In defence of human rights

Armed Conflict and Human Rights in Colombia

The commitment to human rights is the cornerstone of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. However, South Africa’s human rights record in the international community often stands in stark contrast to its constitutional commitment to human rights. In both international and regional contexts, South Africa has demonstrated an inconsistent approach to foreign policy that is often guided more by political considerations than by a principled commitment to advancing human rights. This lecture provides an overview of South Africa’s engagement with international human rights law in the constitutional era and evaluates its human rights record in the international arena in a diverse range of fields. These fields include South Africa’s record of human rights protection in peace and security operations on the African continent; its record as a member of the UN Security Council and Human Rights Council; the assessment of its performance by UN human rights treaty bodies; and its record in respect of the Covid-19 pandemic, international criminal justice, the death penalty, and the arms trade. The lecture draws on Judge Pillay’s extensive experience in international law, including as President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Judge at the International Criminal Court in The Hague and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Preface List of Contributors Introduction Progressive Nuances in International Human Rights Paradigm 1. The Historical Development of International Human Rights, Michelo Hansungule 1. Introduction 2. Some Historical Perspectives on Human Rights 3. Universal Rights 4. The European View 5. Human Rights as Moral Ideas in Diverse Societies, Religions, and Cultures 6. Africa 7. Middle East (Islamic World) 8. Asia 9. Post-War Developments 10. Conclusion 2. Civil and Political Rights, Joshua Castellino 1. Introduction 2. The Covenant 3. The Rights Package 4. Future Challenges 3. An Introduction to Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Overcoming the Constraints of Categorization through Implementation, Vinodh Jaichand 1. Introduction 2. Historical Development 3. Similarities and Differences in Content of ICCPR and ICESCR 4. The Norms and Enforcement 5. On Justiciability: An Example of the Protection of ESC Rights in a Region 6. On Justiciability: Domestic Enforcement 7. Conclusion 4. Women's Rights in International Law, Mmatsie Mooki, Rita Ozoemana, Michelo Hansungule 1. Introduction 2. Recognition of Women's Rights: United Nations Charter and the International Bill of Rights 3. Women's Rights in other United Nations Convention 4. Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women 5. United Nations Groundbreaking Conferences 6. Violence Against Women 7. Conclusion 5. Globalization and Human Rights, Heli Askola 1. Introduction 2. Globalization 3. Economic Globalization and Human Rights 4. Political, Social and Cultural Globalization and Human Rights 5. Conclusion 6. Role of the UN in the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Elvira Dominguez-Redondo 1. Introduction 2. From Codification to Efficiency: The Different Phases of the Human Rights Discourse within the United Nations 3. Normative Development of the UN System of Protection and Promotion of Human Rights 4. Charter-based and Treaty-based Monitoring Mechanisms: Public Special Procedure and the Work of the Committees 7. Attributes of Successful Human Rights on-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) - Sixty Years After the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, George E. Edwards 1. Introduction 2. NGOs & Human Rights NGOs 3. Ten Characteristics of Successful Human Rights NGOs 4. NGO Self-Regulation Via Codes of Conduct and Ethics 5. Conclusion 8. Do States have an Obligation under International Law to Provide Human Rights Education?, Paula Gerber 1. Introduction 2. Human Rights Education (HRE) in International Law 3. Obstacles to the Realization of HRE 4. Conclusion 9. Application of International Standards of Human Rights Law at Domestic Level, Joshua Castellino 1. Introduction 2. The Codification of International Human Rights Standards as Law 3. Domestic Implementation of Rights: The 'Engine Room' of Universal Instruments of Human Rights 4. Conclusion 10. Role of Regional Human Rights Instruments in the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights, Azizur Rahman Chowdhury, V. Seshaiah Shasthri, Md. Jahid Hossain Bhuiyan 1. Introduction 2. European Human Rights Treaties and Their Implementation 3. The Inter-American Convention on Human Rights, 1969 4. The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, 1981 5. Concluding Remarks Index

This article explores the issues of ensuring the safety of human rights defenders and the existing international mechanisms for countering security challenges faced by this category of individuals. It focuses on the provisions of international legal instruments that define the status of human rights defenders and emphasize the current problems related to ensuring their safety. The article highlights the provisions of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1998, which serves as the foundational universal international act for the protection of human rights defenders. It also analyzes resolutions of the UN Human Rights Council (3/2 Promotion and protection of human rights in Nicaragua, 43/28 Situation of human rights in the Syrian Arab Republic, 44/20 Promotion and protection of human rights in the context of peaceful protests, and 44/19 Situation of human rights in Belarus), which express serious concerns regarding unlawful actions against human rights defenders in the respective states. Additionally, the article reviews the reports of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, which draw attention to the heightened risks faced by those advocating for land rights, the environment, peace, access to justice, sexual diversity, freedom of expression, and gender equality. The article also analyzes the proposals put forward by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights regarding actions to implement the 1998 Declaration and to ensure the safety of human rights defenders. Information is presented on existing negative practices of human rights violations committed against defenders, provided by the international organization Front Line Defenders, which operates to protect human rights defenders at risk. It is emphasized that common violations against human rights defenders include arbitrary detention and arrest of journalists and media workers, restrictions on freedom of opinion and expression, enforced disappearances, torture, arbitrary detention, criminal prosecution, forced displacement, stigmatization, administrative obstacles, smear campaigns aimed at discrediting defenders, and more. Vulnerable groups of human rights defenders who are at risk in any society are identified, including women human rights defenders, members of national minorities, among others. Relevant conclusions and recommendations are provided.

All governments involved in the human rights struggle in China could claim certain policy successes by 1998: for the democracies, there was the release of a few Chinese dissidents, a visit to China by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, some reinforcement of the language of universality of rights and China's signature of the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), and the starting or restarting of dialogues. On Beijing's part, its efforts to publicize the new legal codes and punish those who failed to observe the legal changes demonstrated a willingness to tackle the problems associated with implementation, and it could reassure the more nationalist elements among its domestic public that UN condemnation would now cease, and that it would be engaged in mutual exchanges on human rights with its international counterparts. The Chinese leadership also appeared to have had some success in convincing various international actors of the need to correct the supposed imbalance in attention on civil and political rights, to one that focused more on the right to development and economic, social, and cultural rights. The fragility of this process was demonstrated far sooner than any had predicted, however, with a distinct chill in the Chinese political climate emerging by the end of 1998. Many Chinese, mostly academics, continued to publish and debate various aspects of the law and human rights and use international standards as a basis for their arguments, but more organized challenges were swiftly clamped down upon, especially 10 years after Tiananmen that encouraged reflection on the Party's record. These repressive acts exposed the shallowness of the roots of the new legal codes, the narrow limits of political tolerance, and the relative lack of importance that the state attached to human rights protection when Party control was at stake. They also uncovered the weaknesses in the bilateral dialogue route. Yet any concrete moves to respond directly to the political oppression via a condemnatory resolution at the UN Commission provoked a Chinese threat to break off the bilateral dialogues, and indeed China did break off its dialogue with the USA, partly as a result of Washington's decision to co‐sponsor (with Poland only) a resolution at the 1999 meeting of the UN Commission and more overtly as a consequence of the accidental NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. The overall cooling in relations with the USA for a large part of 1999 occurred as a result of this UN resolution, the failure to resolve the WTO entry issue, and the bypassing of the UN Security Council as a result of China's known disapproval of international intervention in Kosovo. NATO bombing of the province at the time of President Jiang Zemin's tour of Europe, together with the Belgrade embassy incident in May, led to a resurgence of Chinese rhetoric against the hegemonic USA interfering in the internal affairs of sovereign states on the specious grounds of a norm of humanitarian intervention.

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...

Human rights constitute a significant aspect of the law. Human rights are protected by national and international legal and judicial apparatuses. In addition, promoting respect for human rights is a key purpose of the United Nations (UN) and its international bodies, such as the UN Human Rights Council, established in 2006, and the International Criminal Court, created in 1998. The UN has also issued a variety of protocols, declarations and agreements regarding human rights and their protection, specifically the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights in 1966. In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Saudi legislation has initiated and allowed various Saudi human rights institutions, namely the Saudi Human Rights Commission and Saudi National Society for Human Rights. In particular, Saudi legislation has focused on Sharia principles when it comes to the interpretation and implementation of secular international human rights laws. Saudi legislation has enacted a variety of contemporary human rights laws, including the Child Protection Law and the Law of Protection from Abuse. The human cost of terrorism has been felt virtually in every part of the globe. Terrorism has disrupted peace, security, liberty and physical integrity of individuals at every level. Protection and security of its individuals is a fundamental obligation of the state. Accordingly, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has taken several legal measures, allowed under Islamic Sharia and International laws, to ensure the protection of human rights of its citizens and residents and safeguard the society against possible threats of terrorism and bring the criminals to justice. Saudi legislation has ensured human rights applications in other Saudi criminal laws, such as the Saudi Criminal Procedure Law of 2002, amended in 2014 (hereinafter SCPL), and the Saudi Law of Terrorist Crimes of 2014 (hereinafter SLTC). This short commentary provides a concise summary about the existing Saudi legislation related to terrorist crimes and human rights protection. of what we have created, with [definite] preference” [5]. Moreover, Article 26 of the Saudi Basic Law of Governance states that “The State shall protect human rights in accordance with the Islamic Sharia” [6]. Therefore, it can be seen that the protection of human rights in Saudi Arabia is constitutional since it is encouraged by Islamic principles and Saudi laws. Human rights are usually discussed with specific regard to the implementation of criminal punishment and procedure. Therefore, human rights are the subject matter of lots of international debates and conferences. In recent times, the majority of the countries all over the world, and especially Saudi Arabia, have suffered from terrorism. Saudi Arabia has enacted a variety of criminal laws that look after the benefits of Saudi society, one of which is the Saudi Law of Terrorist Crimes (SLTC). This law examines terrorism incidents and facilitates Saudi authorities to protect the society from terrorism and terrorists. This law contains 41 legal clauses. It explains the criminal procedure for terrorist crimes as well as referring to the superior law, which is Saudi Criminal Procedure Law (SCPL), and addresses any legal clause that is not provided in the SLTC (Article 40 of the SLTC). This commentary briefly looks at human rights protection identified under the SLTC.

Subject of the research. The article considers two levels in the mechanism of protection of human rights and freedoms: national and supranational. National includes both judicial and non-judicial methods of protection. The supranational level is represented by universal (global) and regional ways. The purpose of the research is to identify an effective mechanism for the protection of human rights that can replace the mechanism of protection provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, which has ceased to be valid for citizens of the Russian Federation. Research methods are the formal-legal method, analysis, synthesis, formallogical method.The main results. Theoretically, a particular citizen can use any of the national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights. However, the nature of their action and the procedure for gaining access to these mechanisms are different, which affects their effectiveness and the readiness of a person to turn to one or another method of protection. Among supranational mechanisms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 has a unique status: on the one hand, this document is “a symbol of the moral consensus of all states, the starting point for the creation of a modern human rights regime”; on the other hand, it is an act-declaration, the application of which in specific legal relations and the protection of human rights with its help are problematic. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 12/16/1966 provides for the establishment of a Human Rights Committee that exercises control over the provisions of the Covenant through a system of reports. Reports on measures taken to implement the rights provided for by the Covenant, as well as on non-fulfillment of their obligations under the Covenant by other States Parties, are submitted by States Parties. The mechanism of reports, however, is not reliable enough - there are states that ignore it.Regional Conventions are rightly considered the most effective means of protecting human rights. The implementation of the provisions of the Conventions is ensured by the activities of supranational judicial bodies, to which the applicant can file a complaint. The conditions for applying to such a court, its territorial proximity, the possibility of executing court decisions make this method of protection as accessible as possible. Among the national remedies, first of all, it should be noted the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to protect the constitutional rights of citizens. The provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the section on human rights are almost identical, often written in the same phrases. But, despite the number of coincidences in the designation of human rights and freedoms, the main thing is not the designation (this is a declaration) of a specific right or freedom, but how they are applied and what is the practice of their protection (interpretation) by the Constitutional Court at the national level and the Convention on the supranational. It is here that the understanding of “identical” formulations can differ, and the question of who is better: a national or supranational body protects a particular human right, becomes debatable. It should also be remembered about the very meaning of supranational protection as an opportunity to receive protection from one's own state, albeit a subsidiary one. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that in the absence of the possibility of applying to the ECHR, a citizen will be able to receive protection in the Constitutional Court without prejudice to the outcome of such protection.Considering that the protection of human rights is, first of all, the activity of national courts of first instance, consideration by the courts of administrative, civil and criminal cases, in cases where it is carried out in full compliance with the norms of procedural legislation, is able to fully ensure the protection of the rights and human freedoms. To do this, the courts have all the necessary tools, you just need the ability and desire to use them.Among the internal structures for monitoring the observance of human rights, a number of state and public bodies can be distinguished - the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, the police, the prosecutor's office and others. However, it is not possible to attribute them to the effective bodies for the protection of human rights.Conclusions. The existing national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights, in their effectiveness, are not able to fully compensate for the loss of the opportunity for citizens of the Russian Federation to file a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights.

The UN Human Rights Committee is a mechanism for the protection of human rights specified in the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights. States that have ratified this international Treaty are obligated to respect these rights. Individuals who believe that their rights have been violated by a state party can file a complaint with the UN Human Rights Committee and, if the complaint is considered admissible, their application is accepted for consideration. Since the Kyrgyz Republic became a party to the International Covenant on civil and political rights citizens were given the opportunity to defend their rights in an international institution when national remedies failed. Data and quantitative indicators of appeals against the Kyrgyz Republic to the UN Human Rights Committee are presented. The analysis of these data on the recognition of violations by the state or their absence is carried out. At the same time, it was revealed that in recent years there has been an increase in the number of appeals against the Kyrgyz Republic. Consideration of issues related to compliance with the recommendations of the UN Human Rights Committee has led to the identification of problems with the lack of such systematic data. As a result, the author proposed measures to help reduce violations of civil and political human rights in the Kyrgyz Republic, as well as recommendations with changes in the legal norm, in order to provide access to data on the measures taken by the Kyrgyz Republic to consider each recommendation of the UN Human Rights Committee.

The article reveals the role of the judiciary in the context of ensuring the protection of human rights and freedoms in terms of practical approach. It was found that ensuring the protection of human rights and freedoms in Ukraine is regulated by the Constitution of Ukraine, the Law of Ukraine «On the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine» and the Law of Ukraine «On Citizens' Appeals». It is established that in Ukraine judicial protection is enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine, in particular in Article 55, according to which the rights and freedoms of man and citizen in particular are protected by the court. It is proved that the functioning of the constitutional mechanism for the protection of human rights and freedoms can occur only if the state actively participates in ensuring such rights and freedoms. It is determined that an important component of subjective human rights is the right to judicial protection, which should be realized not only in the direct dimension, but also through the activities of state bodies or bodies or organizations authorized by the state. It is established that the concept of «protection» from the standpoint of the legal aspect is interpreted as a legal obligation of the state in the face of bodies, organizations or officials authorized by it, and as the ability of a person to exercise personal subjective right. It was clarified that the concept of «protection of human rights and freedoms» should be interpreted as a set of measures of organizational and legal nature to ensure legal protection or remove obstacles that arise in the context of the exercise of subjective rights and rights to restore such rights, if they were violated with the application of measures on this basis in the form of punishment of the offenders. It is proposed under the mechanism of protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, in particular, to define a holistic, legally enshrined and at the same time dynamic system, which includes subjects, objects, methods and means of protection of human and civil rights and freedoms. to neutralize illegal obstacles, as well as to prevent the emergence of new obstacles. It is proved that the mechanism of protection of human and civil rights and freedoms in particular should consist of institutional and functional systems. It is noted that the prospects for further research in this area are to determine the requirements for the incompatibility of the position of a judge with other activities in a comparative constitutional and legal aspect.

This article looks into the meanings of 'human rights' and 'democracy' which are supposed to be 'essentially contested.' In this connection, it revisits the history of Western political ideas in which the political thoughts of John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau on human rights and democracy are reviewed and contrasted. The ultimate purpose of this exercise is to elucidate the theoretical basis of contemporary debates on North Korean human rights within South Korea. For these debates seem to have to do with the multifarious meanings of 'human rights' and 'democracy.' While most people tend to support the concepts of both 'human rights' and 'democracy' with positive outlook, they do not seem to make an adequate differentiation of these terms. This phenomenon is not helpful in addressing the real problems of human rights in some sector of the world. In this sesne, a contrasted comparison between Locke and Rousseau regarding human rights and democracy can shed light on the contempoary debate in this field. Locke provided a comparatively thorough discussion on 'natural rights' in 17th century Europe and, in turn, the theoretical basis of contemporary liberal democracy. He emphasized that human beings were born with the natural rights of life, liberty, and property before the civil government had been established. Furthermore, he argued that the purpose of establishment of civil government was to preserve the natural rights of human beings. This means that Locke's view on natural rights underlies the 'civil and political rights' of contemporary international human rights norms. On the other hand, Rousseau, while paying keen attention to the same question of human liberty, provided a different methodology to achieve this goal in the 18th century. In other words, he advocated comparatively equal level of property among human beings for guaranteeing freedom of the people. In this sense, he placed priority on the equality over the liberty in reality of human life. In turn, he seemed clear that he had provided the theoretical basis for the 'economic and social rights' of the contemporary international human rights norms. At the same time, this article points out that whether Rousseau intended it or not, he contributed to the rise of social democracy or communism as put forward by Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. In particular, his thesis of 'general will' in political community embraces a crucial theoretical strand of totalitarianism as pointed out by scholars. While this interpretation of Rousseau is not common in contemporary debates on democracy, this article posits that such approach helps to clarify the contemporary debates and even confusion in the field of human rights protection. Seen in this way, the discourses of both human rights and democracy are both sides of the same coin. The 'civil and political rights' form the basis of liberal democracy while 'economic and social rights' social democracy or totalitarian communism. These two contrasted discourses have dominated modern political history, in particular, during the Cold War period. This is why the International Covenants on human rights were divided into two separate documents while the Universal Declaration of Human Rights represented a simple juxtaposition of these two ideological positions on human rights. The contrasted and even confrontational situations between the two theoretical positions were remarkably weakened with the collapse of the Berlin Wall as a proof of failed Eastern bloc. Nevertheless, the same contrasted discourse of human rights and democracy continues by way of now the concept of human security meaning both 'freedom from fear' and 'freedom from want.' The two political regimes on the Korean peninsula emerged as a byproduct of the two competitive visions of human rights and democracy.

Background. The problem of protecting human rights has existed throughoutthe existence of mankind. Modern globalization affects the effectiveness of international institutions in the field of human rights. After all, the rapid processes of development and adoption of international documents in the field of human rights require not only worldwide recognition, but also unquestioning implementation. In this regard, the study of the mechanism for exercising the powers of the UN Human Rights Council in the temporarily occupied territories of Crimea and Donbas is especially relevant. The aim of the article is to establish a mechanism for exercising the powers of the UN Human Rights Council to respect and ensure human rights in Ukraine, in particular in the temporarily occupied territories of Crimea and Donbas. Materials and methods. Both general and special legal methods of cognition were used during the research. The normative basis of the study were international treaties, international law and the work of domestic and foreign scientists. Results. International protection of human rights is one of the most important branches of public international law. The creation of the United Nations has opened a new page in the field of human rights institutions. In order to promote and ensure human rights in Ukraine, in particular in the temporarily occupied territories of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Donbas, the UN Human Rights Council implements a number of mechanisms: closely cooperateswith the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. periodic inspections. The UN Human Rights Council serves as a forum for discussing thematic issues on all human rights. Thus, within the high-level segment of the UN Human Rights Council, on February 23, 2021, for the third year in a row, the UN General Assembly debated on the agenda item «Situation in the Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine» initiated by our state. Within the framework of this event, support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine was expressed. Conclusion. Ukraine’s cooperation with the UN Human Rights Council is increasing pressure from the international community to respect the rights of indigenous peoples, national minorities, social human rights, democracy and the rule of law. During the Russian aggression on the territory of Ukraine, the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution «Cooperation with Ukraine and its assistance in the field of human rights», an agreement was concluded between the Government of Ukraine and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Ukraine. Thus, despite the recommendatory nature of the powers of the UN Human Rights Council, this international institution significantly affects the level of human rights in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, and contributes to the further development of human rights in Ukraine. Keywords: human rights, UN Commission on Human Rights, UN HumanRights Council, Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission.

The article is devoted to the problem of international legal regulation of the restriction of freedom of expression. There are explored the main international legal acts and practice of human rights international bodies in this field. The authors analyze the main criteria for the legitimate restriction of freedom of expression, and conclude that all restrictions must meet the following requirements: be lawful, be necessary, and be carried out with the purpose provided by the norms of international law. Exploring each of these criteria, the authors further establish the requirements that the doctrine and practice have been developed about them. It is noted that the most extensive list of such criteria is the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the somewhat narrower Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966 and the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights of 1969. It is noted that the most extensive list of such criteria are contained in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the somewhat narrower list of such criteria are contained in the Covenant about Civil and Political Rights of 1966 and the Inter-American Convention of Human Rights of 1969. As for the African Convention of Human and Peoples Rights of 1981, it generally implies that freedom of expression is carried out within the limits prescribed by law. It is argued that the norms of international law, in particular Art. 20 of the Covenant about Civil and Political Rights of 1966 sets a number of absolute limits on freedom of expression, namely: prohibition of the propaganda of war, national, racial or religious hatred. Similar norms are duplicated by a number of other international legal instruments. Particular attention is paid to the philosophical-legal views on the question of legitimate restriction of freedom expression of views. The authors note that the opinions of scientists on this subject are significantly different: from the absolute freedom to express opinions until it is fully restrained by the establishment of special procedures, such as previous censorship. Key words: freedom of expression; freedom of speech; limitation freedom of expression; censorship; ECHR; UN Human Rights Committee.

The year 1993 marked a momentous point in the struggle for the promotion and protection of human rights. The General Assembly also adopted a resolution establishing the post of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Support for the establishment and strengthening of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) became one of the main responsibilities of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. This chapter provides an assessment of the support NHRIs have received from respective High Commissioners and the achievements and weaknesses/ challenges pertaining to such support. It analyzes the main achievements of the support successive High Commissioners have provided for the establishment, strengthening, and integration of NHRIs in the UN human rights system. The chapter discusses the weaknesses and challenges of this support and addresses several measures the current High Commissioner and future High Commissioners could consider in providing better support to these institutions. Keywords:National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs); protection of human rights; UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

Reviewed by: The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: Conscience for the World ed. by Felice D. Gaer & Christen L. Broecker Matheus de Carvalho Hernandez (bio) The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights: Conscience for the World ( Felice D. Gaer & Christen L. Broecker eds., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2014), 398 pages (incl. index), ISBN 978-90-04-25424-4. The position of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights was created at the end of 1993 by a unanimous vote in the United Nations General Assembly. The creation of this office was preceded by strong lobbying by NGOs (particularly Amnesty International) and state delegations (primarily the United States) during the Second World Conference on Human Rights, known as the Vienna Conference, in June of 1993. Throughout the Cold War, several negotiation attempts to create this office were hampered, on the one hand by the bipolar conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union—and consequently between the so-called “generations” of human rights—and on the other hand by the still incipient institutional strengthening of the international human rights system. The end of the Cold War, the “thawing” of the UN, and the consolidation of NGOs as international political agents established the conditions for the emergence of this position, which from then on assumed primary responsibility for human rights within the entire political-institutional framework of the UN. Despite the centrality of the position for the institutionalization of human rights within the UN and the fact that, bureaucratically, it has the rank of Under-Secretary General, there are very few studies and analyses on the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the office in the international literature. In this respect, this book is an extremely welcome addition to the small number of other titles on the topic, such as the works of Bertrand Ramcharan and the pioneering doctoral thesis by Roger Clark in 1972. As stated above, the book has its merits. The first, doubtlessly, is its originality. The second is the attempt to cover the most varied aspects of the High Commissioner and the office. In addition to the introduction written by the editors, the book is divided into five well balanced parts. The first part discusses the expectations concerning the work of the mandate holder and the office, analyzing its twenty five years of existence and making recommendations for its future. Besides the articles by the current High Commissioner, Navi Pillay, and the former High Commissioner, Ramcharan, the reflections of Michael Ignatieff on the possibilities for increasing the duties of the High Commissioner and of Harold Koh on the personification and institutionalization process contribute to the literature in the area. The second part addresses a recurring theme in the literature on human [End Page 971] rights: universality. The authors in this section, Michael O’Flaherty and Sunila Abeysekera, focus on how the High Commissioner operationalizes and promotes the principle of universality, or fails to do so, in its work, particularly in relation to the committees that monitor compliance with international human rights treaties (known as Treaty Bodies). In the third part, one of the main contributions of the collection starts to emerge: the little known or studied responses of the Office of the High Commissioner to systematic human rights violations. Felice Gaer, who is extremely knowledgeable about the UN human rights system, recommends that there should be more synergy and cooperation and less disputing and rivalry between the work of the High Commissioner and the Special Procedures. Christen Broecker and William O’Neill make a panoramic analysis of the work conducted by the High Commissioner’s national offices, located in several different countries around the world, demonstrating the political-institutional potential and difficulties of giving local significance to international human rights standards. Tseliso Thipanyane wraps up the third part by describing the relationship between the National Human Rights Institutions and the High Commissioner, the leading enthusiast of these institutions within the institutional framework of the UN. The fourth part is interesting in that it responds to the more skeptical literature concerning the political influences of the UN human rights bodies. Suzanne Nossel and Broecker show how the institutional maturity of the position of High Commissioner...