародних стандартів у сфері захисту прав людини на діяльність Національної поліції України. Розкрито сутність «Десяти основних стандартів прав людини для правоохоронних органів», якими повинні керуватися у своїх діяльності працівники Національної поліції України, а також звернено увагу на найбільш поширені порушення прав людини з боку окремих працівників Національної поліції. Згідно з результатами дослідження Національна поліція України повинна неухильно дотримуватися стандартів у сфері захисту прав людини під час реалізації своїх функцій. Саме значне зростання рівня транснаціональної організованої злочинності, стрімка міграція населення у світі, відмінності у підготовці поліцейських кадрів у різних країнах призвели до необхідності впровадження єдиних міжнародних стандартів у діяльність Національної поліції України. Визначено, що у грудня 1998 року у Лондоні «Міжнародною Амністією» спільно з посадовими особами поліції та експертами з різних країн було розроблено «10 основних стандартів прав людини для правоохоронних органів».Дані 10 стандартів були розроблені для використання їх органами поліції як вихідної точки для розробки детальних положень щодо навчальних тренувань та моніторингу поведінки працівників поліції. Встановлено, що, непоодинокими є випадки перевищення працівниками Національної поліції України своїх повноважень, що призводить до порушення прав і свобод людини і громадянина.Імовірними причинами порушень є відсутність ефективного механізму контролю за дотриманням працівниками Національної поліції міжнародних стандартів прав людини, неефективність застосування норм права щодо притягнення працівників поліції до кримінальної відповідальності за порушення прав людини, що вимагає розроблення пропозицій, щодо удосконалення механізму контролю за дотриманням працівниками національної поліції України міжнародних стандартів прав людини.

This Thesis deals with the role of the Constitution and the Domestic Law in the implementation of the modern international standards of human rights as defined under the United Nations Covenants on Human Rights of 1966. It seeks to explain some aspects of the obligation of states parties to take legislative measures for purposes of the effective implementation of the Covenants at the domestic level. The study is conducted in the context of a case study of Jordan as a state party. The Thesis consists of three main parts, divided into seven Chapters and followed by Chapter VIII which is a general conclusion. Part One, contains two Chapters dealing with the relationship between the modern international standards of human rights and the domestic legal systems. Chapter I is a brief legal and historical background. It seeks to highlight some of the major developments in the legal background of the modern international standards of human rights and the legal system of Jordan. Chapter II discusses the applicability of the international rules of human rights within the domestic legal systems with special reference to Jordan. Part Two, is devoted to the first part of the role of the constitution and domestic law in the implementation of the modern international standards of human rights; namely, the adoption of equivalent standards at the domestic level. It also contains two Chapters. Whereas Chapter III focuses on the civil and political rights. Chapter IV deals with the economic, social and cultural rights. A list of four rights has been selected from each catalogue in order to define precisely what are the legislative measures required in the case of each right. Part Three, deals with the other part of the role of the constitution and domestic law, i.e. the introduction of sufficient domestic legal safeguards. It contains three Chapters. Chapter V discusses the role of the Judiciary as the vindicator of human rights, and the independence of the Judiciary as a legal safeguard against human rights violations. Chapter VI deals with the rights to judicial review of administrative actions, as a guarantee against excess or abuse of powers by the administrative authorities, and as an inevitable requirement for the rule of law and respect for human rights in practice. Chapter VII discusses emergency powers and the Impact of the state of emergency on human rights; and considers the question of derogation under Article 4 of the Political Covenant. It focuses on the role of the Constitution and the domestic legislature in imposing restrictions on the right of the national authorities to declare a public emergency and on the emergency powers themselves when the state of emergency is declared. Finally, the concluding Chapter VIII is a general assessment of; The role of the constitution and the domestic laws in the implementation of the modern international standards of human rights, the present system of international scrutiny of the domestic legislative measures, and the performance of Jordan as a state party and the existing legal system of Jordan in general.

Reviewed by: Bureaucratic Intimacies: Translating Human Rights in Turkey by Elif M. Babül Elif Ege* (bio) Elif M. Babül, Bureaucratic Intimacies: Translating Human Rights in Turkey (Stanford University Press 2017), ISBN 9781503601895, 230 pages. Building upon her seven years (2007 to 2014) of ethnographic fieldwork in human rights training programs, in her book Bureaucratic Intimacies: Translating Human Rights in Turkey, Elif M. Babül examines the globally acclaimed concept "human rights" and its daily configurations manifested by government officials such as judges, prosecutors, police officers, prison guards, teachers, religious officials, and health care professionals. Turkey's candidacy to the European Union (EU) membership started in 1999, and from then on the country pursued the integration process to enforce the EU standards of human rights.1 The human rights training programs that Babül's book focuses on are part of this integration process. For Babül, these programs functioned as spaces of encounter between government workers and transnational human rights regimes. She convincingly argues that training programs enable the "translation"2 of the human rights standards in order to address local issues. Yet these programs also depoliticize these standards in order to navigate the "foreignness" attached to these standards in the nationalist imagery of the government workers, by redefining them as necessary requirements to achieve expertise, professional development, and good governance. According to Babül, in doing so, these training programs have failed to contest the existing authoritarian bureaucratic structures that pave the way for major human rights violations, such as ethnic violence, forced migration, and disappearances. While analyzing the training programs, Babül moves beyond the clear-cut separations of the conventional understanding of pedagogy that builds a hierarchy between the educated and non-educated, and teacher and learner. Instead, she emphasizes "dialectical encounters that generate contradiction and resistance."3 According to her, these training practices operate as "dialogical processes"4 that are full of negotiations, contestations, and uncertainties, where the government workers actively take part in challenging and reframing these supposedly "standard" universal standards in line with their local conditions, social and political interests, and "sensitivities, moralities and rationalities that shape the governmental field in Turkey."5 In this sense, her ethnographic method enables the scholar to pay special attention to the interactions and exchanges of different actors, rather than rely on a top-down analysis of human rights standards and [End Page 474] their implementations. This choice is particularly useful for the Turkish context, considering the prevalent nationalist reactions against the discourse of human rights and its European/Western "experts" that claim them to be foreign impositions. Although recently the state has undertaken the responsibility of the institutionalization of human rights discourse—through "a liberal reclamation"6—the prevalent nationalist reactionary discourse in Turkey has defined human rights as "a cover for treacherous activity against the indivisibility of the nation and the state."7 Babül contextualizes this understanding within the country's political and economic history (particularly after the 1980s coup d'etat). As a recipient of foreign aid and structural adjustment policies, Turkey has been required to follow the standards of human rights and women's rights in order to gain the necessary funds.8 As in other contexts from the Global South,9 this has created the feeling of human rights standards as being a foreign influence on the sovereignty of the state. Babül alludes to this neocolonial aspect of human rights training programs while tracing the history of the training programs in the third chapter, where she emphasizes the role played by the Western military-industrial complex in designing these training programs. However, while doing so, the scholar does not exempt the government workers in Turkey from responsibility as she successfully implements a balanced analysis that holds the government officials accountable for their human rights violations, while also emphasizing global asymmetries of power. Throughout the book, Babül underlines the ways in which these national sensitivities around human rights discourse play a role in building "bureaucratic intimacies"10 where government workers, in different levels and formats, collectively take part in conducting, sharing, and withholding "public secrets," meaning major violations of human rights, for the "continuation/perpetuity of the state."11...

They came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade union...

Many counter-terrorism measures enacted by states have been criticized for violating human rights. This study sought to assess the Kenya’s counter-terrorism framework to ascertain whether the established counter-terrorism measures violate or adhere to the protection of human rights. The study adopted an exploratory research design to assess the counter-terrorism measures and alleged human rights violation in Kenya. The target population was the national security organs, counter-terrorism agencies, civil societies championing human rights protection, security enforcers and watchdog bodies. The sample of 200 respondents and informants was drawn from the National Assembly, Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights, the International Federation for Human Rights, UN Counter-Terrorism Centre and Amnesty International Kenya. A stratified and purposive sampling technique was employed in selecting the respondents and informants during the study. The findings of the study established various stick and carrot counter-terrorism strategies used by organizations, government and security apparatus in Kenya. These strategies are faced by a number of challenges. A number of these measures violate human rights. There are however, some counter terrorism strategies that uphold human rights. The counter-terrorism strategies that the government can adopt in respect of human rights to include youth empowerment and employment, enhance surveillance and intelligence gathering, stop renditions and use of force, proper investigations, uphold human rights and rule of law and public education, awareness and participation. The study recommends government to adopt counter-terrorism promote human rights protection. Further, the study recommends that the governments need to create public awareness and participation in counter-terrorism strategies and measures to build public confidence on its efforts to fight terrorism.

최근 한국과 일본의 외교관계는 점점 긴장되고 있는 현실이다. 현재 일본 정부는 과거 한반도에서 일본 식민지 지배하에 (1910-1945) 일어난 전시 잔학행위와 부당행위에 대한 배상을 제공하는 합의에 도달하는 것을 거부하고 있다. 이러한 역사적 기록에는 한국인들이 즉결 처형, 강제 노동, 그리고 강제적 일본군 위안부 동원의 대상이 되었었다는 것을 포함하고 있다. 또한, 한국인들은 일본으로 강제이주의 대상이 되었고, 그곳에서 전쟁 이후에도 계속 착취를 당했다. 세계이차대전이 끝난 이후부터, 한국인들은 주로 빈민가나 작은 촌락에 거주하며, 인권침해에 준할만한 체계적인 차별을 당해왔다. 일본의 국가 주도적 차원에서의 한인소수민족에 대한 차별행위들은 수십 년 동안 지속되어 왔다. 이러한 역사의 그늘 안에서, 현재 일본의 배상동의 거부 행위는 주변 국가들과의 관계까지도 훼손시키고 있을 뿐만 아니라, 심지어 모든 회원국들에 의해 마땅히 지켜져야 하는 국제 인도주의법의 기초가 되는 국제인권규범을 약화, 훼손시키는 행위임이 분명하다. 본 논문은 세대를 거슬러 지속된 차별과 소외를 겪고 있는 일본에 있는 한인소수민족을 중심으로 다룬다. 마땅히 당사국인 일본정부로부터 보호받아야할 한인소수민족의 기본적 권리들은 현시점까지도 전혀 존중 받지 못하고 있는 것이 현실이다. 따라서, 본 논문은 현재 한인소수민족에 대한 일본국가 주도의 인권규범위반에 준하는 차별적 행위들이 얼마나 이뤄지고 있는지에 대해 분석 한다. 현재 일본에 있는 한인소수민족들은 그들의 기본적 권리들이 지속적으로 침해되는 위험에 처해 있지만, 일본정부는 이러한 상황의 해결을 위한 적절한 법적 조치들은 없는 현실이다. 현재 일본의 정책들과 관행들은 국제인권규범들에 명백히 위배되는 것이며, 이는 인종적 다양성을 포용하는 소위 다문화주의 접근방식의 정책을 지향하고 있는 대부분의 민주주의 국가들에 반대되는 것이라고 볼 수 있다. 국제인권규범들과 그에 따른 기준들을 준수하기 위해 일본정부가 자국에 거주하고 있는 한인소수민족의 권리를 완전히 인식해야 할 필요성이 시급하다. 현재 일본정부는 한인소수민족의 인권 상황을 개선하고, 동시에 국제인권규범과 기준에 따라 고안된 정책들을 도입하는 국가 정책적 변화의 촉진을 위해 최선을 다해야 한다.Diplomatic relations between the Republic of Korea and Japan have become increasingly tense. The current Japanese administration refuses to reach an agreement that could provide reparations for its wartime atrocities and injustices, which happened on the Korean peninsula under Japanese colonial rule (1910 1945). The historical record includes Koreans being subjected to summary execution, forced labor, and the forced slavery of comfort women. Korean people were also subject to forced migration to Japan, where their exploitation continued, even after the war. Since the end of World War II, Korean ethnic minorities, often living in slums and hamlets, have been systematically discriminated against. These abuses amount to human rights violations. Japan’s stateled discrimination of the Korean ethnic minority group has remained unchanged for decades. In the shadow of this history, Japan’s refusal to agree to reparations strains its relationships with other countries in the region, and undermines the international human rights norms that form the basis of international humanitarian laws, which all member states must abide by. This paper considers the Korean ethnic minority group in Japan, whose experience of discrimination and marginalization extends across generations. Even in the current era, the fundamental rights of those with Korean ancestry have not been respected. Accordingly, this paper examines the extent to which state-led discrimination against Koreans amounts to human rights violations. The Korean minority population in Japan is currently at risk of having their fundamental rights continuously violated, while the Japanese government lacks adequate legal measures to resolve the situation. This paper finds that current Japanese policies and practices violate international norms pertaining to human rights, thus reversing the trend of many liberal democracies to embrace multiculturalism and ethnic diversity. There is an urgent need for the Japanese government to fully recognize the rights of the Korean minority in Japan in an effort to abide by international human rights norms and standards. The Japanese government should thus make utmost efforts to improve the human rights conditions of the Korean minority, and simultaneously bring Japanese policies into accordance with international human rights standards.

Previous research suggests that most treaties are ineffective in ensuring countries’ compliance with human rights standards. It has been argued, however, that preferential trade agreements (PTAs) including ‘hard’ human rights standards can withhold economic benefits and, thus, can have a real potential to substantially reduce human rights violations. The following article questions this as existent work on the effects of PTAs on human rights standards neglects a selection process underlying the implementation of these treaties. Countries being aware of the ‘shadow of the future’ already take into account what may happen at the succeeding enforcement stage when establishing a particular PTA. This implies that states agree on ‘hard’ human rights standards in PTAs only if they have a general propensity to abide by human rights in the first place. For testing the empirical implications of their argument, the authors collected new data on PTAs in 1976/77-2009, and employ genetic matching techniques. The results support the theoretical argument that PTAs are unlikely to affect human rights compliance when controlling for the outlined selection problem.

Understanding the current disjuncture between human rights, authoritarianism, populism, nationalism, globalization, and forced migration has never been more urgent, especially in the face of gradual collapse of the liberal world order. Failure to address human rights violations will have grave consequences. Without understanding the sources of human rights violations, international human rights standards will do little to ensure their realization across the globe. Yet it is unrealistic to search exclusively for general laws and discernible patterns of human rights violations that could be held across all cases. While it is possible to systematically explore both proximate and underlying causes of human rights violations, such an analysis must be grounded in theory. It is thus important to unpack the sources of endemic human rights abuses, including those having to do with authoritarianism, xenophobic nationalism, sectarianism, torture, child labor, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, genocide, forced migration, human/sexual trafficking, statelessness, and refugee crisis. To that end, there are two broad categories of human rights violations: domestic and international. Although there is agreement on the most pressing problems of human rights violations, there is no consensus over the answers. Our findings have broader implications for literature on human rights abuses, moral responsibility in the postliberal world order, and social justice.

Reviewed by: Human Rights in Latin America: A Politics of Terror and Hope Carrie Booth Walling (bio) Sonia Cardenas , Human Rights in Latin America: A Politics of Terror and Hope (Philadelphia, Penn.: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010) 248 pp., ISBN 978-0-8122-4197-6. The human rights record of Latin America is decidedly mixed. Plagued by high levels of poverty and inequality, legal impunity, weak democratic institutions, and strong militaries, Latin America has experienced severe levels of human rights abuse. Human rights violations in the region have included torture, extrajudicial killing, forced disappearance, and political imprisonment. Individually and in tandem, authoritarian regimes in Latin America have used repression and state-sponsored terrorism in the name of political stability and national security. Human rights abuse in Latin America, until recently, had been considered among the worst in the developing world.1 The regional experience of human rights has been one of significant political terror; but Latin America is also home to powerful human rights organizations and precedent-setting efforts to secure justice and accountability for government human rights abuse. Indeed, Latin America has displayed extraordinary leadership in the development and proliferation of international human rights norms and institutions. Latin American countries played an important role in securing human rights language in the United Nations Charter, developed and ratified the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man in early 1948 (preceding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), and were at the forefront of efforts to ensure state accountability for human rights violations through the development of new human rights standards (protection from forced disappearance, the right to an identity) and the use of transitional justice mechanisms. There is a regional trend toward embracing human rights norms which has been aptly described as a "human rights norms cascade" in Latin America.2 Sonia Cardenas effectively captures this nuanced and complicated history of human rights in a simple but substantively rich introductory text book, Human Rights in Latin America: A Politics of Terror and Hope. Cardenas' text is an attempt to complicate simple understandings of human rights in Latin America by introducing students to the terror of human rights abuse, the hope of human rights reform, and the challenge of accountability through an examination of regional trends and cross-national dynamics. Cardenas has written her text with two audiences in mind: undergraduate students of human rights and undergraduate students of Latin America. She makes [End Page 1032] human rights concepts accessible for students by examining them within the historical and geographic experience of Latin American countries. This approach reflects a principal goal of the book: to introduce students to the systematic tools and methods for studying human rights while simultaneously introducing them to the lived experience of victims and survivors of human rights abuse. Cardenas invites her readers in "stepping back and getting up close— stepping back to identify key facts and trends, getting up close to hear personal experiences of abuse.3" As a result, the book combines quantitative analysis of human rights trends with qualitative research on the origins of abuse and the dynamics of political reform with personal narratives of survival and official documentation of repression and redress. Cardenas' text is a welcome effort at combining different literatures, analytical approaches and narrative styles, providing students with a rich and multilayered experience of human rights in both principle and practice. Cardenas achieves this by including "Up-Close" text boxes of first-hand accounts and primary documents that function as mini-case studies throughout her scholarly analysis.4 This dual approach cleverly introduces students to the broad content of human rights, perpetrators of abuse, and tools of human rights change. While the book necessarily focuses its analysis narrowly on the violation of physical integrity rights that have plagued Latin America (freedom from torture, extrajudicial execution, forced disappearance, and political imprisonment), it succeeds in introducing students to human rights issues that overlap, but push beyond these particular political and civil rights, hinting at the broad, interconnected, and interdependent character of all human rights. Using "up close" text boxes, Cardenas exposes her readers to diverse human rights issues including femicide, disability rights, sexual orientation rights, labor rights, indigenous rights, and the rights...

Human rights policies and practices in the People's Republic of China have repeatedly been criticized for falling short of international standards. Although China has signed the international covenant on civil and political rights, so far it has ratified only the international covenant on economic, social, and cultural rights, despite repeated urgings by the international community. China's performance even under the agreements to which it is bound remains a subject of frequent criticism.1 While China's compliance with international human rights standards seems highly problematic, its human rights record can be explained at least in part by reference to China's divergent interpretations of these standards based on factors of local legal culture. The paradigm of explains much about the ways in which international legal standards are interpreted and applied in light of local legal cultural norms in China.2 As well, China's compliance with its international human rights commitments may be understood by reference to factors of institutional performance. The paradigm of institutional capacity explains the ways that conditions of perspective, identity, and organization affect the performance of governance institutions. As an alternative to normative analysis of human rights violations, the cultural and structural dimensions of selective adaptation and institutional capacity explain much about China's human rights policies and practice.LEGAL CULTURE AND SELECTIVE ADAPTATIONLegal culture analysis permits appreciation of the tensions between the globalized systems of liberal legal norms, from which many international human rights standards derive, and deeply embedded systems of local norms and values. China's legal reform project represents in significant part an effort to adapt selectively foreign models of law and governance drawn largely from the liberal tradition.3 This involves questions about the potential for normative community between Chinese legal culture and the foreign models China is seeking to apply to its development project. Proceeding from tenets about human equality and natural law, liberal political and legal norms stand generally for the proposition that government should be an agency of popular will.4 Such agency requires accountability, from political leaders through democratic elections and from administrative agencies acting within the limits of lawfully delegated authority. Responsible agency is thus a typology by which regulators and their political superiors are accountable to the subjects of regulation, and as a result are expected to exercise regulatory authority broadly in accordance with norms of transparency and the rule of law. Thus, the accountability of political and administrative agents may be described in terms of their responsibility to society. In contrast, norms of governance in China suggest a typology of patrimonial sovereignty, by which regulators are accountable primarily to their bureaucratic and political superiors, and as a result have few obligations to heed the subjects of rule in the process or substance of regulation. Under the dynamic of patrimonial sovereignty, political leaders and administrative agencies have responsibility for society but are not responsible to it. This helps to set an ideological context by which protection of individual human rights is relegated to secondary status, behind the primacy of the state.Tensions between responsible agency and patrimonial sovereignty affect compliance with international human rights standards through the dynamic of selective adaptation, by which non-local institutional practices and organizational forms are mediated by local norms. While parties to international human rights treaties accept compliance obligations upon ratification, as a practical matter interpretation and application of specific international human rights standards will depend on a degree of commonality between the sodocultural norms underlying these standards and local norms. …

Introduction. The article is devoted to the study of general prospects for the development of the human rights institution in conditions of global crises. Human rights in the modern civilized world are not only abstract universal values, the highest social value of the development of democratic, legal and social states, a key element of the stable and progressive functioning of society, but also an integral part of the process of implementing law as a whole. Global crises, which are accompanied by increased economic, political and social problems, usually lead to a temporary weakening of the mechanisms for the implementation and protection of human rights and freedoms. Such a situation requires the development and implementation of new mechanisms to counter the challenges and threats associated with the growing level of discrimination, violence and numerous violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms in these conditions. The aim of the article. The purpose of this article is to determine the general prospects for the development of the institution of human rights in the context of global crises and to develop basic recommendations for ensuring their effective implementation. Results. Various issues related to improving the institution of human rights in the context of modern global crises require the use of a considered, balanced approach, which should combine flexible, operational and to a certain extent universal mechanisms for their provision and protection, capable in their entirety to give a quick and qualitative responding to crisis situations in the relevant spheres and industries of public life, ensuring and protecting human rights in extraordinary conditions. The difficulty of creating such legal mechanisms is associated with a number of reasons, in particular with the existing differences between the global interests of the most developed states, their associations, transnational corporations and the interests of national cultural protectionism, the policy of which some modern states seek to implement, with the need to ensure a constant balance between human rights and security measures that restrict them, with the uneven application of international human rights standards at the national level, which is associated, among other things, with the non-acceptance of a number of modern human rights and freedoms by the socio-cultural traditions of development of many states, with the global crisis of social and individual moral consciousness, etc. Modern forms of law enforcement and human rights protection activities include appropriate digital platforms and social networks for the dissemination of certain information, consolidation of citizens and pressure on public authorities. In the context of modern crises, such technologies include platforms for monitoring compliance with human rights, collecting signatures, online appeals and petitions, etc. An important component of these innovations is also digital platforms for providing legal consulting, which can provide primary legal assistance to migrants, refugees, victims of hostilities or environmental disasters, and other socially vulnerable segments of the population. Conclusions. The prospects for development of the human rights institution in the context of global crises are associated both with the implementation of further modernization of international and national human rights protection mechanisms (for example, improving the legal framework, increasing the level of legal awareness of the population, creating effective judicial and other human rights protection institutions, etc.), and with the implementation of a set of measures aimed at the formation and development of the moral consciousness of the individual, in particular a number of his moral qualities that ensure the natural unity of being (for example, conscience, benevolence, honesty, responsibility, loyalty, mercy, courage, moderation, hard work, etc.). It is the high level of public and individual moral consciousness that makes it impossible to formally, unscrupulously apply legal norms, various abuses and manipulations of their content in certain legal relations, and therefore is one of the main prerequisites and at the same time a guarantee of the real effectiveness of relevant law enforcement and human rights protection practices, the primary subject of which is always a person. Key words: human rights, global crises, mechanisms for ensuring and protecting human rights, state, legal norms, implementation of law.

The article is devoted to the identification, definition and research of theoretical and praxeological factors and trends leading to the objectification of the issue of codification works in the field of international legal standards of human rights. It is proved that issue of human and citizen rights and freedoms, since the creation of the UN in 1945, has been a fundamental object of cooperation between states in the modern international community (see the Preamble to the 1945 UN Charter). That is why at the level of such an association of modern states, as well as at the regional and bilateral levels, in order to detail and specify the mandatory obligations of states in this most important sphere of interaction, a large number of multilateral and bilateral international interstate treaties, which, firstly, affect a wide range of subjects (people, women, children, disabled people, believers, prisoners, soldiers, prisoners of war, the elderly, pensioners, athletes, etc.), and secondly, establish mandatory obligations of their member states (international legal obligations of states, obligations of states under international treaties signed by them) in relation to a wide range of rights recognized by their legally recognized international catalog (personal, political, economic, social, cultural, environmental), thirdly, in the process of their implementation in various conditions (peacetime, state of martial law or war, environmental and man-made disasters, other extraordinary conditions of existence and functioning of statehood, etc.). It is noted that in the modern world, since the creation of the UN, the protection and observance of the basic rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen have ceased to be the competence of a specific country, but have become the business of the entire international community, since, first of all, it is the "alpha and omega" of international cooperation of states in its boundaries (the teleological factor of the modern international order – author); secondly, it is precisely within its limits that a powerful international legal array of treaty law documents was created regarding such specialized protection and protection of human and citizen rights / thanks to the increased concern and attention of the international community to these issues at various times, authoritative international organizations, including the UN, adopted about 300 declarations, conventions, charters/ (determining source factor of the modern international order – author); thirdly, for a long time, they have been the most important task of many states of the world community in terms of fulfilling their international legal obligations, taken within the framework of the international treaties signed by them and the implementation of their instructions within the limits of national jurisdiction (a mandatory factor of the modern international order – author); fourthly, there are clear international legal mechanisms of protection, protection and control over the fulfillment by member states of the international community of international legal obligations in the field of human and citizen rights and freedoms (the technologically protected factor of international protection, protection and control of modern international order – author); fifthly, the regulatory and technological phenomenon "international legal standards of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen" was used for the first time, which was transformed into an important, modern, effective phenomenology of modern international law, based on the relevant international and national implementation mechanisms of the international treaty law and provides for the mandatory borrowing of the above standards by the national constitutional legislation of the states – respectively, either signatories, or participants, or parties to relevant contractual international legal acts (transformational and implementation factor of international protection, protection and control of the modern international order – author). It is argued that, taking into account the special importance and socio-legal significance of international legal standards of human and citizen rights and freedoms for the formation and implementation of institutional-organizational and regulatory-obligatory guidelines of the modern international legal order, based on the fundamental principles of public international law, the problem of their codification acquires of significant importance.

The recent 100th anniversary of the birth of Ralph Johnson Bunche, serves as a timely reminder of the United States' proud history of leadership and commitment to international law and institutions, and of how much that kind of leadership is needed today. There is an urgent need for the United States to reflect on its own historic role in the establishment of a global system of rules and institutions. The time has come to renew its commitment, in words and deeds, to the rule of law and to the international human rights standards and system that it did so much to establish. Equally important, there is a need to recognize how both connect to the goal of ensuring true human security. I make this call for a renewed commitment not as a critic but as a longtime friend and strong supporter of the United States. We are confronted today with a dangerous array of threats to peace and security--from terrorists who are prepared to attack without regard for human lives, to failing and failed states unable to secure even the most basic structures of governance and risk of becoming the breeding grounds for future terrorists. Other threats--from the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to the global HIV/AIDS pandemic, to international criminal syndicates that traffic in everything from small arms to the most vulnerable human beings--all require leadership and joint action. It is precisely these dangers that make respect for the rule of law and human rights so important today. Standing up for those principles and the international systems that have been built to uphold them requires holding fast to long-standing national and international obligations. It also calls for thinking in new ways about security. A more expansive notion of human security could serve as a bridge, reconnecting the people of the United States with people from every part of the planet with greater awareness of our common future. Some have argued that the terrible attacks of September 11, 2001, were so heinous that the only possible response was a global on terrorism. These voices point out that the enemy is not a nation-state and is not willing to respect the fundamental standards of international law. Fighting terrorism, therefore, requires new strategies and sometimes exceptional More than three years after September 11, we must ask ourselves if such measures were justified or if they have brought results. (1) Were the decisions taken by the U.S. government to hold detainees Guantanamo Bay without Geneva Convention hearings; to monitor, detain, and deport immigrants against whom no charges had been made; or to question long-held commitments (such as forbidding the use of torture) justifiable actions to protect the American people? Some believe strongly that such actions were necessary to guard against further terrorist attacks. What is clear is that the language at war with has had direct, and nefarious, implications. It has brought a subtle--or not so subtle--change of emphasis: order and security trump all other concerns. As was often the case in the past during times of war, the emphasis on national order and security involved curtailment of democratic processes and resulted in violations of human rights. The bipartisan commission that has investigated the actions leading up to and following the events of September 11 has prompted an important debate about the effectiveness of these strategies and how best to protect the United States in the future. (2) That debate should continue, and the International Commission of Jurists made a good start during its biennial conference in August 2004 in Berlin. One hundred sixty international lawyers from around the world adopted the Declaration on Upholding Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Combating Terrorism, (3) which acknowledges terrorism as a serious threat to human rights and affirms that all states are obliged to take effective measures. …

Background: Human rights violations within the criminal justice system represent a pervasive problem. International human rights agreements and national laws clearly assert the absolute protection of human rights. However, despite these strong legal principles, human rights violations frequently occur within the criminal justice system. This article examines the problem of human rights violations in the criminal justice system of Kazakhstan and the role of the prosecutor's office in protecting human rights. Methods: This study utilised documentary analysis and secondary data analysis methodologies to conduct a detailed examination of legal acts, international agreements, and policy documents It specifically reviewed documents including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the Constitutional Law “On the Prosecutor's Office”, the Concept of Legal Policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan up to 2030, and human rights reports from international bodies such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Freedom House. The study also analysed reports from the Ministry of Justice and the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Results and conclusions: By analysing international human rights treaties, national legislation, and reports from leading human rights organisations, the study exposes significant discrepancies between legal mandates and actual practices. Despite Kazakhstan's formal commitment to international human rights standards, it reveals systemic issues, including instances of human rights abuses in criminal justice. The study highlights the critical role of the prosecutor's office in human rights protection while also pointing out the challenges in effectively fulfilling these responsibilities. The findings stress the importance of legislative reforms for enhancing the protection of human rights in criminal justice. The study is particularly relevant for policymakers, human rights advocates, and scholars interested in the intersection of law enforcement and human rights protections, offering insights that could guide future improvements in criminal justice practices.