The Ineffectiveness of the UN Human Rights Committee
The United Nations has played a crucial role in the international system since its beginning. It has been the main place where leaders from around the globe can communicate and work out issues. Its charter is admirable and includes goals, such as “saving future generations from the scourge of war has brought untold sorrow to mankind." The United Nations creates rules against violence, issues sanctions, and plays a peacekeeping/diplomatic role by creating ‘space’ between conflicted countries. It also helps countries raise their standard of living, creates jobs, and delivers aid to victims of natural disasters or war. The human rights and relief programs that the UN has initiated or supported are impressive indeed.
. The purpose of the Committee was two-fold: 1. To study reports submitted every five years by state parties to the conference, and to make general comments on these reports, 2. To serve as the body to which individuals and groups could complain against states regarding the violation of the rights..
Is the Human Rights Committee really a failure? Yes. The following evidence are
The Committee was established, in part, to serve as a forum in which individuals could file complaints against states for human rights abuses. However, * In twenty years of existence, the Committee had registered only around 800 complaints. This is set against the backdrop of the two-billion individuals (from over 100 states) who could theoretically call on the Committee for protection. * In only 15 per cent of the cases have states implemented the Committee's views or offered any remedy to the applicant.
The “experts” that make up the Committee are more often government agents than independent experts.. This biases the Committee toward defending state actions rather than censuring them. Until the Committee is made up of truly independent experts, there is little hope of serious state responsibility, as they cannot understand the common man’s problems.
The
. The purpose of the Committee was two-fold: 1. To study reports submitted every five years by state parties to the conference, and to make general comments on these reports, 2. To serve as the body to which individuals and groups could complain against states regarding the violation of the rights..
Is the Human Rights Committee really a failure? Yes. The following evidence are
The Committee was established, in part, to serve as a forum in which individuals could file complaints against states for human rights abuses. However, * In twenty years of existence, the Committee had registered only around 800 complaints. This is set against the backdrop of the two-billion individuals (from over 100 states) who could theoretically call on the Committee for protection. * In only 15 per cent of the cases have states implemented the Committee's views or offered any remedy to the applicant.
The “experts” that make up the Committee are more often government agents than independent experts.. This biases the Committee toward defending state actions rather than censuring them. Until the Committee is made up of truly independent experts, there is little hope of serious state responsibility, as they cannot understand the common man’s problems.
The