THE ROLE OF NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHT INSTITUTIONS IN PROMOTING AND PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS (original) (raw)
Related papers
Human Rights, State Compliance, and Social Change Assessing National Human Rights Institutions
2012
National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) – human rights commissions and ombudsmen – have gained recognition as a possible missing link in the transmission and implementation of international human rights norms at the domestic level. They are also increasingly accepted as important participants in global and regional forums where international norms are produced. By collecting innovative work from experts spanning international law, political science, sociology and human rights practice, this book critically examines the significance of this relatively new class of organizations. It focuses, in particular, on the prospects of these institutions to effectuate state compliance and social change. Consideration is given to the role of NHRIs in delegitimizing – though sometimes legitimizing – governments' poor human rights records and in mobilizing – though sometimes demobilizing – civil society actors. The volume underscores the broader implications of such cross-cutting research for scholarship and practice in the fields of human rights and global affairs in general.
The " Protection " Capacity of National Human Rights Institutions
This working paper evaluates the "protection" capacity of NHRIs in Southeast Asia. It does this by examining the NHRIs actual record in providing such services and their capacity to do bring about redress and compensation to human rights complaints. The NHRIs' record is assessed by reviewing key documents such as annual reports and third part assessments that record the activity and performance of these institutions. This study was taken at a time when the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (ICC) has made threats of downgrade to the status of some NHRIs due their non-conformity with the Paris Principles. Given the emerging works on NHRIs in Asia and in Southeast Asia in particular, this paper seeks to contribute to the literature by specifically focusing on those ASEAN countries with NHRIs and whether they complement AICHR by filling the gap of “protection” in the regional mechanism.
2023
Since 2016, the United Nations have strongly encouraged the creation of National Mechanisms for Implementation, Reporting and Follow-up (NMIRFs). Such governmental actors are rapidly spreading around the world, and principles on NMIRFs are being discussed. How does this new development recast ideal models for national human rights systems, and how does it impact independent National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)? Based on extensive research exploring NHRIs-NMIRFs interactions in five countries (Denmark, Mauritius, Moldova, Portugal and the Republic of Korea), Sébastien Lorion and Rachel Murray point to major changes in local human rights implementation that may be induced by the development of NMIRFs. While the study is first and foremost raises academic knowledge on the opportunities and risks arising from the development of NMIRFs, the studies goes one step further and makes a series of recommendations that considered, especially from the perspective of NHRIs, for the future normative and practical developments of NMIRFs.
Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2020
A wealth of literature argues that domestic institutions can sometimes restrain government repression. In this article, we highlight an institution tasked specifically with protecting and promoting human rights: the National Human Rights Institution (NHRI). Although common international standards exist, NHRIs exhibit substantial variation in their organization, the rights that they protect, the activities they permit, and the manner in which they appoint their members. Scholarship to date has conceptualized and measured NHRIs dichotomously; an NHRI either exists or it does not. We present data that highlights NHRI heterogeneity collected via content analysis of NHRI annual reports, NHRI websites, national constitutions, government legislation, and other sources. Using these data, we show NHRIs that can publish their findings and NHRIs that can punish offenders are each associated with less state torture. These data will allow future researchers to better explore important questions regarding NHRI origins, design, processes, and effectiveness.
National Human Rights Institutions: The Missing Link in Business and Human Rights Governance?
ICL Journal, 2020
In 2014, the United Nations established a working group to elaborate an international treaty on business and human rights. In October 2018, negotiations on a first draft of the actually text took place. Besides this zero-draft, the working group released the draft text of an Optional Protocol containing several institutional arrangements. The Optional Protocol carves out a key role for national implementation mechanisms to promote compliance with, monitor and implement the treaty on business and human rights. With such an institutional arrangement, the future treaty would join the ranks of what can be called a new generation of human right treaties which institutionalize a top down with a bottom up approach aiming to address the disjuncture between rules and practice. The Optional Protocol indicates that this role of national implementation mechanism could be taken up by National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs). This follows an increased recognition of NHRIs as significant actors ...
Journal of Human Rights Practice, 2011
The question of whether to establish a single national human rights institution (NHRI) with a broad mandate or multiple specialized institutions is a pressing one in several European countries, yet has been largely neglected in the academic literature. Many states have gradually acquired specialized institutions, addressing particular grounds of discrimination or the rights of different vulnerable groups. Often for reasons of cost, the wisdom of having many institutions is being questioned, and several countries -the United Kingdom (UK), Sweden, Croatia, for examplehave merged multiple institutions or are considering such a step.