Reflections on state obligations with respect to economic, social and cultural rights in international human rights law

International Journal of Human Rights

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 969-1012

  Ssenyonjo, Manisuli ^a  

^a Elliott Jaques Building   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Economic; Extra territorial human rights obligations; International covenant on economic; Non derogable rights; Optional protocol to the international covenant on economic; Social and cultural rights; State obligations

Indexed keywords

EID: 80155133930     PISSN: 13642987     EISSN: 1744053X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13642981003719158     Document Type: Article

References (400)

1. GA res. 217A (III), UN Doc. A/810 at 71 (1948).
2. (1948) 19 US Department of State Bulletin 751.
3. Both the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 993 UNTS 3, entered into force 3 January 1976, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 999 UNTS 171, entered into force 23 March 1976, refer to the UDHR in their preambles recognising that 'in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his economic, social and cultural rights'.
4. See Measures taken within the United Nations in the field of Human Rights, UN Doc. A/CONF.32/5, pp. 28-30.
5. The Committee was established by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Resolution 1985/17 of 28 May 1985.
6. See n. 3 above.
7. See Compilation of general comments and general recommendations adopted by human rights treaty bodies, UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol. I), (27 May 2008), 1-171. The General Comments of the CESCR are available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/comments.htm (accessed February 20, 2010).
8. See e.g. M Ssenyonjo, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in International Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2009), chapter 4;
9. F. Coomans, ed., Justiciability of Economic, and Social Rights: Experiences from Domestic Systems (Antwerpen: Intersentia, 2006). For a collection of cases on ESC rights, see ESCR-Net, at http://www.escr-net.org/caselaw/caselaw_list.htm (accessed February 20, 2010).
10. See e.g. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Poland, UN Doc. C.12/POL/CO/5 (20 November 2009), para 9.
11. D. Bilchitz, Poverty and Fundamental Rights: The Justification and Enforcement of Socio-Economic Rights (Oxford: OUP, 2007), 2.
12. See United Nations, The Millennium Development Goals Report (New York, 2009), 45, http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/MDG%20Report%202009%20ENG.pdf (accessed February 20, 2010).
13. The Report noted that approximately 2.5 billion people were without access to basic sanitation; despite health risks to their families and communities, 18% of the world's population - 1.2 billion people - practise open defecation;
14. Almost 1 billion did not have access to safe drinking water; 1.4 billion people lived on less than $1.25 a day, and 72 million children did not have access to education.
15. See ICESCR, n. 3 above, Arts, 6-15.
16. See ICCPR, n. 3 above.
17. See ECOSOC Resolution 1985/17, n. 5 above.
18. See the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Human Rights Council, Resolution 8/2, 28th Meeting, 18 June 2008, http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/E/HRC/resolutions/A_HRC_RES_8_2.pdf (accessed February 20,2010).
19. See also UN Doc. A/63/435, Annex, (28 November 2008).
20. Ibid., Arts 1, 2, 10, and 11.
21. GA res. A/RES/63/117, (10 December 2008), UN Doc. A/63/435.
22. The first 26 states to sign the Optional Protocol were: Argentina, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Chile, Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Finland, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, uxembourg, Madagascar, Mali, Montenegro, Netherlands, Portugal, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Togo, Ukraine, and Uruguay. By the end of February 2010, six more states (Armenia, Bolivia, Italy, Mongolia, Paraguay and Timor-Leste) had signed the Protocol.
23. See M. Dennis and D. Stewart, 'Justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights: should there be an international complaints mechanism to adjudicate the rights to food, water, housing and health', American Journal of International Law 98, no. 3 (2004): 462.
24. CETS No. 5, adopted on 4 November 1950.
25. For a comprehensive discussion of the ECHR see generally D.J. Harris et al., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
26. Airey v. Ireland A 32 (1979);
27. 2 EHRR 305, at para. 26.
28. C. Warbrick, 'Economic and social interests and the European convention on human rights', in M. Baderin and R. McCorquodale, eds. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Action (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 241.
29. The European Social Charter was adopted in 1961 and revised in 1996. On the European Social Charter see generally D.J. Harris and J. Darcy, European Social Charter, 2nd ed. (Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers, 2001).
30. H. Cullen, 'The collective complaints system of the european social charter: interpretative methods of the European committee of social rights', Human Rights Law Review 9, no. 1 (2009): 61-93.
31. O.A.S. Treaty Series No. 36, 1144 UNTS 123.
32. O.A.S. Treaty Series No. 69 (1988), entered into force 16 November 1999. On the justiciability of ESC rights in the Inter-American system see M.F. Tinta, 'Justiciability of economic, social, and cultural rights in the inter-american system of protection of human rights: Beyond traditional paradigms and notions', Human Rights Quarterly 29, no. 2 (2007): 431-459.
33. Adopted 27 June 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982).
34. For a discussion see Malcolm D. Evans and R. Murray, eds, The African charter on human and peoples' rights: the system in practice, 1986-2006, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008).
35. F. Ouguergouz, The African charter on human and peoples' rights: A comprehensive agenda for human rights (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2003).
36. See African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/24.9/49 (1990), entered into force 29 November 1999; Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Rights ofWomen in Africa, adopted by the 2nd Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the Union, Maputo, CAB/LEG/66.6 (13 September 2000, entered into force 25 November 2005); and the African Youth Charter, n. 40 below.
37. African Charter, ibid., Art 45.
38. See M. Ssenyonjo, 'The justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights', East African Journal of Peace and Human Rights 9, no. 1 (2003): 1-36.
39. Communication 241/2001, Sixteenth Annual Activity Report of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights 2002-2003, Annex VII; (2003) African Human Rights Law Reports 96.
40. Communication 155/96, Fifteenth Annual Activity Report of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights 2001-2002, Annex V; (2001) African Human Rights Law Reports 60; (2003)10 IHRR 282.
41. For a comment on this case se D. Shelton, 'Decision regarding communication 155/96: social and economic rights action center and the center for economic and social rights v. nigeria', American Journal of International Law 96, no. 4 (2002): 937.
42. Communication 155/96, ibid., para. 68.
43. Communication 241/2001, n. 31 above, at para. 84.
44. See S. Khoza, 'Promoting economic, social and cultural rights in Africa: The African commission holds a seminar in pretoria', African Human Rights Law Journal 4, no. 2 (2004): 334.
45. See also 'Statement on social, economic and cultural rights in Africa, Pretoria, 17 September 2004', African Human Rights Law Journal 5, no. 1 (2005): 182.
46. OAU Doc. OAU/LEG/EXP/AFCHPR/PROT (III) (9 June 1998).
47. Ibid., Article 34(6) provides: 'At the time of the ratification of this Protocol or any time thereafter, the State shall make a declaration accepting the competence of the Court to receive cases under article 5 (3) of this Protocol [Article 5(3) reads: The Court may entitle relevant Non Governmental organizations (NGOs) with observer status before the Commission, and individuals to institute cases directly before it, in accordance with article 34 (6) of this Protocol]. The Court shall not receive any petition under article 5 (3) involving a State Party which has not made such a declaration'.
48. See In the Matter of Michelot Yugogombaye v. The Republic of Senegal, Application No. 001/2008, http://www.african-ourt.org/fileadmin/documents/Court/Latest_Judgments/E nglish/JUDGMENT._MICHELOT_YOGOGOMBAYE_VS._REPUBLIC_OF_SENEGAL_1_.pdf (accessed February 20, 2010).
49. See Resolution on the Impact of the Ongoing Global Financial Crisis on the Enjoyment of Social and Economic Rights in Africa, ACHPR/Res159(XLVI)09, adopted in Banjul by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, 25 November 2009, preamble para. 6.
50. See the African Youth Charter, adopted by the African Union Assembly in July 2006, preamble para. 5, http://www.africa-union.org/root/UA/Conferences/Mai/HRST/Charter%20engli sh.pdf (accessed February 20, 2010).
51. See e.g. Supreme Court of India in the following cases: Francis Coralie v. The Union Territory of Delhi (1981) 1 SCC 608;
52. Francis Coralie Mullin v. The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981) 2 SCR 516;
53. Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corp., (1985) 3 SCC 545.
54. Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame and Others (1990) 1 SCC 520;
55. Chamelli Singh and Other v. State of Uttar Pradesh JT (1995) 9 SC 380;
56. Shanti Star Buildersv. Narayan K. Totame (1990) 1 SCC 520;
57. Consumer Education and Research Centre (CERC) v. Union of India (1995) 3 SCC 42.
58. See e.g. Constitutional Court of South Africa (CC) in the following cases: Thiagraj soobramoney v. minister of health, KwaZulu-Natal 1998 (1) SA 765 (CC);
59. 1997 (12) BCLR 1696 (CC);
60. Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v. Grootboomand Others 2001 (1) SA 46 (CC);
61. 2000 (11) BCLR 1169 (CC);
62. Minister of Health and Others v. Treatment Action Campaign 2002 (5) SA 721 (CC)
63. 2002 (10) BCLR 1033 (CC).
64. Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v. Grootboom and Others 2001 (1) SA 46 (CC);
65. Lindiwe Mazibuko and Others v. City of Johannesburg and Others, Case CCT 39/09 [2009] ZACC 28, http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2009/28.html (accessed February 20, 2010), paras 161-2.
66. For a comment on the Grootboom case see C. Scott and P. Alston, 'Adjudicating constitutional priorities in a transnational context: A comment on soobramoney's legacy and grootboom's promise', South African Journal on Human Right 16 (2000): 206;
67. P. De Vos, 'Grootboom, the right of access to housing and substantive equality as contextual fairness', South African Journal on Human Rights 17 (2001): 258;
68. S. Liebenberg, 'The right to social assistance: the implications of grootboom for policy reform in south Africa', South African Journal on Human Rights 17, no. 2 (2001): 232;
69. J. Sloth-Nielsen, 'The child's right to social services, the right to social security, and primary prevention of child abuse: some conclusions in the aftermath of grootboom', South African Journal on Human Right 17, no. 2 (2001): 210;
70. R. Dixon, 'Creating Dialogue about Socioeconomic Rights: Strong-Form Versus Weak-Form Judicial Review Revisited', International Journal of Constitutional Law 5, no. 3 (2007): 391-418.
71. CESCR, General Comment 9: The Domestic Application of the Covenant, UN Doc. E/C.12/ 1998/24 (3 December 1998), para. 9.
72. See CESCR, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.79, (5 June 2002), para. 24.
73. See also CESCR, Concluding Observations: Poland, UN Doc. E/C.12/POL/CO/5 (20 November 2009), para. 9. For a survey of cases on ESC rights see e.g. Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), Leading Cases on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Summaries, Working Paper No. 3 (Geneva: COHRE, 2006); and International Commission of Jurists, Courts and the Legal Enforcement of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Comparative Experiences of Justiciability (Geneva: International Commission of Jurists, 2008).
74. See Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 213 UNTS 262, entered into force 18 May 1954. Art. 2 reads: 'No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.' For the analysis see Harris et al., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, 697-709.
75. M. Craven, The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: A Perspective on its Development (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 106-52.
76. H. Steiner and P. Alston, International Human Rights in Context: Law, Politics, Morals - Text and Materials, 2nd ed. (Oxford: OUP, 2000), 275. For the analysis of Article 2(1) of the ICCPR.
77. see D. Harris, 'The international covenant on civil and political rights and the United Kingdom: An introduction', in The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and United Kingdom Law, ed. D. Harris and S. Joseph (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 1-8;
78. M. Nowak, UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary, 2nd ed. (Kehl: N.P. Engel, 2005), 37-42.
79. M. Craven, 'The justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights', in Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Their Implementation in United Kingdom Law, ed. R. Burchill, D. Harris and A. Owers (Nottingham: University of Nottingham Human Rights Law Centre, 1999), 1-12, at 5 (footnotes omitted).
80. UN Doc. E/CN.4/1987/17, Annex; Human Rights Quarterly 9, no. 2 (1987): 122-135.
81. Review of the International Commission of Jurists 37 (1986): 43-55. The 29 participants who adopted the Limburg Principles came from various states and international organisations.
82. Human Rights Quarterly 20, no. 3 (1998): 691-704.
83. The Maastricht Guidelines were adopted by a group of more than 30 experts. For a commentary on these guidelines see E. Dankwa, C. Flinterman and S. Leckie, 'Commentary to the maastricht guidelines on violations of economic, social and cultural rights', Human Rights Quarterly 20, no. 3 (1998): 705-730.
84. See the introduction to the Limburg Principles, n. 50 above, para. iii.
85. See the introduction to the Maastricht Guidelines, n. 51 above.
86. See CESCR, General Comments at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/comments.htm; UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol.I), (n. 7 above), 1-171.
87. Statements of the Committee are available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/statements.htm (accessed February 20, 2010).
88. CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 2;
89. Limburg principles, n. 50 above, 16 and 21.
90. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Iraq,UNDoc.E/1998/22, (20 June 1998), paras 253 and 281.
91. See e.g., CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 3;
92. CESCR, General Comment 14, para.56: 'states should consider adopting a framework law to operationalise their right to health national strategy'. See also generally CESCR, General Comment 20: Non-Discrimination in Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Art. 2(2), UN Doc. E/C.12/GC/20 (25 May 2009)).
93. A. Nolan, 'Addressing economic and social rights violations by non-state actors through the role of the state: A comparison of regional approaches to the "obligation to protect"', Human Rights Law Review 9, no. 2 (2009): 225-255.
94. See e.g., CESCR, Concluding Observations: Iraq, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.17 (12 December 1997), paras 13-14;
95. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Morocco, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.55 (1 December 2000), paras 34, 45 and 47;
96. CESCR, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom, UN Doc. E/C.12/GBR/CO/5 (22 May 2009), para. 16;
97. CESCR, General Comment 5, para. 16.
98. CESCR, General Comment 20, paras 27-35.
99. CESCR, General Comment 20, para. 27.
100. See, e.g., Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Ylimaz Dogman v. The Netherlands, Communication 1/1984 (29 September 1988);
101. African Commission, Kevin Mgwanga Gunme et al. v. Cameroon, Communication 266/2003, Twenty-sixth Annual Activity Report of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights 2009, Annex 4.
102. CEDAWCommittee, Concluding Observations: Tanzania, UN Doc. CEDAW//C/TZA/CO/6 (18 July 2008), paras 16, 17 and 55;
103. CEDAW Committee, Concluding Observations: Nigeria. UN Doc. CEDAW/C/NGA/CO/6 (18 July 2008), paras 13,14 and 44.
104. CESCR, General Comment 9, para. 2.
105. CESCR, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom, UN Doc. E/C.12/GBR/CO/5 (22 May 2009), para. 13.
106. See K. Tomasevski, The State of the Right to Education Worldwide - Free or Fee: 2006 Global Report (Copenhagen: August 2006), http://www.katarinatomasevski.com/images/Global_Report.pdf (accessed February 20, 2010).
107. United Nations, The Millennium Development Goals Report, 15.
108. 10 U.N. GAOR, para. 9, UN Doc. A/2910/Add.6 (1955).
109. H.W. Fowler, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), 954.
110. E.M. Kirkpatrick, ed., Chambers Family Dictionary (Edinburgh: Chambers, 1981), 613.
111. P. Hanks, ed., The New Oxford Thesaurus of English (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 754.
112. CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 9. Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which includes ESC rights and corresponding state obligations, there is no reference to the qualifying clause 'progressive realisation'. Thus, its obligations arise immediately, although implementation is qualified by the phrase 'within their means'.
113. P. Alston and G. Quinn, 'The nature and scope of states parties' obligations under the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights', Human Rights Quarterly 9, no. 2 (1987): 156, at 172.
114. See also H. Steiner, 'International protection of human rights', in International Law, ed. M.D. Evans (Oxford,: Oxford University Press, 2003), 757-787.
115. See A. Mowbray, The Development of Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights by the European Court of Human Rights (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004).
116. Human rights committee (HRC), General comment 32: article 14 - right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/32 (23 August 2007), para. 9;
117. Golder v. United KINGDOM, Judgement of 21 February 1975, Series A, No. 18;
118. (1979-1980) 1 EHRR 524, paras 34-5.
119. Airey v. Ireland, Judgement of 9 October 1979, Series A, No. 32;
120. (1979-1980) 3 EHRR 592, para. 26.
121. HRC, General Comment 32, n. 75 above, para. 10.
122. CESCR, General Comment 13, para. 31.
123. See also Commission on Human Rights Res. 2002/ 23, para. 4(b).
124. Under the ICESCR, Article 7(a)(i) The States Parties to the ICESCR recognise the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work which ensure, in particular remuneration which provides all workers, as a minimum, with: 'Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction of any kind, in particular women being guaranteed conditions of work not inferior to those enjoyed by men, with equal pay for equal work'.
125. For a discussion of minimum core obligations, see generally A. Chapman and S. Russel, eds, Core Obligations: Building a Framework for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2002).
126. CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 10.
127. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 11 (para. 17);
128. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 13 (para. 57);
129. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 14 (para. 43);
130. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 15 (para. 37);
131. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 17 (para. 39);
132. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 18 (para. 31);
133. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 19 (para. 59);
134. See for example CESCR, General Comment Nos 21 (para 55) respectively, www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/comments.htm (accessed February 20, 2010).
135. CESCR, General Comment Nos 14, para. 47;
136. CESCR, General Comment Nos 15, para. 40.
137. See also CESCR, Poverty and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/10 (10 May 2001), para. 18.
138. A key provision of the ICESCR, Article 11(1) captures the idea of progressive realisation when it recognizes a right to an adequate standard of living including adequate food, clothing and housing, 'and to the continuous improvement of living conditions'.
139. See e.g. CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 9;
140. General Comment 13, para. 44;
141. General Comment 14, para. 31;
142. General Comment 15, para. 18;
143. Limburg Principles, 21.
144. See also CESCR, Statement on Poverty and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/10, (4 May 2001), para. 18.
145. See e.g., CESCR, General Comment 19 (2008), para. 43;
146. General Comment 18 (2005), para. 22;
147. General Comment 17 para. 28 (2005);
148. General Comment 16 (2005), paras 18-21;
149. General Comment 15 (2002), paras 20-9;
150. General Comment 14 (2000), para. 33;
151. General Comment 13 (1999), para. 46.
152. The General Comments of all UN human rights treaty bodies are compiled in the UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev. 7.
153. See A. Eide, The Right to Adequate Food as a Human Right, UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1987/23 (7 July 1987), para. 66;
154. A. Eide, 'Economic and social rights', in Human Rights: Concepts and Standards, ed. J. Symonides (Aldershot: UNESCO Publishing, 2000), 109-174.
155. See e.g., The Social and Economic Rights Action Center and the Center for Economic and Social Rights/Nigeria, Communication 155/96, (2001) AHRLR 60, para. 44.
156. CESCR, General Comment 14, paras 57-8;
157. P. Alston, 'Out of the abyss: The challenges confronting the new un committee on economic, social and cultural rights', Human Rights Quarterly 9, no. 3 (1987): 332-381, at 357-358;
158. Maastricht Guidelines (1997), para. 8.
159. For example, in the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development Plan of Implementation, states made a commitment to halve, by the year 2015, the proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water (as outlined in the Millennium Declaration) and the proportion of people who do not have access to basic sanitation.
160. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Republic of Korea, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.59 (21 May 2001), para. 34.
161. CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 9.
162. CESCR, General Comment 13, para. 45;
163. CESCR, General Comment 14, para. 32;
164. CESCR, General Comment 15, para. 19;
165. General Comment 21, para. 65.
166. The Maastricht Guidelines, 14(e).
167. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Mauritius, UN Doc. E/C.12/1994/8 (31 May 1994), para. 16.
168. See, e.g., CESCR, General Comment 13: The Right to Education, UN Doc. E/C.12/1999/10 (8 December 1999) paras 14, 20, and 45;
169. CESCR, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.79 (5 June 2002) paras 22 and 41.
170. CESCR, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom, UN Doc. E/C.12/GBR/CO/5 (22 May 2009), para. 44.
171. United Nations, The Millennium Development Goals Report, 6-7.
172. UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/10, n. 85 above, para. 8.
173. ACHPR/Res159(XLVI)09, n. 39 above, preamble para. 8.
174. UN Doc. E/C. 12/2001/10, n. 85.
175. See CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 9;
176. General Comment 13, para. 44;
177. and General Comment 14, para. 31;
178. Limburg Principles, para. 21.
179. A. Chapman, 'A "Violations Approach" for monitoring the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights', Human Rights Quarterly 18, no. 1 (1996): 23-66, at 31;
180. A. Chapman and S. Russell, 'Introduction', in core obligations: Building a framework for economic, social and cultural rights, ed. A. Chapman and S. Russell (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2002), 1-19, at 5.
181. See R. Robertson, 'Measuring state compliance with the obligation to devote the "Maximum Available Resources" to realising economic, social and cultural rights', Human Rights Quarterly 16, no. 4 (1994): 693, at 694.
182. S. Joseph et al., The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Cases, Materials and Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 7.
183. In 2004 the UN identified 50 states as the 'Least Developed Countries'. See UN LDCs List at http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls/ldc/list.htm (accessed February 20, 2010);
184. UNCTAD, The Least Developed Countries Report 2004 (New York and Geneva: United Nations, 2004), 318.
185. See A. Eide, 'Economic and Social Rights', in human rights: Concepts; Declaration on the Right to Development, ed. J. Symonides (GAR 41/128 of 4 December 1986), Art. 2 stating in part: '1. The human being is a central subject of development and should be the active participant and beneficiary of the right to development. 2. All human beings have a responsibility for development, individually and collectively'.
186. Chapman and Russell, 'Introduction', 11.
187. Limburg Principles 23, 27 and 28.
188. See e.g., CESCR, Concluding Observations: Nigeria, UN Doc. E/1999/22, paras 97 and 119;
189. Mexico, UN Doc. E/2000/22, paras 381 and 394;
190. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Cambodia, UN Doc. (22 May 2009), para. 14;
191. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Democratic Republic of Congo, UN Doc. E/C.12/COD/CO/4 (20 November 2009) para. 11;
192. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Madagascar, UN Doc. E/ C.12/MDG/CO/2 (20 November 2009), para. 11.
193. Limburg Principles 24.
194. CESCR, General Comments 14, 15, 16 and 21, paras 53, 45, 32 and 66 respectively.
195. See also CESCR, Statement, n. 121 below, para. 11 stating that 'in accordance with the practice of judicial and other quasi-judicial human rights treaty bodies, the Committee always respects the margin of appreciation of states to take steps and adopt measures most suited to their specific circumstances'.
196. Limburg Principles, 28.
197. See also CRC, Concluding Observations: Rwanda, UN Doc. CRC/C/15/Add.236 (4 June 2004), para. 18.
198. See A. Eide, 'The Use of indicators in the practice of the committee on economic, social and cultural rights', in Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: A Textbook, ed. A. Eide, C. Krause and A. Rosas, 2nd ed. (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001), 545-551, at 549.
199. Robertson, 'Measuring state compliance', 700.
200. See e.g., CESCR, Concluding Observations: Philippines, UN Doc. E/C.12/1995/7 (7 June 1995), para. 21 stating that 'in terms of the availability of resources, the Committee notes with concern that a greater proportion of the national budget is devoted to military spending than to housing, agriculture and health combined'.
201. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Senegal, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.62 (24 September 2001), para. 23.
202. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Democratic Republic of Congo, UN Doc. E/C.12/COD/ CO/4 (20 November 2009), para. 16.
203. Eide rightly argued that: 'The "expenditure of death" should be turned into "expenditure of life" (public action to combat poverty)'.
204. A. Eide, 'Economic, social and cultural rights as human rights', in Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: A Textbook, ed. A. Eide, C. Krause and A. Rosas, 2nd ed. (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001), 9-28, at 28.
205. Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, n. 15 above, Articles 1 and 2.
206. CESCR, Statement: An Evaluation of the Obligation to Take Steps to the 'Maximum of Available Resources' Under an Optional Protocol to the Covenant, UN Doc. E/C.12/2007/1 (10 May 2007), para. 9.
207. Ibid. para. 8.
208. Ibid., para. 13. See also the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, n. 15 above, Art. 9.
209. For a discussion see D.M. Davis, 'Socioeconomic Rights: Do They Deliver the Goods?' International Journal of Constitutional Law 6, nos 3-4 (2008): 687-711.
210. CCT 8/02, [2002] ZACC 15;
211. 2002 (5) SA 721;
212. 2002 (10) BCLR 1033 (5 July 2002).
213. Ibid., para. 135. Section 27 reads: '(1) Everyone has the right to have access to (a) health care services, including reproductive health care; (b) sufficient food and water; and (c) social security, including, if they are unable to support themselves and their dependants, appropriate social assistance. (2) The state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of each of these rights. (3) No one may be refused emergency medical treatment'.
214. See ICESCR, Arts 2(1), 11, 15, 22, and 23.
215. For a discussion of these articles see S.I. Skogly, Beyond National Borders: States' Human Rights Obligations in International Cooperation (Antwerpen: Intersentia, 2006), 83-98.
216. See also UN Charter, Arts 1, 55, and 56;
217. UDHR, 22 and 28;
218. Convention on the Rights of the Child, Arts 4, 7(2), 11(2), 17(b), 21(e), 22(2), 23(4), 24(4), 27(4), 28(3), 34 and 35; the International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities, GA Res. 61/106, Annex I, UN GAOR, 61st Sess., Supp. No. 49, at 65, UN Doc. A/61/49 (2006), entered into force 3 May \ 2008, Arts 4(2) and 32.
219. GA res. 41/128, annex, 41 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 53) at 186, UN Doc. A/41/53 (1986).
220. Vienna Declaration (1993), paras 9, 12 and 34.
221. Office of the UNHCHR, Draft Guidelines: A Human Rights Approach to Poverty Reduction Strategies (2002), para. 215, http://www.unhchr.ch/pdf/povertyfinal.pdf (accessed May 1, 2009).
222. P. Heller and S. Gupta, Challenges in Expanding Development Assistance, (Washington, DC: IMF, 2002), http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/pdp/2002/pdp05.pdf (accessed May 1, 2009). For the designation of a state as 'developed' and 'developing' see United N
223. ations, Standard Country or Area Codes for Statistical Use, Series M, No. 49, Rev. 4 (United Nations publication, Sales No. M.98.XVII.9), available in part at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm (accessed February 20, 2010).
224. Alston and Quinn, 'The nature and scope of states parties' obligations', at 186-191.
225. M. Craven, 'The international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights', in An Introduction to the International Protection of Human Rights: A Text Book, ed. R. Hanski and M. Suksi, 2nd ed. (Abo: Abo Akademi University, 1999), 101-123.
226. See Report of the Open-ended Working Group to Consider Options Regarding the Elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on its Second Session, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2005/52 (10 February 2005), para. 76.
227. See 'Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right of Everyone to the Enjoyment of the Highest Attainable Standard of Physical and Mental Health, Paul Hunt, Addendum: Missions to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in Washington, D.C.' (20 October 2006) and Uganda UN Doc. A/HRC/7/11/Add.2 (5 March 2008), para. 133.
228. CESCR, UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/10, n. 85 above, para. 17.
229. CESCR, General Comment 15, para. 38 (emphasis added).
230. See e.g., CESCR, Summary Record: Ireland, UN Doc. E/C.12/1999/SR.14, para. 38.
231. See e.g., CESCR, Summary Records: Japan, UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/SR.42, para. 10;
232. Germany, UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/SR.48, para. 37.
233. This was originally proposed by the Pearson Commission in 1968 and adopted in 1970. See GA res. 2226, 25 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 28), para. 43; UN Doc. A/8028 (1970);
234. K. Tomasevski, Development Aid and Human Rights Revisited (London: Pinter, 1993), 32. This target was reaffirmed in the Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development 1995, Commitment 9, UN Doc. A/CONF.166/9 (14 March 1995), para. 1.
235. Report of the International Conference on Financing for Development Monterrey, Mexico, 18-22 March 2002, A/Conf.198/11.
236. These states are Denmark (1.06%); Netherlands (0.82%); Sweden (0.81%); Norway (0.80%) and Luxembourg (0.70%). See OECD, Press Release, 20 April 2001.
237. Examples are: Belgium (0.36%); Switzerland (0.34%); France (0.33%); Finland and UK (0.31%); Ireland (0.30); Japan, Germany and Australia (0.27%); New Zealand and Portugal (0.26); Canada and Austria (0.25); Spain (0.24%); Greece (0.19%); Italy (0.13%) and the United states (0.10%). Ibid. See also UN Wire, 'World Bank Head Blasts Rich Nations for Record on Aid', May 5, 2004.
238. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Australia, UN Doc. E/C.12/AUS/CO/4 (22 May 2009), para. 12.
239. See the MDG Gap Task Force Report 2008, Millennium Development Goal 8: Delivering on the Global Partnership for Achieving the Millennium Development Goals (New York: United ations, 2008), vii.
240. See e.g. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Belgium, UNDoc. E/C.12/1/Add.54 (2000), paras 16 and 30; Finland, E/C.12/1/Add.52 (2000), paras 13 and 23; Ireland, E/C.12/1/Add.77 (2002), para. 38;
241. Spain, E/C.12/1/Add.99 (2004), para. 27. In May 2008 the CESCR recommended that France 'increase its official development assistance to 0.7 per cent of its GDP, as agreed by the Heads of state and Government at the International Conference on Financing for Development, held inMonterrey (Mexico) on 18-22March 2002'. See CESCR, Concluding Observations: France, UNDoc. E/C.12/FRA/CO/3 (2008), para. 32. See also Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment 5, General Measures of Implementation for the Convention on the Rights of the Child, UN Doc. CRC/GC/2003/5 (3 October 2003), para. 61.
242. See e.g., CESCR, Concluding Observations: Spain, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.99 (2004), paras 10 and 27;
243. France, UN Doc. E/C.12/FRA/CO/3 (May 2008), para. 12.
244. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Belgium, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.54, para. 30.
245. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Ireland, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.77 (17 May 2002), para. 38. See also CESCR, Concluding Observations: Korea, UN Doc. E/C.12/KOR/CO/ 3 (20 November 2009), para. 7.
246. See e.g., CESCR, Concluding Observations: Denmark, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.34, para. 11, commended for devoting 1% of GDP to international assistance and cooperation. See also CESCR, Luxembourg, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.86, (2003), para. 6.
247. CESCR, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom, UN Doc. E/C.12/GBR/CO/5 (22 May 2009), para. 9.
248. UNDP, The Human Development Report 2007/2008 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 25, http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2007-2008/chapters/ (accessed February 20, 2010). The report notes that, 'There are still around 1 billion people living at the margins of survival on less than US$1 a day, with 2.6 billion - 40 percent of the world's population -living on less than US$2 a day.'
249. See UNCTAD, 'The Challenge of Financing Development in LDCs', 3rd United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, Brussels, 14-20 May 2001, http://r0.unctad.org/conference/e-press_kit/financing.pdf (accessed February 20, 2010).
250. See OECD Journal on Development 7, no. 3 (2006): 38.
251. CESCR, General Comment 2: International Technical Assistance Measures, UN Doc. E/ 1990/23 (2 February 1990), para. 7.
252. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Democratic Republic of Congo, UN Doc. E/C.12/COD/ CO/4 (20 November 2009), para. 16.
253. See Report of the Special Rapporteur, n. 136 above, para. 29.
254. See for example The Rainbow Warrior (New Zealand v. France) (Arbitration Tribunal) (1990) 82 ILR 449.
255. See e.g. CESCR, Summary Records: Ireland E/C.12/1999/SR.14, (2 February 2000), para. 38;
256. Germany, UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/SR.48, (31 August 2001), para. 19 and Finland, UN Doc. E/C.12/2000/SR.61 (21 November 2000), para. 48.
257. See CESCR, Summary Records: Finland, UN Doc. E/C.12/2007/SR.11 (15 May 2007), para.11.
258. P. Hunt, "Mission to the WTO", UN Doc. E/CN.4/2004/49/Add.1, para. 28.
259. Report of the High Commissioner, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2004/40, para. 40. For a summary of issues relating to the participation of developing countries in the multilateral trading system
260. S. Lester and B. Mercurio, World Trade Law: Text, Materials and Commentary (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2008) 779-817;
261. M. Matsushita et al., The World Trade Organisation: Law, Practice and Policy, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 763-784.
262. J. Stiglitz, We Have Become Rich Countries of Poor People', Financial Times, September 7, 2006.
263. See Yong-Shik Lee, Reclaiming Development in the World Trading System (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), chapter 1.
264. Oxfam, Rigged Rules and Double Standards: Trade, Globalisation and the Fight against Poverty (Oxford: Oxfam, 2002), 48. For a further discussion of the intricacies of foreign aid see generally R.C. Riddle, Does Foreign Aid Really Work? (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).
265. For a detailed discussion of the term 'jurisdiction' in public international law see generally M. Shaw, International Law, 6th ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 645-96;
266. I. Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, 7th ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 299-321;
267. V. Lowe, 'Jurisdiction', in International Law, ed. M. Evans, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 335;
268. M. Akehurst, Jurisdiction in international Law', British Year Book of International Law 46 (1972-1973): 145.
269. Article 2(1) of the ICCPR provides: '1. Each state Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognised in the present Covenant...'. For a comment see H. King, The extraterritorial human rights obligations of states', Human Rights Law Review 9, no. 4 (2009): 521-556.
270. 1155 UNTS 331, 8 ILM 679, entered into force 27 January 1980.
271. Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, ICJ Reports 2004, p. 4, para. 112. For a discussion of this Advisory Opinion see S.R.S. Bedi, The Development of Human Rights Law by the Judges of the International Court of Justice (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2007), 337-351.
272. Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), (Merits), Judgement of 19 December 2005, 2006 45 ILM 271, para. 217.
273. See the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), Drozd and Janousek v. France and Spain, (Appl No. 12747/8), Judgement of 26 June 1992, (1992) 14 EHRR 745, para. 91; Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary Objections) (App. No. 15318/89) 1995 20 EHRR 99, para. 52 (confirmed in Cyprus v. Turkey (App. No. 25781/94) (2002) 35 EHRR 30, paras 76-81).
274. CESCR, General Comment 1: Reporting by States Parties (Third Session, 1989), UN Doc.E/1989/22, annex III at 87 (1989), para. 3 (emphasis added).
275. See also CESCR, General Comment 8: The Relationship between Economic Sanctions and Respect for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/C.12/1997/8 (12 December 1997), para. 10;
276. CESCR, General Comment 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health, UN Doc. E/C.12/2000/4 (11 August 2000), para. 12(b);
277. CESCR, General Comment 15: The Right to Water, UN Doc. E/C.12/2002/11 (20 January 2003), para. 12(c).
278. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Israel, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.27 (4 December 1998), para. 8. See also CESCR, Concluding Observations: Israel, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.90 (23 May 2003), paras 15 and 31.
279. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Israel, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.27 (4 December 1998), para. 6.
280. CESCR, General Comment 20, para. 14 (emphasis added).
281. See Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, n. 15 above, Art. 2(1), emphasis added.
282. See generally R. McCorquodale and P. Simons, Responsibility beyond borders: state responsibility for extraterritorial violations by corporations of international human rights law', The Modern Law Review 7, no. 4 (2007): 598-625.
283. CESCR, General Comment 19: The Right to Social Security, UN Doc. E/C.12/GC/19 (4 February 2008), para. 53.
284. See CESCR, Concluding Observations: Cameroon, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.40 (8 December 1999), para. 38.
285. ECtHR, Bankovic v. Belgium and Others, 12 December 2001, Decision, No. 52207/99, Reports 2001-XII, para. 59.
286. See McCorquodale and Simons, Responsibility Beyond Borders', at 624.
287. See J. Ruggie, Business and Human Rights: Mapping International Standards of Responsibility and Accountability for Corporate Acts, UN Doc. A/HRC/4/35 (19 February 2007), para. 15.
288. Economic sanctions often 'cause significant disruption in the distribution of food, pharmaceuticals and sanitation supplies, jeopardize the quality of food and the availability of clean drinking water, severely interfere with the functioning of basic health and education systems, and undermine the right to work'. See CESCR, General Comment 8: The Relationship between Economic Sanctions and Respect for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/C.12/1997/8 (12 December 1997), para. 3.CESCR, General Comment 8, ibid., para. 13 (emphasis added).
289. See CESCR, Summary Record of the 49th Meeting: Germany UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/SR.49 (30 August 2001), para. 48.
290. CESCR, General Comment 19, para. 54. See also CESCR, General Comment 15, para. 33.
291. See e.g. F. Cheru, Effects of Structural Adjustment Policies on the Full Enjoyment of Human Rights, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1999/50, para. 31.
292. The CESCR noted this in several Concluding Observations made in 1993-2004 when several states implemented SAPs.
293. See e.g. Algeria, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.71 (2001);
294. Argentina, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.38 (1999);
295. Bulgaria, UNDoc. E/C.12/1/Add.37 (1999);
296. Cameroon, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.40 (1999);
297. Colombia, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.74 (2001);
298. Ecuador, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.100 (2004);
299. Egypt, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.44 (2000);
300. El Salvador, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.4 (1996);
301. Honduras, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.57 (2001);
302. Republic of Korea, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.59 (2001);
303. Nepal, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.66 (2001);
304. Netherlands, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.25 (1998);
305. Nicaragua, UN Doc. E/C.12/1993/14 (1994);
306. Romania, UN Doc. UN Doc. E/C.12/1994/4 (1994);
307. Senegal, UN Doc. E/C.12/ 1/Add.62 (2001);
308. Senegal, UN Doc. E/C.12/1993/18 (1993);
309. Solomon Islands, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.33 (1999);
310. Venezuela, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.56 (2001).
311. D. McGoldrick, The Interface between public emergency powers and international law', International Journal of Constitutional Law 2 (2004): 380 at 383.
312. For example Article 4(1) ICCPR states: 'In time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed, the States Parties to the present Covenant may take measures derogating from their obligations under the present Covenant to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin'. See Human Rights Committee, General Comment 29: States of Emergency (Article 4), UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.11 (31 August 2001).
313. See HRC, General Comment 29, ibid., para. 1.
314. Such derogation clauses may be found in, e.g., ICCPR, Article 4(1), ECHR, Article 15, and the American Convention on Human Rights, Article 27.
315. See CESCR, Concluding Observations: Democratic Republic of Congo, UN Doc. C.12/ COD/CO/4 (20 November 2009), para. 6.
316. In Constitutional Rights Project, Civil Liberties Organisation and Media Rights Agenda v. Nigeria, Communications Nos 140/94, 141/94, 145/95, 13th Annual Activity Report (1999), para. 41 the African Commission stated: 'In contrast to other international human rights instruments, the African Charter does not contain a derogation clause. Therefore limitations [derogations] on the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Charter cannot be justified by emergencies or special circumstances...' This view was also stated in Commission Nationale des Droits de l'Homme et des Libertes v. Chad, Communication No. 74/92, 9th Annual Activity Report (1995-1996), para. 21; Malawi African Association and Others v. Mauritania, Communication Nos 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97-196/97 and 210/98, 13th Annual Activity Report (1999-2000), Annex V, para. 84.
317. Alston and Quinn, The Nature and Scope of States Parties' Obligations', at 217.
318. Article 4 of the ICESCR provides that: 'The States Parties to the present Covenant recognise that, in the enjoyment of those rights provided by the State in conformity with the present Covenant, the State may subject such rights only to such limitations as are determined by law only in so far as this may be compatible with the nature of these rights and solely for the purpose of promoting the general welfare in a democratic society'. For a discussion see A. Mü ller, Limitations to and derogations from economic, social and cultural rights', Human Rights Law Review 9, no. 4 (2009): 557-601.
319. Alston and Quinn, The Nature and Scope of States Parties' Obligations', at 217.
320. CESCR, General Comment 14, para. 47.
321. CESCR, General Comment 15, para. 40.
322. ICJ Reports 2004, p. 136 (Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004).
323. Ibid., para. 112, emphasis added.
324. Ibid., para. 106.
325. Basic Principles for the Protection of Civilian Populations in Armed Conflicts, UN General Assembly Resolution 2675 (xxv), 9 December 1970, para. 1.
326. CESCR, General Comment 15, para. 22. For the interrelationship of human rights law and humanitarian law, the Committee noted the conclusions of the International Court of Justice in Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Request by the General Assembly), ICJ Reports (1996), p. 226, para. 25.
327. Ibid., citing Articles 54 and 56, Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (1977), Article 54, Additional Protocol II (1977), Articles 20 and 46 of the third Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949, and common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.
328. Under the ICCPR, the following rights are non-derogable: the right to life (Article 6); the prohibition of torture, inhuman and degrading treatment (Article 7); the prohibition of slavery and servitude (Article 8, paragraphs 1 and 2); the prohibition of detention for debt (Article 11); the prohibition of retroactive criminal laws (Article 15); the recognition of legal personality (Article 16); and freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief (Article 18).
329. Müller, "Limitations to and Derogations from Economic, Social and Cultural Rights", at 593.
330. See E. Mottershaw, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Armed Conflict: International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law', The International Journal of Human Rights 12, no. 3 (2008): 449-470.
331. UN Doc. E/C.12/2001/10, n. 85 above, para. 18.
332. The 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, UN Doc. A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.5 (26 March, 1993), paras 32-8.
333. See CESCR, Fact Sheet No. 16 (Rev. 1).
334. See for example CESCR, 'Towards an Optional Protocol to the ICESCR', UN Doc. E/1993/22;
335. P Alston, Establishing a Right to Petition under the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights', Collected Courses of the Academy of European Law IV, no. 2 (Dordrecht: Kluwer Law International, 1995), at 107;
336. International Network for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR-Net), Resource Page on the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, http://www.escr-net.org/resources/resources_show.htm?doc_id=431553 (accessed February 20, 2010).
337. Report of the Fifth Session of the CESCR, UN Docs E/1991/23, para. 25 and E/CN.4/1997/ 105, para. 2. At the Committee's request, then Committee member Philip Alston reported four times on the Optional Protocol in UN Docs E/C.12/1991/WP.2 (25 October 1991); E/C.12/ 1992/WP.9 (27 November 1992); E/C.12/1994/12 (9 November 1994); E/C.12/1996/ CRP.2/Add.1. For a background to the Optional Protocol see the International Commission of Jurists, The Evolution of An Optional Protocol Complaints Mechanism Under The ICESCR (Geneva: International Commission of Jurists, no date), http://www.icj.org/IMG/pdf/1.pdf (accessed February 20, 2010);
338. C. Mahon, Progress at the front: the draft optional protocol to the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights', Human Rights Law Review 8, no. 4 (2008): 617-646.
339. On 15 March 2006, the General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES/60/251 to establish the Human Rights Council. The Commission on Human Rights concluded its sixty-second and final session on 27 March 2006 before the Optional Protocol was adopted.
340. World Conference on Human Rights, Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, UN Doc. A/CONF.157/23, Part II, para. 75.
341. See Contribution of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to theWorld Conference on Human Rights, 26 March 1993, UN Doc. A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.5, Annex I at para. 18 and Annex II.
342. Draft Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1997/105. The draft provided for: (i) the justification for the Optional Protocol in the Preamble;
343. (ii) the complaints to the competent supervisory body from individuals, and groups who are alleged victims or who act on behalf of alleged victims of violations of all rights in the Covenant contained in Arts 1-15;
344. (iii) interim and follow-up measures; as well as (iv) a friendly settlement procedure. For comments on the draft, see UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/84, and for the analysis, see K. Arambulo, Strengthening the Supervision of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Theoretical and Procedural Aspects (Antwerpen: Intersentia, 1999), at 199-342;
345. Report on the workshop on the Justiciability of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, with Particular Reference to the Draft Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2001/62/Add.2 (22 March 2001).
346. See Reports of UNHCHR, Draft Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, UN Docs E/CN.4/2001/ 62/Add.2 (2001); E/CN.4/2000/49 (2000); E/CN.4/1997/105.
347. UN Docs E/CN.4/RES/1997/17; E/CN.4/RES/1998/33; E/CN.4/RES/1999/25; E/ CN.4/RES/2000/9.
348. UN Docs E/CN.4/1998/84 and E/CN.4/2001/62.
349. Most of those who submitted (11 out of 14) were in favour. See for example Croatia, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1999/112; Cyprus, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/84;
350. Czech Republic, UN Doc. E/CN.4/ 2000/49; Ecuador, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/84;
351. Finland, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1999/112; Georgia and Germany, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2000/49;
352. Lebanon and Lithuania, UN Doc. E/ CN.4/2000/49; Mauritius, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2001/62;
353. Mexico, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1999/ 112/Add.1; Norway and Portugal, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2001/62;
354. Syrian Republic, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/84.
355. Notably Canada, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/84/Add.1 and Sweden, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1999/ 112/Add.1.
356. Dennis and Stewart, Justiciability of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights', at 514.
357. See Report on the Workshop on the Justiciability of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, with Particular Reference to the Draft Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2001/62/Add.2 (22 March 2001).
358. Commission on Human Rights Res. 2001/30, 20 April 2001, UN Doc. E/CN.4/RES/2001/ 30, para. 8(c).
359. Report by Mr Hatem Kotrane, Independent Expert on the Question of a Draft Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2002/57 (12 February 2002); UN Doc. E/CN.4/2003/53 and Corr.1 and Corr.2 (13 January 2003).
360. Kotrane, ibid. UN Doc. E/CN.4/2003/53, para. 2.
361. Ibid., para. 3.
362. Kotrane, Corrigendum UN Doc. E/CN.4/2003/53/Corr.2, (7 April 2003), para. 76.
363. CHR Resolution 2003/18, paras 12-13. The open-ended working group met three times in 2004, 2005 and 2006. The first session was on 23 February-5 March 2004 but the working group 'did not reach consensus on whether to start drafting an Optional Protocol'.
364. See U Doc. E/CN.4/2004/44 (15 March 2004), para. 76. The second session of the working group took place on 10-20 January 2005.
365. See UN Doc. E/CN.4/2005/52 (10 February 2005) and Analytical Paper by C. de Albuquerque, Elements for an Optional Protocol to the ICESCR, UN Doc. E/CN.4/2006/WG.23/2 (30 November 2005). The third session of the working group was held on 6-17 February 2006. See UN Doc. E/CN.4/2006/47 (14 March 2006).
366. Contained in UN Doc. A/HRC/8/WG.4/2 (24 December 2007).
367. Contained in UN Doc. A/HRC/8/WG.4/3 (25 March 2008).
368. See notes 15-18 above and accompanying text.
369. Ibid., Art. 18. For an overview see generally Mahon, 'Progress at the Front';
370. L. Chenwi, Correcting the historical asymmetry between right: the optional protocol to the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights', African Human Rights Law Journal 9, no. 1 (2009): 23-51;
371. C. de Albuquerque, Chronicle of an announced birth: the coming into life of the optional protocol to the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights - the missing piece of the international bill of human rights', Human Rights Quarterly 32, no. 1 (2010): 144-78.
372. These states were: Australia, Greece, India, Morocco, Russia and the US. See Report of the Fourth Session of the Open Ended Working Group, UN Doc. A/HRC/6/8 (30 August 2007), para. 36.
373. See Report of the Open Ended Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the ICESCR on its Fifth Session, UN Doc. A/HRC/8/7 (23 May 2008), paras 214 and 245.
374. See also HRC, General Comment No. 31 [80]: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, adopted on 29 March 2004 (2187th meeting), UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13 (2004), para. 2.
375. See Joseph et al The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, at 21.
376. See CAT, Art. 21; The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, below GA res. 45/158, annex, 45 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 49A) at 262, UN Doc. A/45/49 (1990) entered into force 1 July, 2003, Art. 74; ICERD, Arts 11-13; and ICCPR, Arts 41-3.
377. GA res. 2106 (XX), Annex, 20 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 14) at 47, UN Doc. A/6014 (1966), 660 UNTS 195, entered into force 4 January 1969.
378. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, GA res. 39/46, annex, 39 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 51) at 197, UN Doc. A/39/51 (1984), entered into force 26 June 1987.
379. GA res. 54/4, annex, 54 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 49) at 5, UN Doc. A/54/49 (Vol. I) (2000), entered into force 22 December 2000.
380. See Report on Mexico produced by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under Article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention, and reply from the Government of Mexico, UN Doc. CEDAW/C/2005/OP.8/MEXICO (27 January 2005).
381. As noted in section 2 justiciability of ESC rights is supported by a growing body of case law. See e.g. ESCR-Net, Caselaw Database: A Database of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Related Jurisprudence, Cases and Other Decisions, http://www.escr-net.org/caselaw/ (accessed February 20, 2010); Tinta, 'Justiciability of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights'.
382. ESCR-Net, ibid. See also P. Alston, Establishing a right to petition under the covenant on economic, social and cultural rights', Collected Courses of the Academy of European Law 4, no. 2 (1995): at 107.
383. Maastricht Guidelines, 31.
384. See UN Doc. A/CONF.157/PC/62/Add.5, para. 24.
385. ESCR-Net, Benefits of an OP-ICESCR, http://www.escr-net.org/resources_more/resources_more_show.htm?doc_id=42 6659 (accessed February 2010).
386. See Statement by Ms Louise Arbour, High Commissioner for Human Rights to the Openended Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Fifth Session, Salle XII, Palais des Nations, 31 March 2008, http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/0/56935B5FB6A5B376C1257425003 9EAE0?opendocument (accessed February 20, 2010).
387. W. Vandenhole, Completing the UN complaint mechanisms for human rights violations step by step: towards a complaints procedure complementing the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights', Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights 21, no. 3 (2003): 459.
388. See Kotrane UN Doc. E/CN.4/2002/57, para. 56(a).
389. M. Nowak, The need for a world court of human rights', Human Rights Law Review 7, no. 1 (2007): 251-259 at 253.
390. Ibid., at 254.
391. See e.g. CESCR, Concluding Observations: Kenya, UN Doc. E/C.12/1993/6 (3 June 1993), para. 10, the Committee noted: 'with concern that the rights recognised by Kenya as a state party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are neither contained in the constitution of Kenya nor in a separate bill of rights; nor do the provisions of the Covenant seem to have been incorporated into the municipal law of Kenya. Neither does there exist any institution or national machinery with responsibility for overseeing the implementation of human rights in the country'.
392. See e.g. the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (3rd periodic report), UN Doc. E/1994/104/Add.11 (17 June 1996), para. 9.
393. CESCR, Concluding Observations: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - Dependent Territories, UN Doc. E/C.12/1/Add.79, (5 June 2002), para. 24.
394. See e.g. CESCR, General Comment 3, para. 9;
395. General Comment 13, para. 44;
396. General Comment 14, para. 31;
397. General Comment 15, para. 18;
398. Limburg Principles, 21.
399. D. McRae, Developing countries and the future of the WTO', Journal of International Economic Law 8, no. 3 (2005): 603-610.
400. See UN Doc. A/HRC/8/7 (23 May 2008), above n. 241, para. 246.