The U.N. treaty system definitively establishes the legitimacy of international
interest in the protection of human rights. It is undisputed that sovereignty
is limited with respect to human rights. International supervision is valid
and states are accountable to international authorities for domestic acts affecting
human rights. The treaty standards are the benchmark for assessment and concern.
Over the last decade ratifications in the treaty system and acceptance of communication procedures have risen exponentially. What began as an assertion of a few, is now a global proclamation of entitlements of the victims of human rights abuse. Furthermore, this participation by states has been voluntary. The obligations of the human rights treaties have been freely assumed. It is the legal character of these rights which places them at the core of the international system of human rights protection. For these rights generate corresponding legal duties upon state actors, to protect against, prevent, and remedy human rights violations.
The primary aims of the treaty system are to:
The human rights treaty system encompasses nine major treaties:
The nine treaties are associated with nine treaty bodies which have the task of monitoring the implementation of treaty obligations. The treaty bodies meet primarily in Geneva, and are serviced by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). These are:
Prior to 2008, CEDAW met in New York and was serviced by the UN Division for the Advancement of Women.
The treaty bodies are composed of members who are elected by the states parties
to each treaty (or through the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in the
case of CESCR). In principle, treaty members are elected as experts who are
to perform their functions in an independent capacity.
Meeting periodically throughout the year, the treaty bodies fulfill their monitoring function through one or more of three different methods.
First, all states parties are required by the treaties to produce state reports on the compliance of domestic standards and practices with treaty rights. These reports are reviewed at various intervals by the treaty bodies, normally in the presence of state representatives. Concluding observations, commenting on the adequacy of state compliance with treaty obligations, are issued by the treaty bodies following the review.
Second, in the case of five treaties individuals may complain of violations of their rights under the treaty (the Civil and Political Covenant, the Racial Discrimination Convention, the Convention Against Torture, the Women's Discrimination Convention and the Disability Convention). These complaints are considered by the treaty body which expresses a view as to the presence or absence of a violation.
Third, in the case of CAT and CEDAW, their work includes another procedure. This is an inquiry procedure which provides for missions to states parties in the context of concerns about systematic or grave violations of treaty rights.
In addition, the treaty bodies contribute to the development and understanding
of international human rights standards through the process of writing General
Comments or Recommendations. These are commentaries on the nature of obligations
associated with particular treaty rights and freedoms.
Significantly, the international system has had implications at the national
level. A multitude of domestic legal systems have been affected by the treaties.
The treaties form the basis of a significant number of the world's bills of
rights. There are also numerous instances of legal reform prompted by the treaties.
Non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions have invoked
the treaty standards in relation to proposed government legislation and policies.
Legislative committees have used treaty standards as reference points. The treaties
have sometimes been incorporated into national law, had direct application through
constitutional provisions to national law, and been used to interpret domestic
law through judicial intervention.