UN Human Rights Council Adopts a Socialist View of International Solidarity
HUMAN RIGHTS, LAW & JUSTICE, SOCIETY & CULTURE
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
In a recent report, the independent expert assigned by the United Nations Human Rights Council to work on developing a human right to international solidarity outlined a vision of solidarity that is based on an obligation of developed nations to promote and finance the realization of an economically and socially equitable world order. On October 1, 2009, a majority of the members of the Human Rights Council adopted a resolution taking note of the report and requesting the independent expert to continue his work, with emphasis on developing guidelines, standards, norms and principles for promoting international solidarity and analyzing developments in international economic, social, and “climate” fields.
On July 22, 2009, at the Twelfth Session of the Human Rights Council (“HRC”), the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights submitted to the HRC the report (A/HRC/12/27) of Rudi Muhammad Rizki, the independent expert on human rights and international solidarity (the “Report”). The Report was submitted in continuation of Special Expert Rizki’s work on the preparation of a draft declaration on the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity.
In the Report, the independent expert proposes a definition of international solidarity that contemplates a democratic and equitable global order governed through an evolving system of binding international human rights laws and practices.
The Report contains the following specific conclusions:
• Soft-law norms need to progressively develop into hard law in the processes involved in the making of international law.
• Gaps need to be bridged between soft and hard law, values and norms, through a diversity and plurality of legal processes and broader approaches to interpretation, recognizing that global governance depends on a number of stakeholders who all contribute to the making of international law and policy.
• Collective rights have proven effective in shifting the balance of power in international relations, creating widely recognized, if not always realized, entitlements in international law and responding to the societal effects of globalization.
• Human rights, which are by nature dynamic and constantly evolving, need to accommodate new rights, just as each generation should contribute to their evolution, in keeping with the aspirations and values of the time.
• A broad, purposive approach to the interpretation of human rights treaty provisions and an approach to international law as a normative system or process, rather than as rules, should be pursued.
• The Geneva-based human rights treaty bodies, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the mechanisms of the HRC and its Advisory Committee should contribute to the realization of a democratic and equitable international order.
• While the obligations of a State to respect, protect and fulfill human rights are traditionally related to persons under its jurisdiction (nationals or foreigners), in the context of global interdependence it becomes necessary to recognize the existence of extraterritorial State obligations.
• Governments should adopt policies that induce greater corporate social responsibility, and companies should adopt strategies reflecting the inescapable fact that their own long-term prospects are tightly coupled with the well-being of society as a whole.
• In a fragmented world, cooperation for our common good requires an ideology based on compromise, globalism and sharing, common interests and long-term perspectives.
• The Millennium Development Goals, and the legal and policy measures taken to reach them, are part of the substance of emerging legal norms related to third-party responsibility and the international duty to cooperate. This is especially so in the case of Goal 8, which seeks to promote an international partnership for development in areas, such as access to affordable medicines and technologies and cooperation to increase development assistance and to cancel the debt burden of poor countries.
On October 1, in a 33 to 14 vote, the HRC adopted a resolution (A/HRC/12/L.20) on human rights and solidarity that takes note of the Report and requests the independent expert to continue his work on a draft declaration on the right to international solidarity and in the development of guidelines, standards, norms and principles to promote and protect this right (the “Resolution”). Because the right to international solidarity contemplated by the independent expert and a majority of the members of the HRC is rooted in the realization of economic and social equality for developing nations, the resolution requests the independent expert to monitor all major UN and other meetings in the economic, social, and climate fields. The Resolution also requests the independent expert to seek views and contributions from governments, UN agencies, and non-governmental organizations.
The views of the 14 members of the HRC that objected to the resolution were articulated in a statement made by French delegation prior to the vote (the “Statement). The Statement expressed serious doubts that the principle of international solidarity can be transposed into binding norms relative to human rights. Rightfully, the objecting nations were concerned about an interpretation of international solidarity that gives rise to binding international laws that the United Nations uses to globally govern economic and social rights in a manner that obligates developed nations to underwrite the economic well-being of developing nations.
Jim Kelly is the President of Solidarity Center for Law and Justice, P.C., a public interest civil and human rights law firm based in Atlanta, Georgia. The opinions expressed herein are his own.
A JOINT PROGRAM OF
