Analyse the sources and instruments of international human rights law and evaluate their effectiveness

What this dot point is asking

SCSA wants you to know where international human rights law comes from, the key instruments and institutions, and to evaluate how effectively those rights are actually protected. The recurring theme is the gap between the high ideals of the documents and the difficulty of enforcing them against sovereign states.

Sources of international law

International law has several recognised sources, set out in the Statute of the International Court of Justice. These are treaties (conventions between states), customary international law (consistent state practice followed out of a sense of legal obligation), general principles of law recognised by nations, and, as a subsidiary aid, judicial decisions and the writings of jurists. Human rights law draws on all of these, but treaties are the most important.

The International Bill of Rights

The foundation is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948. The UDHR is a declaration, not a treaty, so it is not legally binding in itself, but much of it is now regarded as customary international law and it inspired later binding instruments.

The two key binding covenants, adopted in 1966 and in force from 1976, are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), covering rights such as life, liberty, fair trial, free speech and freedom from torture, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), covering rights such as work, education, health and an adequate standard of living. Together with the UDHR these three documents are often called the International Bill of Human Rights.

Other major instruments

Beyond the core covenants there are specialised conventions, including the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention against Torture (CAT), and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

UN institutions and enforcement

Several bodies monitor and promote human rights. The Human Rights Council (a body of the General Assembly) conducts the Universal Periodic Review of each state. Treaty bodies, such as the Human Rights Committee for the ICCPR, examine state reports and individual complaints. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights coordinates UN human rights work. The International Court of Justice resolves disputes between states, while the International Criminal Court can prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Enforcement, however, is the central weakness. International law relies heavily on state consent, reporting, diplomatic pressure and "naming and shaming" rather than coercive sanction. The UN Security Council can authorise binding sanctions or force, but its five permanent members can veto action, which often paralyses responses to serious abuses.

Evaluating effectiveness

Strengths include the creation of universal standards, a framework that has influenced domestic law worldwide, mechanisms for reporting and review, and a developing system of international criminal accountability. Weaknesses include the dominance of state sovereignty, weak and inconsistent enforcement, the Security Council veto, selective application, and the fact that ratification does not guarantee domestic implementation. International human rights law is therefore best described as setting strong standards but possessing limited enforcement power.