The United Nations Special Procedures

Author(s):  
Thérèse Murphy ◽  
Amrei Müller

This chapter examines the UN Special Procedures, a system of independent experts appointed to monitor and report on human rights violations and to advise and assist in promoting and protecting rights. It positions the Special Procedures as a “missing population,” neglected not just by proponents of global health but by human rights advocates too. This chapter sets out to counter this neglect by “peopling” human rights law. It does this by adding the Special Rapporteurs and others who make up the system of Special Procedures, positioning these experts as an essential supplement to the actors—courts, treaty bodies, non-governmental organizations, victims, and states—that dominate accounts of human rights law. Adding Special Procedures would help in particular to address the widespread failure to see human rights law as a deliberative and iterative process that draws in a range of actors.

1993 ◽  
Vol 33 (293) ◽  
pp. 94-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Doswald-Beck ◽  
Sylvain Vité

International humanitarian law is increasingly perceived as part of human rights law applicable in armed conflict. This trend can be traced back to the United Nations Human Rights Conference held in Tehran in 1968 which not only encouraged the development of humanitarian law itself, but also marked the beginning of a growing use by the United Nations of humanitarian law during its examination of the human rights situation in certain countries or during its thematic studies. The greater awareness of the relevance of humanitarian law to the protection of people in armed conflict, coupled with the increasing use of human rights law in international affairs, means that both these areas of law now have a much greater international profile and are regularly being used together in the work of both international and non-governmental organizations.


2021 ◽  
pp. 189-208
Author(s):  
Johanna Bond

Just as the UN treaty bodies have been increasingly willing to consider intersectionality in the international human rights context, many nongovernmental organizations have also incorporated an intersectional approach into their human rights advocacy. NGOs enjoy a symbiotic relationship with the treaty bodies, holding the treaty bodies accountable for their human rights work while also accepting guidance from the treaty bodies as to how best to engage with the UN system. This reciprocal dynamic makes NGOs a fruitful source for exploring their potential to advocate for intersectional approaches within the United Nations and for examining ways in which the treaty bodies might also encourage NGOs to use intersectional frameworks in their own advocacy work. The growing acceptance of intersectionality within the United Nations and within the civil society sector is mutually reinforcing and holds the promise of more comprehensive remedies for human rights victims.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 379-417
Author(s):  
Noëlle Quénivet

Whilst most legal scholarship focuses on the responsibility of the United Nations for human rights violations few studies have ascertained the legal basis of the primary rules leading to such responsibility. This article fills this gap by reviewing the theories used to bind the UN to customary human rights law: (1) the UN has inherited its member states’ obligations, (2) participation in the formation of customary human rights law implies being bound by it, (3) the UN is bound by international law because it has legal personality and (4) as the UN is embedded in international law it must comply with its norms. Such theories are further tested against the backdrop of international organizations’ theories. The article draws the conclusion that (1) should be rejected, (2) is not yet legally sound and (3)-(4), despite their flaws, are more persuasive. Ultimately, recourse must be had to general international law.


2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Martin Wählisch

In 1994, the Human Development Report of the un Development Programme (undp) drew for the first time global attention to the concept of ‘human security’, which has led to a series of debates in the United Nations.1 The report emphasized that without the promotion of ‘people-centered development’ none of the objectives of the global development agenda can be achieved, neither peace, human rights, environmental protection, reduced population growth, nor social integration. The idea of the human security concept is to approach security beyond a purely State-focused military angle, but also include humanitarian, political, economic and social perspectives. In 2001, un Secretary General Kofi Annan reemphasized in the Millennium Report that the ‘freedom from want’ and ‘freedom from fear’ embrace more than the absence of violent conflict, but encompasses human rights, good governance, access to education and health care and ensuring that each individual has opportunities and choices to fulfil his or her potential. In 2005, the World Summit Outcome Document called for defining the scope of human security in the General Assembly more precisely. In 2012, the un General Assembly finally adopted a common understanding of the human security notion. This article gives an overview of the evolution of the human security concept in the United Nations. It looks at its historical development, codification attempts and the recent debate in the General Assembly. The article highlights arguments of critics and advocates of the human security approach, who have been trying to identify linkages between security, development and the respect for human rights. The article describes the status of international practice, indicating the trend of gradual implementation of human security aspects in national, regional and international policy frameworks. The term ‘human security’ has eventually entered the active vocabulary of governmental officials, diplomats, military decision-makers, humanitarian and other non-governmental organizations, serving increasingly as a reference point for more comprehensive policy planning with regard to security and development challenges.


Author(s):  
Maia Hallward ◽  
Charity Butcher ◽  
Jonathan Taylor Downs ◽  
Emily Cook

Abstract Scholarship on human rights and environmental justice suggests that organizations vary in their messaging regarding outcomes related to environmental protection and sustainability, differences often found in the divide between the Global North and Global South. The literature also suggests that Indigenous organizations represent groups that traditionally focus on issues of sovereignty, while grappling with unique problems related to assimilation, cultural preservation, and oppression. This study utilizes empirical data gathered from 333 non-governmental organizations affiliated with the United Nations Human Rights Council to explore whether Indigenous and non-Indigenous organizations, which share many aspects of their mission with one another at the transnational level, differ on issues related to environment sustainability and collective identity rights. Our results indicate that Indigenous organizations take a more holistic approach in addressing the relationship between humans and the natural world, centring marginalized perspectives through restorative justice and the needs of current and future generations.


1983 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.A. Keenleyside

Prior to 1947, India, despite its dependence upon Great Britain, was represented in most of the bonafide international conferences and organizations that evolved especially during the inter-war years. For example, India participated in the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, the Washington Conference on Naval Armaments of 1921, the London Naval Conference of 1930, the Disarmament Conference of 1932 and the annual inter-war conferences of the International Labour Organization. In addition, India was represented in two important international organizations of the inter-war period—the British Commonwealth, in whose deliberations it was included from 1917 onwards and the League of Nations, of which it was a founding member. For a variety of reasons; Indians involved in the independence movement disassociated themselves from and were critical of official Indian diplomacy conducted through the major international conferences and institutions of the world community and tended to attach greater importance to those non-governmental organizations in which the voice of nationalist India could be fully heard—that is to the deliberations of such bodies as the League Against Imperialism, 1927–1930, the Anti-War Congress of 1932, the World Peace Congress of 1936 and the International Peace Campaign Conference of 1938. Nevertheless, despite the nationalist antipathy for official Indian diplomacy, an examination of such governmental institutions as the League of Nations from the perspective of nationalist India is still important in order to understand some aspects of independent India's foreign policy and more specifically its approach to international organization. Further, even though Indian delegations to the League were unrepresentative, there were subtle ways in which they reflected national Indian opinions and exhibited specifically Indian traits, so that a study of the official Indian role is useful in drawing attention to what were to prove to be some of the earliest and most persisting elements of independent Indian diplomacy via such bodies as the United Nations. It is thus the purpose of this article first to explore nationalist Indian attitudes towards the League (especially the reasons for opposition to the organization), second to analyze the extent to which the official Indian role in the League reflected nationalist Indian concerns, and third to comment upon the impact of the League of Nations on independent India's foreign policy, especially its role in the United Nations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document