The United States declared that the provisions of articles 1 through 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are not self executing. Please discuss and expand with cases and examples.
What does this declaration mean? And is it valid under International Law? Please support with cases and logical argument.
What are the major differences between the state reporting procedure under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the process of universal periodic review by the UN Human rights Council? Which procedure is more effective in protecting human rights??
The response addresses the queries posted in 1596 words with references.
//Before writing about the declaration of United States, about the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, we will write about the importance of human rights protection on global level. Then, we will write about the meaning of declaration to assess the legal structure proposed by United Nations, as followed by United States on the basis of the discussion of case and example.//
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
Human rights protection is the basic goal of international law making body, which is United Nations. It mainly aims towards binding of rights of the humans to form a universally protected society. Different member states of UN have to comply with the ICCPR treaty. It was proposed in the year 1966, and adopted into force in 1976, to protect the civil and political rights of the people. ICCPR is an effective measure considered by UN, regarding the recognition of fairness, integrity, equality and obligation of the law for the individuals (Forsythe, 2006).
In concern to the adoption of the ICCPR treaty in 1991, the government of United States proclaimed that the provisions defined under the Articles 1 to 27 were non-self-executing. The senate proclaimed that the agreement will be equally applicable to the people in United States. The declaration means that the specified Articles of the treaty are non- self-executing and cannot be considered in the domestic law for making decisions (Moore, 2004).
The declaration was also aimed towards clarification of the provisions included in the treaty to be non-executable for the resolution of the private actions without the enforcement of the provisions as a part of the domestic law of the country. Direct consideration of the provisions as decisions was restricted for the courts in the country. It was basically defined as the statutory interpretation to comply with the international law. Only the consistency of the interpretation of the domestic statutes was mentioned to the complied with the provisions of ICCPR (Forsythe, 2006).
It can be analyzed from the example of Article 7, which provides the right regarding the protection of an individual from the medical experiment or scientific processes without the free consent. The provision is legally connecting around 165 states for the prohibition of individuals against the medical experiments. It is considered as an absolute right of the individuals, but it is not self-executed by any of the state actors. It induces a gap between the legal obligations at international level that are not executable in the ...
The international covenant on civil and political rights are examined. What the declaration means is determined. The response addresses the queries posted in 1596 words with references.