at Google ScholarTitle data
Kaime, Thokozani:
Whose rights are they anyway? A critical analysis of the international supervision mechanisms for economic, social and cultural rights.
In: Zambia Law Journal.
Vol. 36
(2004)
.
- pp. 1-19.
ISSN 1027-7862
Abstract in another language
The prerceived differnces between civil and political rights on the one hand; and economic, social and cultural rights on the other, did not only result in the division of the rights contained inthe UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights into the ICCPR and the ICESCR, but it also resulted in the oprovison of radically different supervision mechanisms for the two instruments. Whilst the ICCPR was endowed with a compulsory periodic reporting procedure, an interstate complaint procedure, a friendly settlement procedure8 as well as an individual complaint procedure incorporated in a separate Optional Protocol, the ICESCR was only bequeathed with a periodic reporting procedure. The evident paucity of supervisory mechanisms both in quality and quantity has led scholars to question the effectiveness of a supervision system which entirely entrusts governments with the responsibility for reporting on themselves, once every five years, subject to soft questioning for a few hours by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ('the Committee')," which is elected by those very governments, and with almost no likelihood of serious censure or real sanctions. This analysis argues that the effectiveness of any human rights supervisory system is directly proportional to its ability to ensure the protection of the rights concerned to individual right-holders. Based on this premise, it is argued that the mechanism enshrined in the Covenant is not effective because of inherent structural deficiencies which disable it from realising the rights guaranteed in the Covenant for individuals. However, the system has attained a considerable level of effectiveness, thanks to a combination of several conceptual and practical developments which had not been envisaged (or intended) in the Covenant. Nevertheless, the system is not truly effective, as it still remains largely abstracted from individuals. Thus, whilst the effectiveness of the supervision mechanism has progressively developed, there is still a lot of room for improvement
Further data
| Item Type: | Article in a journal |
|---|---|
| Refereed: | Yes |
| Institutions of the University: | Faculties Faculties > Faculty of Law, Business and Economics > Department of Law > Chair African Legal Studies > Chair African Legal Studies - Univ.-Prof. Dr. Thokozani Kaime Faculties > Faculty of Law, Business and Economics Faculties > Faculty of Law, Business and Economics > Department of Law Faculties > Faculty of Law, Business and Economics > Department of Law > Chair African Legal Studies |
| Result of work at the UBT: | No |
| DDC Subjects: | 300 Social sciences > 340 Law |
| Date Deposited: | 10 Jul 2020 08:07 |
| Last Modified: | 27 Jan 2022 10:35 |
| URI: | https://eref.uni-bayreuth.de/id/eprint/55671 |