Human rights are inherent to all human beings, regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. They cannot be given or taken away.
Human rights are the foundation for freedom, justice and peace in the world.
They have been formally and universally recognised by all countries in the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights. Since then, many treaties have been adopted by states to reaffirm and guarantee these rights legally.
International human rights law sets out the obligations of states to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights for all. These obligations impose specific duties upon states, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems.
All human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent, and interrelated (Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action,
Equality and non-discrimination are cross-cutting principles in international human rights law that guarantee the full enjoyment of human rights to everyone.
he right to education ensures access to quality schools and to an education that is directed towards the full development of the human personality. NESRI uses six priority human rights principles in our work that are fundamental to guaranteeing the right to education and are of particular relevance to education reform efforts in the United States:
Individual Rights: Every individual child must have equal access to a quality education adapted to meet his or her needs.
Aims of Education: The aims of education must be directed toward the development of each child’s personality and full potential, preparing children to participate in society and to do work that is rewarding and reasonably remunerative, and to continue learning throughout life.
Dignity: Schools must respect the inherent dignity of every child creating an environment of respect and tolerance in the classroom, preventing practices and disciplinary policies that cause harm or humiliation to children, and promoting self-confidence and self-expression.
Equity: There must be equitable distribution of resources in education across communities according to need.
Non-Discrimination: The government must ensure that the human right to education “will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.”
Participation: Students, parents and communities have the right to participate in decisions that affect their schools and the right to education.
The Right to Education is protected by:
ROLE OF NATIONAL HUMANRIGHTS COMMISON :
NHRC was constituted under Section 3 of the 1993 Act for better protection of human rights. The term ‘human rights’ is defined in Section 2(d) of the 1993 Act, which reads as follows:
“2. (d) “Human rights” means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India.”
• It is autonomous i.e. it has been created by an Act of Parliament.
• NHRC is committed to provide independent views on issues within the parlance of the Constitution or in law for the time being enforced for the protection of human rights. The Commission takes an independent stand.
• NHRC has the powers of a civil court.
• Authority to grant interim relief
• Authority to recommend payment of compensation or damages
• Over seventy thousand complaints received every year reflects the credibility of the Commission and the trust reposed in it by the citizens.
• NHRC has a very wide mandate
• NHRC has unique mechanism with which it also monitors implementation of its various recommendations.
ROLE OF UN
The United Nations (UN) system has two main types of bodies to promote and protect human rights: Charter Bodies and Treaty Bodies.
Charter Bodies are established under the UN Charter in order to fulfil the UNs general purpose of promoting human rights. They have broad mandates that cover promoting human rights in all UN member states.
The Human Rights Council
The principal UN Charter Body responsible for human rights is the Human Rights Council (HRC). The General Assembly established the HRC in 2006, in the hope that it would be more efficient and effective than its predecessor, the Human Rights Commission. Forty-seven UN member states sit on the HRC. One of its main purposes is to review the human rights record of every UN member state once every four years and to make recommendations for improvement. Australia is not currently a member of the Human Rights Council.
Office Of The United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights
The Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), a department of the United Nations Secretariat was established following the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. Its role is to prevent human rights violations and secure respect for human rights by promoting international cooperation and coordinating the United Nations’ human rights activities. The OHCHR conducts a very broad range of activities from is headquarters in Geneva. It also works directly in areas where there are severe human rights violations though field offices and as part of UN peace missions.
Treaty Bodies have responsibility for monitoring and promoting compliance with a particular human rights treaty. As such they are only concerned with countries that are a party to that treaty.
A number of human rights treaties have established treaty-monitoring bodies to supervise the implementation of treaty obligations by State Parties:
- the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination monitors State Parties compliance with ICERD;
- the Human Rights Committee monitors State Parties compliance with the ICCPR;
- the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights monitors State Parties compliance with the ICESCR;
- the Committee against Torture monitors State Parties compliance with CAT;
- the Committee on Migrant Workers monitors State Parties compliance with the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families;
- the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women monitors State Parties compliance with CEDAW; and
- the Committee on the Rights of the Child monitors State Parties compliance with the CRC.
Treaty Bodies consider reports from State Parties on their compliance with the treaty and some treaty bodies can receive individual complaints of treaty body violations.
Reporting obligations and monitoring
Treaty Bodies consider periodic reports from States parties about the measures they have adopted to carry out their obligations under each treaty.
When Treaty Bodies assess reports from State Parties they may also consider information contained in ‘shadow reports’. Shadow reports are those submitted to the Treaty Bodies by NGOs and National Human Rights Institutions (rather than government).
After considering the reports, Treaty Bodies make recommendations (often called Concluding Comments or Recommendations) about how the State Party can improve its compliance with its treaty obligations.
Individual complaints
Some Treaty Bodies have additional powers to receive and consider complaints from individuals who allege they are the victims of human rights violations by the State. The bodies with the power to hear individual complaints are:
- the Human Rights Committee;
- the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination;
- the Committee against Torture; and
- the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women.
A finding of a Treaty Body that a State Party has violated a person’s human rights under the treaty is not legally binding.
Individuals can only make complaints to Treaty Bodies if they have exhausted all domestic remedies and if the relevant State Party has recognised the competence of the Treaty Body to hear their complaint.
By ratifying the ICERD, the CAT and the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, Australia has recognised the competence of Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Committee against Torture and the Human Rights Committee to hear individual complaints about violations of the relevant treaty provisions.
The United Nations is currently considering proposals to reform the treaty bodies and make reporting obligations easier for States, by establishing a single, unified Treaty Body to monitor implementation of all the principal human rights treaties.
COMMITTEE REPRESENTATION
UN Treaty Bodies are committees of experts in the relevant area who serve in their personal capacity, not as representatives of their countries. Emeritus Professor Ivan Shearer and Elizabeth Evatt, former Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia, are two examples of recent Australian representatives.
Other UN organs that do important human rights work include:
- UN High Commissioner for Refugees
- Commission on the Status of Women
- United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM)
- United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
- UNAIDS.
NATIONAL COMMISION FOR WOMEN
The objective of the NCW is to represent the rights of women in India and to provide a voice for their issues and concerns. The subjects of their campaigns have included dowry, politics, religion, equal representation for women in jobs, and the exploitation of women for labour. They have also discussed police abuses against women.[4]
The commission regularly publishes a monthly newsletter, Rashtra Mahila in both Hindi and English.[5]they also fight against the problems of women for progress and happiness
Controversies
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code
In December 2006 and January 2007, the NCW found itself at the center of a minor controversy over its insistence that Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code not be changed to make adulterous wives equally prosecutable by their husbands.
But the grounds on which Ms. Vyas resists the logic of making this a criminal offence — particularly for women, as often recommended — are not as encouraging. She is averse to holding the adulterous woman equally culpable as the adulterous man because women, she believes, are never offenders. They are always the victims.
The NCW has demanded that women should not be punished for adultery, as a woman is “the victim and not an offender” in such cases. They have also advocated the amendment of Section 198 of the CrPC to allow women to file complaints against unfaithful husbands and prosecute them for their promiscuous behaviour. This was in response to “loopholes” in the Indian Penal code that allowed men to file adultery charges against other men who have engaged in illicit relations but does not allow women to file charges against their husbands.
The Commission has also worked to guarantee women security in unconventional relationships.
Mangalore pub attack controversy
The NCW came under sharp criticism for their response to the attack by forty male members of the Hindu right-wing Sri Ram Sena on eight women in a bar in Mangalore in late January 2009. Video from the attack shows the women were punched, pulled by their hair, and thrown out of the pub.
NCW member Smt Nirmala Venkatesh was sent to assess the situation, and said in an interview that the pub did not have adequate security and that the women should have protected themselves. Venkatesh said, “If the girls feel they were not doing anything wrong why are they afraid to come forward and give a statement? On 6 February, the NCW said they decided not to accept Venkatesh’s report but would not be sending a new team to Mangalore. On 27 February, The Prime Minister’s Office approved the removal of Nirmala Venkatesh on disciplinary grounds.
Guwahati molestation controversy
The NCW came under fire again after the molestation of a 17-year-old girl by a gang of men outside a pub in Guwahati on 9 July 2012. NCW member Alka Lamba was accused of leaking the name of the minor victim to the media, and was subsequently removed from the fact-finding committee, though she remains a member of the commission. The following week, NCW chairperson Mamta Sharma made comments suggesting that women “be careful how you dress”, which invited criticism that she was guilty of victim blaming. The controversy led activists to call for a restructuring of the commission.
Sex trafficking is a grave violation of human rights and a form of violence against women and children
Sex trafficking violates women’s right to life, liberty and security of person. The fundamental individual right to life, liberty and security of person is reflected in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
The Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence Against Women (Convention of Belém do Pará), Chapter II, Article 3 provides for the right of women to be free from violence within both the public and private spheres, specifically listing “trafficking in persons” as a form of violence against women regardless of whether it involves the knowledge or acquiescence of state agents.
Sex trafficking is often referred to as modern-day slavery. Many countries have ratified various international conventions that create obligations to prohibit slavery and slavery-like practices. While some sex trafficking situations may not involve the permanent ownership historically associated with slavery, they can involve exploitation and deprivations of liberty that render the situation tantamount to slavery. Slavery-like practices that can manifest in sex trafficking situations, including servitude, forced labor, debt bondage, and forced marriages, are also prohibited.(See also the section on Forced and Child Marriage in this module)
Some acts of sex trafficking involve conduct that can be understood as a form of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, which is prohibited under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), Article 5 of the UDHR and Article 7 of the ICCPR, and has attained the status of a jus cogens norm. The failure to protect women from sex trafficking also represents a failure to ensure women’s right to equal protection under the law. This is a well-enshrined principle of international law.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 35 states that “States Parties shall take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent the abduction of, the sale of or traffic in children for any purpose or in any form.”
CASES OF HUMAN RIGHT VOILATION
AFGANISHTAN
Fighting between the Taliban and government forces in Afghanistan escalated in 2015, with the Taliban seizing control of Kunduz and holding the city for nearly two weeks before Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), with United States air and ground support, regained control. The Taliban also seized a number of district centers and threatened other provincial capitals. The United Nations deemed nearly half of the country’s provinces as being at high or extreme risk.
The upsurge in violence had devastating consequences for civilians, with suicide bombings, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and targeted attacks by the Taliban and other insurgents causing 70 percent of all civilian casualties. The number of civilians killed during government military operations, particularly ground offensives, increased too.
While both President Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah publicly affirmed the government’s commitment to human rights, their National Unity Government (NUG) failed to address longstanding concerns, including violations of women’s rights and attacks on journalists. The government launched an action plan to curb torture and enacted legislation criminalizing the recruitment of child soldiers, but impunity for both continued.
Parliamentary and provincial elections scheduled for 2015 were postponed indefinitely pending contested electoral reforms. More people became internally displaced due to conflict than in any previous year since 2002; the 100,000 new IDPs in 2015 brought the nationwide total to almost 1 million.
Targeted attacks on civilians by the Taliban also increased in 2015. In statements released in April and May, the Taliban vowed to kill government officials, specifically judges, prosecutors, and employees of the Ministry of Justice. The Taliban also identified Afghans and foreigners working for aid organizations as targets, a policy that helped make Afghanistan the world’s most dangerous country for humanitarian aid workers.
The UN also reported a significant increase in attacks against schools between April and June, mostly by the Taliban. Threats from both pro-government militias and insurgents led to school closures in Kunduz, Ghor, and Nuristan. In May, Afghanistan endorsed the global Safe Schools Declaration, thus committing to do more to protect students, teachers, and schools during times of armed conflict, including through implementing the Guidelines on Protecting Schools from Military Use.
Early in the year, the new Ghani administration publicly affirmed its commitment to preserving and enhancing protections for women’s rights. However, the government failed to take steps to improve enforcement of the Elimination of Violence against Women Law (EVAW) and to stop prosecutions of so-called moral crimes, which lead to imprisonment of women fleeing domestic violence and forced marriages.
A February report by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, UNAMA, concluded that 65 percent of cases filed under EVAW that involved battery and other kinds of serious abuse were resolved through mediation, while only 5 percent led to criminal prosecution.
According to a UNAMA report in February 2015, one-third of detainees in Afghan detention facilities are tortured and unofficial detention centers continue to function, with four such centers in Kandahar alone. There were no reported investigations into incidents of torture documented by UNAMA, and no reported prosecutions.
A September 2015 amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code, imposed by presidential decree, allows Afghan authorities to detain for a renewable one-year period anyone suspected of “crimes against internal or external security,” or believed “likely to commit such a crime.”
INDIA
n May, the northeastern state of Tripura revoked the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), citing a decline in insurgency. However, it remains in force in Jammu and Kashmir and in other northeastern states. AFSPA has been widely criticized by rights groups and numerous independent commissions have recommended repealing or amending the law, but the government has not done so in the face of stiff army opposition.
A May report by the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions noted that “impunity remains a serious problem” and expressed regret that India had not repealed or at least radically amended AFSPA.
LGBT individuals continue to face harassment, extortion, intimidation, and abuse, including by the police. In December 2013, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of section 377 of the Indian penal code, which criminalizes same-sex conduct between consenting adults. An appeal was pending at time of writing.
The upper house of parliament approved a proposed law in April that, if enacted, would protect the rights of transgender people. In 2014, the Supreme Court mandated legal recognition of transgender people as a third gender and ruled them eligible for special education and employment benefits.
Despite its democratic traditions, however, India has not yet emerged as an effective proponent of human rights. For instance, in October, when India invited all 54 leaders of the African Union to a summit in New Delhi, it ignored calls by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to arrest Sudan’s president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, who faces charges of war crimes and genocide in Darfur.
India was a weak proponent of human rights at the UN in 2015. In March, India voted in support of a Russian-backed resolution to remove benefits for same-sex partners of UN staff. India abstained on Human Rights Council resolutions on Syria, North Korea, and Ukraine, and voted against resolutions on Iran and Belarus.
In July, India abstained on a UN Human Rights Council resolution that called for Israeli accountability in the 2014 Gaza conflict. The Indian government said it had abstained from voting because the resolution included a reference to bringing Israel before the ICC, which India considered “intrusive.
Few months back in Kashmir capt. Major gogoi arrested a person who was throwing stone and he tied by major gogoi as a result of which state human rights commission directed the central govt. to pay 10 lacs rs to the victim
BALOCHISTAN
Human rights violations in the Balochistan province of Pakistan have drawn concern and criticism in the international community, being described by Human Rights Watch (HRW) as having reached epidemic proportions.The violations have taken place during the ongoing Balochistan conflict between Baloch nationalists and the Government of Pakistan over the rule of Balochistan, the largest province by land area of modern-day Pakistan.
Violations have a fairly low profile in Pakistan. According to Declan Walsh in The Guardian newspaper, “newspaper reports” in Pakistan about civilian killings in Balochistan are “buried quietly on the inside pages, cloaked in euphemisms or, quite often, not published at all”.Journalist Ahmed Rashid writes that “so many journalists have been killed in Balochistan” that “journalists are too scared” to cover the issue.
The Frontier Corps, the anti-Shia group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency and other groups have been accused of “a decade-long campaign” of “pick up and dump” in which “Baloch nationalists, militants or even innocent bystanders are picked up, disappeared, tortured, mutilated and then killed”. Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has been accused of massive human rights abuses in Balochistan by Human Rights Watch, with the enforced disappearance of hundreds of nationalists and activists. In 2008 alone, an estimated 1102 people were disappeared from the region. There have also been reports of torture. An increasing number of bodies are being found on roadsides having been shot in the head. In July 2011, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan issued a report on illegal disappearances in Balochistan which identified ISI and Frontier Corps as the perpetrators. According to journalist Malik Siraj Akbar, as of May 2015, “dozens of people are losing their lives every day” in “extra judicial killings committed by the Pakistani security forces” in the province of Balochistan.
According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP)and Al Jazeera, there has been a surge in religious extremism in Balochistan, with banned terrorist organizations such as Lashkar-i-Jhangvi and Pakistani Taliban targeting Hindus, Shias (including Hazaras) and Zikris, resulting in the migration of over 210,000 Shias, Zikris, and Hindus from Baluchistan to other parts of Pakistan.[30] A further 90,000 ethnic Punjabis have also fled due to campaigns against Punjabis by Balochi militants.[31]
REPUBLIC OF CONGO
Dozens of armed groups remained active in eastern Congo. Many commanders controlled forces responsible for war crimes, including ethnic massacres, killing of civilians, rape, forced recruitment of children, and pillage.
In Beni territory, North Kivu, unidentified fighters continued to commit sporadic massacres of civilians, killing dozens. Further north, in Ituri province, the Patriotic Resistance Front in Ituri (FRPI) rebel group also committed serious human rights abuses, particularly rape and pillage. In Rutshuru territory, North Kivu province, bandits and armed groups kidnapped dozens of civilians for ransom.
In January, security forces brutally suppressed demonstrations in the capital, Kinshasa, and other cities by those opposed to proposed changes to the electoral law requiring a national census before national elections could be held, effectively extending Kabila’s term for several years.
At time of writing, human rights defender Christopher Ngoyi, youth activists Fred Bauma and Yves Makwambala, and political party leaders Jean-Claude Muyambo, Ernest Kyaviro, and Vano Kiboko remained in detention at Kinshasa’s central prison. On September 14, Kiboko was convicted and sentenced to three years in prison on trumped up charges of racial hatred, tribalism, and spreading false rumors. On September 18, Kyaviro was convicted and sentenced to three years in prison for provoking and inciting disobedience toward public authorities. Trials based on politically motivated charges were ongoing for the others at time of writing.
WEB REFERENCES
BOOK REFFERENCES:
- HUMAN VALUES AND HUMAN RIGHTS : justice dharmadhikar
ReplyForward
Eduindex News 
You must be logged in to post a comment.