A human rights framework to address trafficking of human beings

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 379-404

  Obokata, Tom ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 36549027349     PISSN: 01693441     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/016934410602400302     Document Type: Article

References (223)

1. US Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report 2005, US Department of State, Washington DC, at p. 6. It should be stressed that the clandestine nature of trafficking makes it difficult to obtain accurate statistics.
2. Ryf, K.C., 'The First Modern Anti-Slavery Law: The Trafficking Victim Protection Act 2000', Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, Vol. 34, 2002, p. 45, at p. 47.
3. UNICEF UK, End Child Exploitation: Stop Traffic!, UNICEF UK, London, 2003, at p. 11.
4. UN Doc. A/RES/55/25 (2001), Annexes I and II. For the drafting process of these instruments, see, Gallagher, A., 'Human Rights and the New UN Protocols on Trafficking and Migrant Smuggling: A Preliminary Analysis', Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 4, 2001, p. 975.
5. See for instance, Reports of the Secretary General on Trafficking in Women and Girls, UN Docs E/CN.4/2002/80 and E/CN.4/2003/74;
6. Note by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations Children's Fund and the International Organisation for Migration on the Draft Protocols Concerning Migrant Smuggling and Trafficking in Persons, UN Doc. A/AC.254/27;
7. Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women (GAATW), Human Rights and Trafficking in Persons: A Handbook, GAATW, Bangkok, 2001;
8. Inglis, S.C., 'Expanding International and National Protections against Trafficking for Forced Labour Using a Human Rights Framework', Buffalo Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 7, 2001, p. 55;
9. Obokata, T., 'Human Trafficking, Human Rights, and the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002', European Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 4, 2003, p. 410;
10. and Murray, J., 'Who Will Police the Peace-Builders? The Failure to Establish Accountability for the Participation of the United Nations Civilian Police in Trafficking of Women in Post-Conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina', Columbia Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 34, 2003, p. 475.
11. UN Doc. E/2002/68/Add.1.
12. International Agreement for the Suppression of the White Slave Traffic 1904, 24 United Kingdom Treaty Series 1;
13. International Convention for the Suppression of the White Slave Traffic 1910, 20 United Kingdom Treaty Series 269;
14. International Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Women and Children 1921, 9 League of Nations Treaty Series 15;
15. International Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Women of Full Age 1933, 150 League of Nations Treaty Series 431;
16. and Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others 1949, 96 United Nations Treaty Series 271.
17. UN Doc. A/RES/53/111 (Transnational Organised Crime). For the political and legal developments leading to the adoption of the Organised Crime Convention, see Vlassis, D., The United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime and its Three Protocols: Development and Outlook (unpublished manuscript).
18. Potts, L.G., 'Global Trafficking in Human Beings: Assessing Success of the United Nations Protocol to Prevent Trafficking in Persons', George Washington International Law Review, Vol. 35, 2003, p. 227, at pp. 238 and 239.
19. Trafficking Protocol, op.cit. (note 4).
20. Ibidem, Annex III.
21. Obokata, T., 'Smuggling of Human Beings from a Human Rights Perspective: Obligations of Non-State and State Actors under International Human Rights Law', International Journal of Refugee Law, Vol. 17, No. 2, 2005, p. 394, at pp. 399 and 400. Although this article focuses upon smuggling, the causes are also applicable to trafficking.
22. Report of the Special Rapporteur on Sales of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1999/7, paras 57, 75, 76, 85 and 86.
23. Written Statement Submitted by Human Rights Advocates International, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2002/NGO/45, paras 12 and 13.
24. Report of the Special Rapporteur on Migrants: Mission to the Border between Mexico and the United States of America, UN Doc. E/CN/4/2003/ 85/Add.3, para. 4.
25. Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, Its Causes and Consequences, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2000/68, para. 66;
26. and Report of the Special Rapporteur on Migrants Workers, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2001/84, para. 54.
27. Obokata, loc.cit. (note 12), at pp. 401 and 402.
28. See section 4.2. for detail.
29. Smuggling and Trafficking in Persons and the Protection of Their Human Rights: Note by the Secretary-General, UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/ 2001/26, para. 22;
30. Obokata, T., '"Trafficking" and "Smuggling" of Human Beings in Europe: Protection of Individual Rights or States' Interests?', Web Journal of Current Legal Issues, No. 5, 2001, at http://webjcli.nc.ncl.ac.uk (accessed 23 June 2006);
31. and Hartsough, T., 'Asylum for Trafficked Women: Escape Strategies Beyond the T Visa', Hastings Women's Law Journal, Vol. 13, 2002, p. 77, at p. 95.
32. Roht-Arriaza, N., 'Punishment, Redress, and Pardon: Theoretical and Psychological Approaches', in: Roht-Arriaza, N. (ed.), Impunity and Human Rights in International Law and Practice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995, at p. 19.
33. Idem. See below for measures which can be taken in this regard.
34. On this topic, see Paust, J.J., 'The Other Side of Rights: Private Duties under Human Rights Law', Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol. 5, 1992, p. 51;
35. Clapham, A., Human Rights in the Private Sphere, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993;
36. Jochnick, C., 'Confronting the Impunity of Non-State Actors: New Fields for the Promotion of Human Rights', Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1999, p. 56;
37. Ramasastry, A., 'Corporate Complicity: From Nuremberg to Rangoon, An Examination of Forced Labour Cases and Their Impact on the Liability of Multinational Corporations', Berkeley Journal of International Law, Vol. 20, 2002, p. 91;
38. Megret, F. and Hoffmann, F., 'The UN as a Human Rights Violator? Some Reflections on the United Nations Changing Human Rights Responsibilities', Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2003, p. 281;
39. and Reports of the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Human Responsibilities, UN Docs E/CN.4/2002/107 and E.CN.4/2003/105.
40. Rodley, N., 'Can Armed Opposition Groups Violate Human Rights?', in: Mahoney, K.E. and Mahoney, P. (eds), Human Rights in the Twenty-First Century: A Global Challenge, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1993, at pp. 297-318;
41. Schabas, W., 'Punishment of Non-State Actors in Non-International Armed Conflict', Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 26, 2003, p. 907, at p. 908.
42. 999 United Nations Treaty Series 171.
43. General Comment No. 31, 'The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant', UN Doc. CCPR/C/74/CRP.4/ Rev.6 (2004), para. 8.
44. F.G.G. vs the Netherlands, Communication No. 209/1986, UN Doc. CCPR/C29/D/209/1986, in which the Human Rights Committee held that communications directed against non-States actors were inadmissible.
45. In G.R.B. vs Sweden, Communication No. 83/1997, UN Doc. CAT/C/20/D/83/1997, the Committee against Torture stated that allegations of a risk of torture at the hands of Sendeero Luminoso, a non-State entity controlling significant portions of Peru, fell outside the scope of Article 3 of the Convention (para. 6.5).
46. On this topic, see Klein, D.F., 'A Theory for the Application of Customary International Law of Human Rights by Domestic Courts', Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 13, 1988, p. 332;
47. Koh, H.H., 'Is International Law Really State Law?', Harvard Law Review, Vol. 111, 1998, p. 1824;
48. Dickson, B., 'The Horizontal Application of Human Rights Law, in: Hegarty, A. and Leonard, S. (eds), Human Rights: An Agenda for the 21st Century, Cavendish, London, 1999;
49. Paust, J.J., 'Customary International Law and Human Rights Treaties Are Laws of the United States', Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 20, 1999, p. 301;
50. and Cooper, J., 'Horizontality: The Application of Human Rights Standards in Private Disputes', in: English, R. and Havers, P. (eds), An Introduction to Human Rights and the Common Law, Hart, Oxford, 2000.
51. US Department of State, op.cit. (note 1).
52. F.2d 876 (1980) (2d Cir., 30 June).
53. U.S.C., para. 1350. For a discussion of the Alien Tort Statute, see, Lu, J., 'Jurisdiction over Non-State Activities under the Alien Tort Claims Act', Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 35, 1997, p. 531.
54. In the case of the United States, see further, the Torture Victim Protection Act, 28 U.S.C., para. 1350;
55. and the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, Pub. L 106-386, 114 Stat. 1464. Similar legislation also exists in Belgium and the Netherlands.
56. Pearson, E., Human Traffic, Human Rights: Redefining Victim Protection, Anti-Slavery International, London, 2002, at pp. 81, 100 and 101.
57. Cassese, A., International Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003, at p. 64.
58. See also Meron, T., Human Rights and Humanitarian Norms as Customary International Law, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989;
59. Sunga, L.S., Individual Responsibility in International Law for Serious Human Rights Violations, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1992;
60. Bassiouni, M.C., Crimes Against Humanity in International Criminal Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1992;
61. Meron, T., 'International Criminalization of Internal Atrocities', American Journal of International Law, Vol. 89, 1995, p. 554;
62. and Ratner, S.R. and Abrams, J.S., Accountability for Human Rights Atrocities in International Law: Beyond the Nuremberg Legacy, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001.
63. See for instance, Articles 227-230 of the Treaty of Versailles 1919, Article 6 of the Charter of International Military Tribunal 1945, Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East 1946, Control Council Law No. 10 (Punishment of Persons Guilty of War Crimes, Crimes against Peace and against Humanity) 1945; Article 4 of the Convention on the Prevention and Suppression of the Crime of Genocide 1948; Article 3 of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid 1973; Article 7 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia 1993; and Article 6 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda 1994. Van den Wyngaert, C. (ed.), International Criminal Law: A Collection of International and European Instruments, 2nd ed., Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 2000.
64. Article 25, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9 (1998). For commentaries on the Rome Statute in general, see, Cassese, A., Gaeta, P. and Jones, J. (eds), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002;
65. and Lee, R.S., The International Criminal Court: Elements of Crimes and Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Transnational Publishers, New York, 2000.
66. Obokata, T., 'Trafficking of Human Beings as a Crime against Humanity: Some Implications for the International Legal System', International & Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 54, 2005, p. 445.
67. Ibidem, at p. 455.
68. A shorter version of an analysis of human rights obligations imposed upon States appears in Obokata, loc.cit. (note 5).
69. Op.cit. (note 7), Articles 1-4.
70. Article 6, 1979, 1249 United Nations Treaty Series 13.
71. Article 35, UN Doc. A/RES/44/25, 20 November 1989.
72. Articles 1-3, UN Doc. A/RES/54/263, 25 May 2000.
73. Article 5(3), OJ C 364/1, 18 December 2000.
74. 2005, ETS, No. 197, 2005.
75. Article 6, 1969, 1144 United Nations Treaty Series 123.
76. Article 7, 1994, available at: www.oas.org/juridico/english/Treaties/ b-57.html (accessed 23 June 2006).
77. 2000, SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) consists of Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
78. Convention against Torture, and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984, UN Doc. A/RES/39/46, 10 December 1984.
79. Other instruments include Article 5 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) 1948, GA Res. 217A(III);
80. Article 7 of ICCPR; Article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), ETS No. 5, 1950;
81. Article 5(2) of ACHR; Article 5 of African Charter of Human and Peoples' Rights (African Charter) 1986, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/Rev.5;
82. Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture 1985, OASTS No. 67;
83. and European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman, Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1986, ETS No. 126, 1986.
84. See, for example, Filartiga vs Pena-Irala, op.cit. (note 29);
85. Prosecutor vs Delalic, Case IT-96-21-T, Trial Judgement, 11 November 1998, para. 459;
86. and General Comment No. 24 (Issues Relating to Reservations Made upon Ratification or Accession to the Covenant or Optional Protocols) (1994) of the Human Rights Committee, para. 8, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations adopted by the Human Rights Treaty Bodies, UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.5 (hereinafter Compilation of General Comments).
87. Prosecutor vs Furundzija, Case IT-95-17/1, Trial Judgment, 10 December 1998, para. 153;
88. and General Comment No. 24, ibidem, para. 10. Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969, 1155 United Nations Treaty Series 33, provides that jus cogens is 'a peremptory norm of general international law' which is 'accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character.'
89. 1926, 60 Leage of Nations Treaty Series 253.
90. Article 8.
91. Article 10(3), 1966, 993 United Nations Treaty Series 3.
92. Article 11, 1990, International Legal Materials, Vol. 30, p. 152.
93. On the prohibition of slavery as jus cogens, see Prosectuor vs Kunarac, Case IT-96-23/1, Trial Judgment, 22 February 2001, para. 520;
94. 'Restatement of the Law (Third): Foreign Relations Law of the United States', American Law Institute, Vol. 2, 1987, at p. 167;
95. Bassiouni, M.C., 'Enslavement as International Crime', New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 23, 1991, p. 445;
96. Rassam, A.Y., 'Contemporary Forms of Slavery and the Evolution of the Prohibition of Slavery and the Slave Trade Under Customary International Law', Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 39, 1999, p. 303, at p. 303;
97. and General Comment No. 24, op.cit. (note 48), para. 8.
98. Serie C, No. 1 (1988).
99. Ibidem, para. 176 (emphasis added).
100. This position has been affirmed in a more recent case before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Judicial Condition and Rights of the Undocumented Migrants, Advisory Opinion OC-18/03, Serie A, No. 18 (2003), paras 140-142.
101. See also, Case of 19 Comerciantes vs Colombia, Serie C, No. 109 (2004);
102. and Case of the Mapiripán Massacre vs Colombia, Serie C, No. 134 (2005) (both available only in Spanish).
103. Ergi vs Turkey, Application No. 23818/94, Judgement of 28 July 1998, para. 82.
104. See also Osman vs United Kingdom, Application No. 23452/94, Judgement of 28 October 1998, paras 115-116;
105. and Z and Others vs United Kingdom, Application No. 29392/ 95, Judgement of 10 May 2001, para. 109.
106. General Comment No. 7 (Torture, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment) (1982), paras 1 and 2; Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48);
107. and Herrera Rubio vs Colombia, Communication No. 161/1983, para. 11.
108. Special Rapporteur on Women, op.cit. (note 16), paras 51-53.
109. See further, Cook, R., 'State Responsibility for Violation of Women's Human Rights', Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol. 7, 1994, p. 125.
110. Orentlicher, D., 'Settling Accounts: The Duty to Prosecute Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime', Yale Law Journal, Vol. 100, 1991, p. 2537;
111. and Roht-Arriaza, N., 'State Responsibility to Investigate and Prosecute Grave Human Rights Violations in International Law', California Law Review, Vol. 78, 1990, p. 449.
112. Velasquez Rodriguez Case, op.cit. (note 55), para. 176;
113. General Comment No. 7, op.cit. (note 58), paras 1;
114. and General Comment No. 20 (Replaces General Comment Concerning Prohibition of Torture and Cruel Treatment or Punishment) (1992) of the Human Rights Committee, paras 13 and 14, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
115. General Comments Nos 8 (Right to Liberty and Security of Persons) (1982), and 9 (Humane Treatment of Persons Deprived of Liberty) (1982) of the Human Rights Committee, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
116. Articles 16, 17 and 19.
117. Articles 8, 9 and 10.
118. Articles 6 and 16.
119. Chapter III.
120. Migrant Workers' Convention, Article 2.
121. Ibidem, Article 5.
122. Moore, J., 'From Nation State to Failed State: International Protection from Human Rights Abuses by Non-State Agents', Columbia Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 31, 1999, p. 81, at pp. 92, 93 and 96.
123. It is worth noting that the Human Rights Committee, in relation to prohibitions against torture, stated that 'it is the duty of the State party to afford everyone protection through legislative and other measures as may be necessary against acts prohibited by article 7, whether inflicted by people acting in their official capacity, outside their official capacity or in a private capacity', General Comment No. 20, op.cit. (note 61), para. 2.
124. Articles 2 and 3.
125. Articles and 13.
126. Articles 1, 2 and 24.
127. ICJ Report 1980, paras 58, 59 and 61.
128. Op-cit. (note 55), para. 172.
129. Article 33 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951, 189 United Nations Treaty Series 150, as revised by the Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1967, 606 United Nations Treaty Series 267. Under Article 1 of the Refugee Convention, a refugee is defined as someone who has well-founded fear of being persecuted on grounds of his/her race, religion, nationality, or membership of a particular social group or political opinion.
130. Secretary of State for the Home Department vs Lyudmyla Dzhygun, (Immigration Appeals Tribunal), Appeal No. CC-50627-99 (00TH00728), 13 April 2000. The Immigration Appeals Tribunal recognised that the respondent belonged to a particular social group under the definition of a refugee.
131. See Bensaid vs United Kingdom, Application No. 44599/98, judgement of 6 February 2001, para. 34.
132. Case of Barar vs Sweden, Application No. 42367/98 (unreported). Case Comment, European Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 3, 1999, p. 330.
133. Pearson, op.cit. (note 31).
134. Section 107 of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act 2000, op.cit. (note 31).
135. Pearson, op.cit. (note 31).
136. OJ L 261/19, 6 August 2004. This instrument is binding on all member States except for Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom.
137. Pearson, op.cit (note 31).
138. Written Statements Submitted by Federation of Associations for Defense and Promotion of Human Rights, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2003/NGO/43.
139. Written Statement Submitted by the Association of Refugees and Displaced Persons of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, UN Doc. E/ CN.4/1999/NGO/53;
140. Report of the Special Representative on Internally Displaced Persons: East Timor, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2000/83/Add.3, para. 48;
141. and Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia: Note by the Secretary General, UN Doc. A/57/230 (2003), paras 49-54.
142. The Return of Refugees' or Displaced Persons' Property: Working Paper, UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/17, paras 22-28.
143. Article 12(4); and General Comment No. 27 (Freedom of Movement) (1999) of the Human Rights Committee, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
144. Article 22(5).
145. Article 5(d)(ii), 1966, 660 United Nations Treaty Series 195;
146. and General Recommendation No. 22 (Refugees and Displaced Persons) (1996) of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
147. Article 8.
148. Article 13 of ICCPR; General Comment No. 15 (Position of Aliens under the Covenant) (1997) of the Human Rights Committee, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
149. Article 22(9) of ACHR; and Article 22(1) of the Migrant Workers' Convention.
150. Hyland, K.E., 'Protecting Human Victims of Trafficking: An American Framework', Berkeley Women's Law Journal, Vol. 16, 2001, p. 29, at pp. 59-61.
151. See also The Right to Restitution, Compensation and Rehabilitation for Victims of Gross Violations of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: Final Report of the Special Rapporteur, UN Doc. E/CN.4 /2000/62.
152. Roht-Arriaza, loc.cit. (note 20), at p. 34.
153. Ibidem, at p. 21.
154. Ibidem, at p. 19.
155. General Comment No. 13 (Equality before Courts) (1984) of the Human Rights Committee; and General Recommendation No. 20 (Non-Discriminatory Implementation of Rights and Freedom) (1996) in which the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination notes that the right to equal treatment applies to 'all persons living in a given State', Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48); and Article 18 of the Migrant Workers' Convention.
156. Airey vs Ireland, Application No. 6289/73, Judgement of 9 September 1979, para. 25.
157. Except for those who fear persecution by States of origin.
158. Article 36, 1963, 596 United Nations Treaty Series 261.
159. ICJ Report 2002, para. 77.
160. The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law, Advisory Opinion OC-16/99, Serie A, No. 16 (1999), paras 80, 83, 84, 87 and 122-124.
161. General Recommendation No. 26 (Article 6 of the Convention) (2000), Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
162. Velasquez Rodriguez Case, op.cit. (note 55), paras 166, 174 and 175.
163. Z and Others vs United Kingdom, op.cit. (note 57), paras 108 and 109.
164. State Responsibility in Report of the Commission to the General Assembly on the Work of its Twenty-Ninth Session. Yearbook of the International Law Commission Vol. II (1-2) (1977), at pp. 4-21 (1) and 11-30 (2).
165. Idem.
166. See also Rubenstein, P., 'State Responsibility for Failure to Control the Export of Weapons of Mass Destruction', California Western International Law Journal, Vol. 23, 1993, p. 319, at p. 351.
167. General Comment No. 3 (Nature of States Parties Obligations) (1990) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, para. 1, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
168. Ibidem, paras 1 and 9.
169. Ibidem, paras 1 and 2.
170. Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1997), para. 6, reprinted in: Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 3, 1998, p. 691.
171. Report of the Independent Expert on Human Rights and Extreme Poverty, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1999/48, para. 26.
172. Maastricht Guidelines, loc.cit. (note 112), para. 6.
173. Idem.
174. General Comment No. 3, op.cit. (note 109), para. 10.
175. On this, see OHCHR, Draft Guidelines: A Human Rights Approach to Poverty Reduction Strategies, September 2001.
176. Maastricht Guidelines, loc.cit. (note 112), para. 6.
177. General Comment No. 3, op.cit. (note 109), para. 14.
178. Ibidem, para. 13.
179. Article 2 of ICESCR; General Comment No. 3, op.cit. (note 109), para. 3; Article 2 of ICCPR; Articles 2(d) and 4(a) of CERD; General Recommendation No. 7 (Legislation to Eradicate Racial Discrimination) (1985) of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48); and Article 2(b) of CEDAW.
180. General Comment No. 14 (The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health) (2000) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48), para. 43.
181. General Comment No. 12 (The Right to Adequate Food) (1999) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48), para. 18.
182. General Comment No. 7 (The Right to Adequate Housing) (1997) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Compilation of General Comments, op. cit. (note 48), para. 10.
183. Article 10 of CEDAW; Article 28 of CRC; and General Comment No. 1 (Aims of Education) (2001) of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, para. 10, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48); Article 5(e) of CERD; Article 13 of ICESCR; and General Comment No. 13 (The Right to Education) (1999) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48).
184. Article 10 of ICCPR; and General Comment No. 21 (Replacing General Comment No. 9 Concerning Humane Treatment of Persons Deprived of Liberty) (1992) of the Human Rights Committee, para. 4, Compilation of General Comments, op.cit. (note 48);
185. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (1977), ECOSOC Resolution 2076 (LXII), para. 6. 1;
186. and Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (1988), UN Doc. A/RES/43/173, Principle 5.
187. Article 5 of CERD; and General Comment No. 3, op.cit. (note 109), para. 5.
188. General Comment No. 13, op.cit. (note 125), para. 10;
189. and General Comment No. 1 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, op. cit. (note 125), para. 10.
190. Article 13(1) of ICESCR; and Article 29(1) of CRC.
191. Boister, N., 'Transnational Criminal Law?', European Journal of International Law, Vol. 14, 2003, p. 953, at p. 955.
192. 'Restatement of the Law', loc.cit. (note 54), at p. 254.
193. R. vs Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No. 1), 4 All E.R. 897;
194. and Demjanjuk vs Petrovsky, 612 F. Supp.544 (1985).
195. See also Orenthcher, loc.cit. (note 60), at pp. 2555, 2593 and 2594;
196. and Scharf, M.P., 'Application of Treaty-Based Universal jurisdiction to Nationals of Non-Party States', New England Law Review, Vol. 35, 2001, p. 363, at pp. 372 and 373.
197. Boister, loc.cit. (note 130), at p. 964.
198. Idem.
199. Trafficking Protocol, op.cit. (note 4), Articles 9-11.
200. Organised Crime Convention, op.cit. (note 4).
201. See for instance, Articles 9, 10 and 14 of ICCPR; and Articles 55, 66 and 67 of the Rome Statue.
202. Article 9(4) of the Trafficking Protocol provides that 'States Parties shall take or strengthen measures, including through bilateral or multilateral cooperation, to alleviate the factors that make persons, especially women and children, vulnerable to trafficking such as poverty, underdevelopment and lack of equal opportunity.'
203. For international criminal law, see for example, Part 9 of the Rome Statute.
204. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, The Effect of Reservations on the Entry into Force of the ACHR (Articles 74 and 75) (1982), Advisory Opinion OC 2-82, Serie A, No. 2, para. 29.
205. Except for ICESCR as noted above.
206. Cassese, op.cit. (note 32), at pp. 15 and 16.
207. Boister, loc.cit. (note 130), at p. 958.
208. Ibidem, at p. 959.
209. Organised Crime Convention, op.cit. (note 4).
210. Trafficking Protocol, op.cit. (note 4), Articles 6 and 7.
211. Boister, loc.cit. (note 130), at p. 956.
212. Organised Crime Convention, op.cit. (note 4).
213. Cassese, op.cit (note 32), at p. 31.
214. Ibidem, at pp. 141 and 142.
215. Op.cit. (note 137).
216. Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of Organization, UN Doc. A/46/1 (13/9/91), at p. 5.
217. See further, Schreuer, C., 'The Waning of Sovereign State: Towards a New Paradigm for International Law?', European Journal of International Law, Vol. 4, 1993, p. 447, at pp. 468 and 469;
218. and Henkin, L., 'That "S" Word: Sovereignty, and Globalization, and Human Rights, Et Cetera', Fordham Law Review, Vol. 68, 1999, p. 1, at pp. 4 and 5.
219. National Human Rights Commission of Nepal at: www.nhrcnepal.org/ (accessed 23 June 2006).
220. Smit, M., Trafficking in Women: A Dutch Country Report, Bureau of the Dutch National Rapporteur on Trafficking, April 2003.
221. In relation to European Court of Human Rights, see the recent case of Siliadin vs France, Application No. 73316/01, Judgement of 26 July 2005.
222. On this point, see Lattimer, M., 'Enforcing Human Rights through International Criminal Law', in: Lattimer, M. and Sands, P. (eds), Justice for Crimes against Humanity, Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2003;
223. and Alston, P. and Crawford, J. (eds), The Future of the UN Human Rights Treaty Monitoring, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.