Comparative Human Rights Worksheet

Comparative Human Rights

title: A hard difference or do categorized human rights blend.

no of words: ....................................................... date: 02-06-2016 course: RGBOM0110

first 2 letters family name student: DI student no.: 4162455

u p s Ms g vg research question content & sources internal structure argumentation style & lay-out other final assessment u = unsatisfactory (<4), p = poor (5); s = satisfactory (6); ms = more than satisfactory (7), g = good (8), vg = very good (9-10)

Abbreviations:

ESC(R)= economic, social and cultural rights.

CIPOR= Civil and political right.

CIPORS= Civil and political rights.

ICCPR= International Covenant on

An example is the right to health in article 12 of the ICESCR. These ESC rights are codified in the International Covenant of Economic, social and cultural rights. Vasak described these rights as the second generation of rights.

Lastly; we have the collective rights also known as group rights these rights belong to groups that are conferred to in treaties, customary international law or soft law.

The ICCPR and the ICESCR are the main sources of CIPOR and ESC rights, however these are not the only sources of these rights, there are a lot of regional treaties that protect, respect and fulfill human rights, like the European charter on Social rights. There is also soft law and customary international law, which can be used as a source for either CIPOR rights or ESC rights. The committee on economic, social and cultural rights together with the human rights committee, are the most influential institutions in regard to human rights.

The distinction.

A couple distinctions have emerged over the years in regard to human

Justiciability is measured whether a human right can be invoked in court. Influential participants in the human rights field, like Jeanne Kirkpatrick, say ESC rights are too vague too implement in their legal system . However isn’t it the role of the judge to fill this gap, in any field of law? Secondly, it has been said that due to the fact that ESC rights often require policy making, the judge is not competent. However policy review is something the judiciary does do. Being able to go to court if your rights are violated is fundamental, especially regarding human rights. ESC rights are binding on states . Everything in the ICESCR entails obligations of conduct and obligations of result. The debate seems to be swinging that the fact that if a right entails a positive obligation on the state it can still be seen as justiciable. This line of thinking is reflected in general comment three paragraph eight in regard to the minimum core obligations of the state. These minimum core obligations are immediate and the excuse of resource constraints cant be used . These rights are non-derogable (GC 14 paragraph 18) so no matter what the context is when these rights are broken, this breach in unjustifiable. Only when states have put every effort forward to tackle this breach than the state is not at fault. Some CIPOR rights are derogable, so this seems confirmation that these rights