Encyclopedia of Human Rights Issues Since 1945

Winston Langley, Winston Langley

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781136595936
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Geschichte
• Subtopic: Weltgeschichte

This comprehensive and up-to-date encyclopedia on human rights issues from 1945 to the present includes more than 400 entries on incidents and violations, instruments and initiatives, countries, and human rights activities. Its scope is global, and its purpose is both to sum up the accomplishments in human rights in our time and also to point out and describe the violations that continue to be perpetrated around the world. Entries cover major issues; incidents and violations; concepts and terms; activists; organizations; and human rights instruments. Entries cover more than 50 countries, from Afghanistan to Yugoslavia. Entries conclude with suggestions for further readings; and a timeline of significant dates since 1945 and the text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are also included.

A _______________

ABORIGINAL PEOPLES. See INDIGENOUS PEOPLES.

ABORTION. Abortion is the intentional removal of a fetus or an embryo from a mother's womb for purposes other than that of either producing a live birth or disposing of a dead embryo. Used as one of the principal means by which humans effect population control, protect the health of mothers, and dispose of unwanted pregnancies, the practice of abortion dates as far back as five thousand years in China. The practice has been contested, however, especially since the Middle Ages in the West, on the grounds that the human embryo has the right to life. So when the present emphasis on human rights began to take political and legal root in international debates following World War II, matters concerning the right to life of the unborn child and of the mother were repeatedly raised and discussed. For instance, Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 6 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) proclaim the right of everyone to life. But when these human rights instruments were debated by their respective drafting committees, no agreement was arrived at on the meaning of that right in relationship to the human fetus, principally because of disagreements on when human life begins. That disagreement continues and is likely to continue into the next century.

Today, abortion is prohibited in some countries, while its availability varies in others. Among the latter, including the U.S., medical termination of a pregnancy is generally permitted under conditions specified by national law: for example, when the continuation of a pregnancy entails risks to the life of the pregnant woman, or when, if the child were born, he or she would suffer from disabling mental or physical abnormalities. In some countries, the issue of abortion is so divisive that it threatens social and international relations. In the United States, for instance, internal social and political divisions have given rise to changes in foreign policy. Congress has placed limits on relations with countries that practice family planning, including abortion. Specifically, Congress has not only cut foreign aid in the general area, but it has prohibited the use of U.S. appropriated funds by countries or organizations participating “in the management” of “coercive” abortion. Further Reading: H. Barber, A Crisis of Conscience (1993); E. C. Koop, “Why Defend Partial-Birth Abortion?,” NYT (September 26, 1996); E. R. Rubin, ed., The Abortion Controversy: A Documentary History (1994).

ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND HUMAN RIGHTS. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) assigns to “every individual and every organ of society” the responsibility to “strive by teaching and education to promote respect” for human rights. Particularly important among those organs are academic institutions and the individuals associated with them. Indeed, it may be confidently asserted that the academy is central to the development and maintenance of national and international civil society. And without a strong civil society, governments, which are the primary violators of human rights, feel little or no moral and political pressure to promote and protect academic freedom and human rights.

When governments target educators, students, and academic institutions for repression, they strike at the heart of human rights promotion and protection. If the human rights movement is to continue its development, and if governments are to be held fully accountable for human rights promotion and protection, harassment, imprisonment of teachers and students, censorship of the right to free expression and inquiry, and the closing of schools, colleges, and universities must be seen as fundamental human rights violations. And governments that engage in such violations must be uncompromisingly condemned and punished.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) one of the few nongovernmental organizations (NGO) that has emphasized this area of human rights, has developed the Academic Freedom Project, which highlights violations of academic freedom in China, Egypt, Guatemala, Israeli occupied territories, Nigeria, South Korea, and the Slovak Republic. When one looks at the world at large, however—including Indonesia, Mexico, and Turkey—one finds widespread limits on academic freedom. See also: Thought, Conscience and Religion; Truth Commissions. Further Reading: B. Reardon, Educating for Human Dignity: Learning About Rights and Responsibilities (1995); World University Service, Academic Freedom: A Human Rights Approach, Vols. 1 and 2 (1990); G. H. Andreopoulos and R. Claude, eds., Human Rights Education for the Twenty-First Century (1997).

ADJUDICATION. This is the name given to a legal process used in settling international disputes by submitting them to an established court. There are three distinct stages in the evolution of human rights: (1) the standard-setting stage, which involves the creation of principles and standards that define those rights; (2) the ratification stage, which is the junction at which states undertake to be bound by the standards; and (3) the implementation stage, which concerns enforcement of the standards.

International efforts in the field of human rights have succeeded very well in setting standards, and a significant number of countries have ratified many of the human rights treaties. In the area of implementation, however, there has been less success. At the global level, there is not yet any court to settle disputes arising out of human rights concerns, but on December 17, 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that provides for the convening of a diplomatic conference to finalize the adoption of a treaty on the creation of an International Criminal Court (ICC). That conference, which Italy offered to host, took place in June 1998, and the treaty was approved. When the ICC comes into being (and it will after the required number of states ratify the treaty), it will have jurisdiction to try individuals who are charged with a number of crimes that bear on human rights.

At the regional level, two human rights courts have been established— the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Each, especially the European Court, has had some success in dealing with human rights abuses, but the adjudicative process at the regional level is still in the early stages of development. National courts, even in the most enlightened countries have not been notably active in dealing with human rights issues. Such relative national inaction is understandable and makes the need for global and regional courts all that more important: national courts are extensions of states; states are the principal abusers of human rights and, therefore, the parties against which claims of human rights abuses are likely to be asserted. States are, therefore, not anxious to set in motion processes that can hold them legally and morally accountable. See also: International Court of Justice. Further Reading: M. C. Bassiouni, The Protection of Human Rights in the Administration of justice (1994); B. Stephens and M. Ratner, International Human Rights: Litigation in U.S. Courts (1996).

ADVISORY SERVICES IN THE FIELD OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Between 1953 and 1954, the United Nations General Assembly authorized the secretary-general to assist states, at their request, in promoting human rights. That assistance, while general in character, was to be especially concerned with the rights of women, minorities, freedom of information, and racial discrimination. In 1955, those provisions of assistance were consolidated by the General Assembly under a program called Advisory Services in the Field of Human Rights. The program now includes fellowships, regional training courses, seminars, and the advisory service of experts. It also includes a Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, which was established by the UN in 1987.

In a 1988 comprehensive report to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), the secretary-general of the UN clearly articulated what the program has been doing to date and aptly outlined what it should be doing in the future: expanding knowledge and understanding of human rights standards; advancing the application of those standards; and offering concrete help in creating and developing national institutions such as law libraries for schools, judges, and lawyers to facilitate the promotion and protection of internationally recognized human rights standards. In states that are parties to human rights instruments, regional training courses, for example, direct their attention to persons who are likely to be directly involved in the implementation of human rights norms—judges, legislators, police, prison officials, health care professionals, community leaders, public and social policy-planners, and others engaged in the administration of justice and social policy. The advisory service of experts focuses on tendering technical and other assistance to governments that need to create and develop the type of legal and other infrastructure (substantive and procedural institutions) to carry out human rights responsibilities.

Since 1988 the program has been expanded, despite financial limitations, and the Centre for Human Rights is now coordinating its activities. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (VDAPA), which came out of the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, explicitly calls for increased financing of the center and strengthening of the advisory services. See also: Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights. Further Reading: UN Doc., Advisory Services in the Field of Human Rights. Report of the Secretary General E/CN.4/1988/40; United Nations Doc., Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action A/CONF. 157/23 (July 12, 1993).

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. Among the fundamental norms of human rights are those of equality and nondiscrimination. Human rights instruments, in general, affirm those two norms. In addition many of those instruments, provide for action to be taken by states to remedy, partly or wholly, the effects of past discrimination based on language, nationality, religion, race, and sex. The three human rights treaties cited below provide clear and precise statements concerning the norm of nondiscrimination, and the policy of affirmative action (remedy for past discrimination).

Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states that “In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language.” Article 1(4) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination provides that Special measures taken for the sole purpose of securing adequate advancement for certain racial or ethnic groups or individuals requiring such protection as may be necessary to ensure such groups or individuals equal enjoyment or exercise of human rights shall not be deemed racial discrimination, provided … that such measures do not, as a consequence, lead to the maintenance of separate racial groups and that they shall not be continued after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved.

The 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) also provides for affirmative action. Article 4 (1) provides that the adoption, by states, of “temporary special measures aimed at accelerating de facto equality between men and women shall not be considered discrimination … but shall in no way entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate standards.” It further provides that the special measures (affirmative action) shall be “discontinued when the objectives of equality of opportunity and treatment have been achieved.”

In the United States, affirmative action programs have been very controversial, with some citizens viewing it as promoting a form of reverse discrimination. In other areas of the world, such as Western Europe and India, policies to remedy the effects of past discrimination have, to date, been less controversial. See also: Remedy. Further Reading: S. Parikh, The Politics of Preference: Democratic Institutions and Affirmative Action in the United States and India (1997); J. A. Sigler, ed., International Handbook on Race and Race Relations (1987).

AFGHANISTAN. The Islamic State of Afghanistan, located in southern Asia, shares borders with Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. It has a population of about 17 million people, which is composed of several ethnic groups, including Hazars, Tajiks, Turkomens, and Uzbeks. The predominant religion is overwhelmingly Islam (Sunni, 76 percent, and Shi'ite, 23 percent). Since its independence from Britain in 1919, successive Afghan governments administered an uneasy internal peace among various political factions until 1978, when the monarchy was overthrown and replaced by a pro-Soviet Union republic on whose behalf Moscow intervened in 1979. This political change not only generated widespread internal unrest but drew Afghans directly into the Cold War. While Soviet and Afghan communists fought Muslim guerrillas called mujahedeen, the United States gave considerable military aid to the guerrillas, who succeeded in forcing a Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989. The Soviet Union's withdrawal did not end the war. The conflict continued between the guerrillas and the communist regime, which was ousted in 1992. Since that date, despite external efforts at mediation, including the UN's, political control has shifted between rival religious and military groups in different parts of the country. At this writing, the Taliban—an independent coalition of religious students and certain military commanders—appears to have gained political ascendency.

Throughout the conflict since the 1970s, but especially since the Taliban gained political control, violati...