Prof R Provost January 2012 History of International Human Rights Law

Stage 0: Gestation (pre-1945) What were precursors of IHRL? o World War I & II. League of Nations between I and II. o Studies by various philosophers o Natural Law Debate - o 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. Talks about the theories of natural rights - result of French Revolution. o Abolitionist Movement Why were HR not part of the emerging IL? o Sovereignty was too important o Norms of IL emerged for economic reasons

Stage 1: Foundation ( ) Factors which made possible the emergence of IHRL o Post-WWII (Nazi Germany) [creation of Jewish state] o Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and International Covenants on HR (1966) o Decolonization Period - self-determination o Failure of the League of Nations; turn to the United Nations o Civil rights, feminist movements in the West. Documents against racial and gender discrimination o European Convention on Human Rights (1950) o Indian Congress Party (1940s) did a lot to support development of HR. Though, Ghandi for self-determination and not necessarily HR - question of HR as being exclusively Western concept Factors which hindered further developments o Global powers (US, Soviet Union, France, UK) not wanting to give up colonies, be held internationally accountable --> vague o Cold War powers - HR not a priority; lack of consensus o Focus on state sovereignty vis-a-vis HR

Stage 2: Institutions ( ) Factors which facilitated the growth of IHRL o "the emergence and consolidation of universal and regional treaty- based institutions for the protection of human rights." (Buergenthal, p 710) o End of period of de-colonization, emergence of new States o Adoption of twin UNHR covenants (1966) o UN ECOSOC resolutions condemning Apartheid (1967) o State participation in regional HR organizations (e.g. Inter-American Commission on HR) o Increased Civil society participation (e.g. Anti-war movements, s) o Active role of US (Carter Administration, 1970s) o Fall of Berlin Wall (i.e. end of Cold War period, 1989) Factors which hindered further developments Respect for State sovereignty & particular domestic legal regimes Contention over degree of positive v. negative State involvement in promotion of HR Continuation of the Cold War period, bi-polarity of global balance of power

Stage 3: Implementation ( ) o Factors which facilitated the growth of IHRL  End of the Cold War (fall of Berlin Wall)  Globalisation  Growth of grassroots rights movements (NGOs etc)  Vienna Declaration (1993)  Apartheid  Post conflicts - Rwanda, Bosnia, East Timor (increased awareness)  Tienanmen Square massacre  Increased use of sanctions, political, economic, social (sporting boycotts - Apartheid) o Factors which hindered further developments  Domestic politics, post Cold War --> Asian nations undergoing domestic transformation o o Questioning of universality of rights discourse (just a western construct?) o Global economics/politics o Disparity between human rights discourse and activism o Conflicts - Rwanda, Bosnia, Timor etc o Global arms trade

Stage 4: Realization(!?) Factors which facilitated the growth of IHRL o ICC (2002), criminal proceedings we saw... o ease of communication (and in particular internet and social media) allows people themselves to demand for their rights (as opposed to governments). Also it makes raising awareness easier and quicker - making it easier to pressure for change Factors which hinder still further developments o financial crisis ( Asian Financial crisis, sovereign debt crisis in EU, 2008 Crisis...) means that funds are less accessible to organizations o security issues (9/11...) give rise to laws which decreased HR norms, but this is being challenged now Are we at maturity? o focus of human rights from the 1990s has moved towards environmental issues (possible addition of this as a human rights) o ICC prosecutions: and example to people from where these violations occurred. o still not easy to claim or enforce your rights

Why does all the energy and effort going in the human rights activism produce such results decidedly meager? How could the rhetoric of human rights be so globally pervasive while the politics of human rights is so utterly weak?