Discourse in Development: Post-Colonial "Agenda" for the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social amd Cultural Rights Through the Post-Colonial Lens (original) (raw)
Related papers
This article uses post-colonial theory to examine the cluster of international human rights known as economic, social and cultural rights. The article surveys the jurisprudence of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, making it relevant for scholars of international human rights as well as post-colonial theory. Traditionally, international human rights divide into two branches: 1) civil and political rights, and 2) economic, social and cultural rights (ESCRs). ESCRs were virtually ignored during the cold war era, but they now receive expanded attention at the international and regional levels. The creation of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the mid-1980s began this process. The Committee has been highly influential in ESCR norm development. Post-colonialism is a branch of critical theory aimed at exposing the exploitative and paternalistic legacy of the international community's relationship to former colonies in the developing wor...
The American University journal of gender, social policy & the law, 2003
Law .armworker Legal Aid Clinic. I would like to thank the organizers of the Postcolonial Law: The Uses of Theory and Reform Projects conference, panel moderator and paper commenter Nicholas Berman, and co-panelist Antony Anghie for their helpful comments on my presentation. I am grateful to .rank Deale and Richard Wilson for their helpful comments on this Article and to Research Assistant Christine .inello for her hard work with obscure sources. I am also grateful to Scott Leckie for his many insights about economic, social and cultural rights, and to my family for much loving support.
The strong presence of ethno-nationalism in postcolonial states, and the associated politics, has often translated into the oppression of minorities and the denial to them of the right to self-determination. It has led to internal conflicts and gross violation of human rights, even genocide. Yet few scholars have addressed the matter in depth from an international law perspective. Mohammad Shahabuddin is an honourable exception. He has now written a timely, theoretically informed, and empirically grounded book on the subject of ethno-nationalism, postcolonial states, and international law. It continues the pathbreaking work Shahabuddin began with his previous monograph Ethnicity and International Law (2016). His work deserves to be read by anyone interested in the fate of minorities and subaltern groups in postcolonial states. His theoretical framework is rich, albeit eclectic. He draws insights from liberalism, Marxism, and feminism. He weaves an analysis that relates the problem of ethno-nationalism to continuance of colonial boundaries, particular trajectories of development, the role of ethnic bourgeoisies, the nature and character of the postcolonial state, and the place of minority rights in the constitutional scheme of things. His deconstruction of the 'ideology' of ethno-nationalism and the postcolonial state draws from among others the 'critical hermeneutics' of John Thompson. In so far as the world of international law is concerned he relies on different strands of critical scholarship that include third world approaches to international law (TWAIL), feminist approaches to international law (FtAIL), and new approaches to international law (NAIL). His essential argument, made by all these three approaches in one form or another, is that international law is part of the problem. The embrace of critical theory allows him to depart from existing work on minorities which essentially adopt a human rights perspective and identify in its matrix the shortcomings in the normative and institutional framework on minority rights. This strand of scholarship usually calls for more effective implementation, and at times a binding treaty to replace xi
Based on its mandate to eliminate racial discrimination, CERD has greatly contributed to the development of the specific body of indigenous peoples’ human rights and to the interpretation of general human rights law to make it adequate and relevant to indigenous peoples. The Committee was notably the first human rights treaty monitoring body to adopt a specific general recommendation on the rights of indigenous peoples. But more generally, throughout its work the Committee has been adopting detailed and responsive observations and recommendations regarding the rights of indigenous peoples, including under its follow up and early warning and urgent action procedures. The present chapter aims to examine the Committee’s contribution to the development of indigenous peoples’ rights. It reviews and analyses the role of the Committee regarding the overall development of indigenous peoples’ rights under international human rights law. In examining the jurisprudence of the Committee, this chapter explores how the Committee has managed to give depth to the convention to be able to cover several key issues faced by indigenous peoples, making it one of the most relevant human rights treaties for indigenous peoples globally.
Minorities and the Making of Postcolonial States in International Law
2021
The ideological function of the postcolonial 'national', 'liberal', and 'developmental' state inflicts various forms of marginalisation on minorities, but simultaneously justifies oppression in the name of national unity, equality and non-discrimination, and economic development. International law plays a central role in the ideological making of the postcolonial state in relation to postcolonial boundaries, the liberal-individualist architecture of rights, and the neoliberal economic vision of development. In this process, international law subjugates minority interests and in turn aggravates the problem of ethno-nationalism. Analysing the geneses of ethno-nationalism in postcolonial states, Mohammad Shahabuddin substantiates these arguments with in-depth case studies on the Rohingya and the hill people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, against the historical backdrop of the minority question in Indian nationalist and constitutional discourse. Shahabuddin also ...
The 42nd Session of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities
Human Rights Quarterly, 1991
The UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities began its forty-second session' on 6 August 1990 under unusual pressure; meeting four days after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, it faced a tense world situation with an overcrowded agenda of studies and human rights violations in particular countries. In addition the Sub-Commission had to address criticism from some members of its parent body, the Commission 1. The official report of the 42nd session is found in U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1990/59 (1990) (hereinafter 1990 Report). The United Nations Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities was established by the Commission on Human Rights in 1947 to make recommendations on issues related to discrimination and minorities. The scope of human rights issues considered by the Sub-Commission increased as the human rights issues considered by the Commission grew. The Sub-Commission helps the Commission develop international standards in many areas of human rights by producing reports, studies, and draft instruments on human rights. This article is adapted from one which appeared in 45 ICJ Rev. 15 (1990). The authors also wish to thank Leslie Anderson for her help on the section of this article dealing with the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery. For other analyses of the 1990 session see generally,
2018
As many as three international disputes containing allegations of infringement of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms Racial Discrimination (ICERD) have been brought before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), thus contributing to the number of cases allowing the Court to pronounce itself on the international human rights law. Even though none of the cases invoking violations of ICERD has been (yet) adjudicated on the merits, they have already provided an opportunity to clarify (at least in part) the compromissory clause enshrined in Art. 22 of ICERD, as well as to tackle some other issues related to provisional measures ordered by the Court. This article discusses the ICJ’s approaches to the application of ICERD in the three above-mentioned cases, while posing the question whether indeed the 1965 Convention can be useful as a tool for settling inter-state disputes. The author claims that ICERD and the broad definition of “racial discrimination” set out...