International human rights law is a firmly established part of public international law, and its

main expression is found in international or regional treaties. Other branches of

international law also operate to protect human rights such as international labour law and
international humanitarian law (also known as the law of armed conflict). Human rights are
the basic rights and freedoms that human beings are entitled to. International human rights
law seeks to guarantee human rights to all human beings without discrimination. Under
international human rights law, states are not only to refrain from interfering with the
exercise and enjoyment of human rights, so-called negative obligations, but also to take steps
to promote, protect and fulfil their enjoyment, so-called positive obligations. Positive
obligations require States to take steps to ensure that non-state actors do not impede the
enjoyment of human rights.
International human rights treaties usually provide for a monitoring system to scrutinise
compliance and assist states parties in the implementation of their obligations. To a varying
degree, treaties create procedures where individuals can bring complaints against states for
alleged human rights violations. Victims of human rights violations during times of armed
conflict may use these procedures to the extent that they are available. International
humanitarian law does not have a similar complaints mechanism.
International human rights law is the body of international law that promotes and protects
human rights at the international and domestic levels.

As a form of public international law, international human rights law is primarily made up of
treaty law – legally binding agreements between state parties – and customary international
law – rules of law derived from the consistent practice of states.

While international treaties and customary law form the mainstay of international human
rights law, other instruments, such as declarations, guidelines, and principles adopted at the
international level contribute to its understanding, implementation, and development.
Human rights law and IHL
International human rights law is closely related to, but distinct from, international
humanitarian law (IHL). They are complimentary since the substantive norms they contain
are often similar or related.

However, international human rights law applies at all times, including during situations of
emergency and conflict. International humanitarian law, however, only applies to armed
conflicts, including occupation. Thus, during conflicts, both legal regimes apply in tandem.
The concept of human rights is also closely linked to human dignity. The World Conference
on Human Rights which was held in 1993 in Vienna stated in its Declaration, “All of the
human rights are drawn from the basic concept of human dignity, worth inherited in the
human being. Human rights and fundamental freedoms revolve around the human
individual.”

the International Bill of Human Rights is made up of:

 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(1966)
 Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights
 Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights
Classification of human rights 

Civil and political rights (human rights of 1st  generation)

Civil rights or liberties are rights that protect one’s right to life and liberty. They are essential
for a person to enjoy a dignified life.

Economic, social, and cultural rights (human rights of 2nd generation)

Relationship between two generations of human rights:

Even though the two sets of rights are recognized by the UN in two different Covenants, they
have a strong relationship. It has been correctly recognised that both kinds of rights are
equally vital and that without civil and political rights, economic, social, and cultural rights
cannot be fully realised, and vice versa.

By 1948, the United Nations’ new Human Rights Commission had captured the world’s
attention. Under the dynamic chairmanship of Eleanor Roosevelt—President Franklin
Roosevelt’s widow, a human rights champion in her own right and the United States delegate
to the UN—the Commission set out to draft the document that became the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Roosevelt, credited with its inspiration, referred to the
Declaration as the international Magna Carta for all mankind. It was adopted by the
United Nations on December 10, 1948

he United Nations (UN) system has two main types of bodies to promote and protect human
rights: Charter Bodies and Treaty Bodies.
Charter Bodies are established under the UN Charter in order to fulfil the UNs general
purpose of promoting human rights. They have broad mandates that cover promoting human
rights in all UN member states.

The Human Rights Council

The principal UN Charter Body responsible for human rights is the Human Rights Council
(HRC). The General Assembly established the HRC in 2006, in the hope that it would be
more efficient and effective than its predecessor, the Human Rights Commission. Forty-seven
UN member states sit on the HRC. One of its main purposes is to review the human rights
record of every UN member state once every four years and to make recommendations for
improvement. In 2017, Australia was elected as a member of the Human Rights Council from
2018-2020.

Office Of The United Nations High Commissioner For Human Rights

The Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), a
department of the United Nations Secretariat [http://www.un.org/documents/st.htm] was
established following the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993. Its role is to prevent
human rights violations and secure respect for human rights by promoting international
cooperation and coordinating the United Nations’ human rights activities. The OHCHR
conducts a very broad range of activities from is headquarters in Geneva. It also works
directly in areas where there are severe human rights violations though field offices and as
part of UN peace missions.

Treaty Bodies have responsibility for monitoring and promoting compliance with a

particular human rights treaty. As such they are only concerned with countries that are a party
to that treaty.

A number of human rights treaties have established treaty-monitoring bodies to supervise the
implementation of treaty obligations by State Parties:

 the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination monitors State Parties

compliance with ICERD;
 the Human Rights Committee monitors State Parties compliance with the ICCPR;
 the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights monitors State Parties
compliance with the ICESCR;
 the Committee against Torture monitors State Parties compliance with CAT;
 the Committee on Migrant Workers monitors State Parties compliance with the
International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of Migrant Workers and their
Families;
 the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women monitors State
Parties compliance with CEDAW; and
  the Committee on the Rights of the Child monitors State Parties compliance with the
CRC.

Treaty Bodies consider reports from State Parties on their compliance with the treaty and
some treaty bodies can receive individual complaints of treaty body violations.

Reporting obligations and monitoring

Treaty Bodies consider periodic reports from States parties about the measures they have
adopted to carry out their obligations under each treaty.

When Treaty Bodies assess reports from State Parties they may also consider information
contained in ‘shadow reports’. Shadow reports are those submitted to the Treaty Bodies by
NGOs and National Human Rights Institutions (rather than government).

After considering the reports, Treaty Bodies make recommendations (often

called Concluding Comments or Recommendations) about how the State Party can improve
its compliance with its treaty obligations.

Individual complaints

Some Treaty Bodies have additional powers to receive and consider complaints from
individuals who allege they are the victims of human rights violations by the State. The
bodies with the power to hear individual complaints are:

 the Human Rights Committee;

 the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination;
 the Committee against Torture; and
 the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women.

A finding of a Treaty Body that a State Party has violated a person’s human rights under the
treaty is not legally binding.

Individuals can only make complaints to Treaty Bodies if they have exhausted all domestic
remedies and if the relevant State Party has recognised the competence of the Treaty Body to
hear their complaint.

By ratifying the ICERD, the CAT and the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, Australia has
recognised the competence of Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the
Committee against Torture and the Human Rights Committee to hear individual complaints
about violations of the relevant treaty provisions.

The United Nations is currently considering proposals to reform the treaty bodies and make
reporting obligations easier for States, by establishing a single, unified Treaty Body to
monitor implementation of all the principal human rights treaties.
COMMITTEE REPRESENTATION

UN Treaty Bodies are committees of experts in the relevant area who serve in their personal
capacity, not as representatives of their countries. Emeritus Professor Ivan Shearer and
Elizabeth Evatt, former Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia, are two examples of
recent Australian representatives.

Other UN organs that do important human rights work include:

 UN High Commissioner for Refugees

 Commission on the Status of Women
 United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM)
 United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
 UNAIDS.

Human Rights Council 

The Human Rights Council is composed of 47 elected United Nations member states and was
set up to prevent abuses, inequity and discrimination, protect the most vulnerable, and expose
the perpetrators of human rights violations. The Council established Special Procedures (or
mechanisms) to address the situations in specific countries and thematic issues across the
globe.
Regional monitoring and enforcement mechanisms
Beyond the UN system, there are regional systems of international human rights law that
complement national and international human rights law by protecting and promoting human
rights in specific areas of the world.

There are three key regional human rights instruments: the African Charter on Human and
Peoples' Rights; The American Convention on Human Rights; and the European Convention
on Human Rights.

A. Origin 
The Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization (AALCO), originally known as the
Asian Legal Consultative Committee (ALCC), was constituted on 15 November 1956. It is
considered to be a tangible outcome of the historic Bandung Conference, held in Indonesia, in
April 1955. Seven Asian States, namely Burma (now Myanmar), Ceylon (now Sri Lanka),
India, Indonesia, Iraq, Japan, and the United Arab Republic (now Arab Republic of Egypt
and Syrian Arab Republic) are the original Member States. Later, in April 1958, in order to
include participation of countries of the continent of Africa its name was changed to Asian-
African Legal Consultative Committee (AALCC). Forty-Seven countries comprising almost
all the major States from Asia and Africa are presently the Members of the Organization.
B. Statutes and Statutory Rules of the Organization
Initially, AALCO was established as a non-permanent Committee for a term of five years.
The five year term was further extended on four occasions until 1981, when at its Colombo
Session, it was decided to place the Organization on a permanent footing. That decision
necessitated revision of the original Statutes and Statutory Rules, the revised versions of
which were adopted in 1987 and 1989 respectively. The new Text of Statutes is in
consonance with the constituent instruments of other intergovernmental Organizations.
Consequently, the Statutory Rules are also revised. 
E. Purposes and Objectives
The purposes and objectives of the Organization as stipulated in Article 1 of the Statutes is as
under:
 To serve as an advisory body to its Member States in the field of international law and
as a forum for Asian-African co-operation in legal matters of common concern;
 To consider and deliberate on issues related to international law that may be referred
to the Organization by the Member States and to make such recommendations to
governments as deemed necessary;
 To exchange views, experiences and information on matters of common concern
having legal implications and to make recommendations thereto if deemed necessary;
 To communicate, with the consent of the governments of the Member States, the
views of the Organization on matters of international law referred to it, to the United
Nations, other institutions and international organizations;
 To examine subjects that are under consideration by the International Law
Commission and to forward the views of the Organization to the Commission; to
consider the reports of the Commission and to make recommendations thereon,
wherever necessary, the Member States; and
 To undertake, with the consent of/or at the request of Member States, such activities
as may be deemed appropriate for the fulfillment of the functions and purposes of the
Organization.
The basic functions and purposes of the Organization as enlisted above give effect to the way
in which subjects/topics were considered by the Organization and formed over the years the
Work Programme of AALCO. Thus, there are three ways in which a matter is placed on the
Work Programme of AALCO: (a) reference by a Member State; (b) Suo moto initiative of the
Secretary-General; and (c) Follow-up of the work of the International Law Commission. In
order to carry out these basic functions and purposes of the Organization, the Secretariat
prepares a study on the topic, which forms the background material for deliberations at the
Annual Sessions.
G. Permanent Headquarters of the AALCO
Pursuant to the Headquarters Agreement between the Government of India and AALCO
which was signed on 26 April 2000, New Delhi is the seat of the Permanent Headquarters of
AALCO (Article 2(1) of the Statutes). The Headquarters is located in Diplomatic Enclave,
Chanakyapuri in New Delhi.  
H. Secretariat
The Secretariat of the Organization is located at its Permanent Headquarters in New Delhi
and is headed by an elected Secretary-General (Article 3 of the Statutes). The present
Secretary-General, Dr. Kamalinne Pinitpuvadol, is from the Kingdom of Thailand. Deputy
Secretaries-General and Assistant Secretaries-General who are senior officers of Member
Governments sent on secondment assist the Secretary-General. Presently, the Governments of
People’s Republic of China, Islamic Republic of Iran, and Japan have deputed their senior
officials to the Secretariat. The regular staff of the Secretariat includes officers in professional
and administrative categories. The Organization also maintains Permanent Observer Missions
to the United Nations at New York and Vienna.
I. Co-operation with the United Nations, its Agencies and other International
Organizations
The AALCO’s activities have been broadened from time to time to keep pace with the needs
and requirements of its Member Governments. This is especially true in the fields of
international trade law matters and economic relations. The AALCO, as the only
intergovernmental organization representing Asia and Africa, has also oriented its activities
to complement the work of the United Nations in several areas. Acknowledging
Organization’s growing status and functions, the UN General Assembly by a Resolution,
adopted at its thirty-fifth Session in 1980 decided to accord AALCO Permanent Observer
Status at the United Nations.  Following that, an item on “Co-operation between the United
Nations and the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization” is placed biannually on the
agenda of the UN General Assembly.  The Organization has established close relations with
the United Nations, its Agencies and several intergovernmental Organizations and concluded
formal co-operation agreements with many of them (Article 6 of the Statutes).  These
include: United Nations (UN), International Maritime Organization (IMO), United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Industrial Development Organization
(UNIDO), International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO), United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), United
Nations University (UNU), United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR),
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), International
Organization for Migration (IOM), International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC), League of Arab States, Commonwealth Secretariat, Council of Europe, the Hague
Conference of  Private International Law and the Organization of African Unity (OAU) now
known as the African Union (AU). These agreements provide for mutual consultation,
exchange of documentation, representation and organization of joint meetings.
It may be emphasized that these co-operation agreements provide useful basis for organizing
joint meetings and seminars on topics of mutual interest to these Organizations. They provide
the funds for the participation of the resource persons and experts, who substantially enrich
the deliberations at the AALCO meetings. 
Every year, a Meeting of AALCO’s Legal Advisers is convened in New York, during the UN
General Assembly Session. Legal Advisers of Non-Member States and representatives of
United Nations and its Agencies also attend this Meeting.
J. Finances
The Organization’s finances are met primarily from three sources, namely (i) the annual
budget to which contributions are made by all Member States; (ii) voluntary contributions
including contribution in the form of deputation of officers; and (iii) special budget for
specific purpose such as for the Arabic Fund. 
.
K. AALCO’s Regional Arbitration Centres
One of the major achievements of AALCO in its programme in the economic field was the
launching of its Integrated Scheme for Settlement of Disputes in the Economic and
Commercial Transactions in 1978. Pursuant to that Scheme, it was decided to establish
Regional Arbitration Centres under the auspices of AALCO, which would function as
international institutions with the objectives to promote international commercial arbitration
in the Asian-African regions and provide for conducting international arbitrations under these
Centres.   
Five such Centres have been established so far, which are located at Cairo (Arab Republic of
Egypt), Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia), Lagos (Nigeria), Tehran (Islamic Republic of Iran) and
Nairobi (Kenya). The respective hosts Governments recognize their independent status like
an international organization and have accorded privileges and immunities to these Centres. 
AALCO provides its expertise and assistance to its Member States in the appointment of
arbitrators and other matters related to the conduct of arbitration. Its centers provide the
opportunities for training of arbitrators as well. The Directors of the Centres present their
reports on the functioning of the Centres at the Annual Sessions. 
AALCO's Contribution to the Codification and Progressive Development of International
Law on Topics of Relevance to Asian-African Regions
Diplomatic law Four Conventions prepared by the International Law Commission in this field
have already been adopted, of which three may be viewed as codification with a minor
component of progressive development, reflecting the current status of international law on
the subjects namely, The Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations, 1961, The Vienna
Convention on Consular Relations, 1963 and The Convention on Special Mission, 1969.
Member States of the AALCO have had ample opportunities to exchange their supportive
views, which led invariably to their ratification of or accession to these Conventions,
covering questions of privileges and immunities of diplomatic, consular and special missions.
Indeed, several Member countries have been assisted by the AALCO in its advisory capacity
in the preparation of appropriate legislation to give effect to the provisions of these
Conventions.

Introduction International law Attempts to control lawlessness even in war. The belligerents
are permitted to capture and seize the goods and even the vessels carrying contraband of war.
Such seizer, however, does not automatically transfer the legal title to the captor state as
some sort of adjudication is required. This is done by the Prize Court. Definition of Prize
Court Prize court is a municipal tribunal established by a belligerent to determine the legality
of the prize. The cargo or vessel captured and seized on the high seas or in the territorial sea
of a belligerent is designated as prize. Prize court is established by a belligerent and is
manned by its own nationals but it applies the rules of international law in adjudication of a
prize. Thus, prize court is a special municipal tribunal constituted for deciding questions of
maritime capture in time of war. Functions of Prize Court Pitt Cobbett has listed the
following functions of prize courts: 1. To enquire into cases of maritime capture. 2. To decree
condemnation when the capture proves lawful prize. 3. To award restitution and
compensation when the capture is not prize. 4. To protect the interests of all against rapine
(plunder) and disorder. Procedure of Prize Courts The prize courts are free to apply any
procedure, but the decisions must be based on international law. They are expected to follow
the basic rules of fair procedure, such as observance of the rule of audi alteram partem. Law
applied by Prize Courts Prize courts are municipal courts manned by nationals of the state
establishing the court. But these courts apply internationals law generally. But when there is a
conflict between international law and the state law, the court would apply the latter. In the
Zamora case, 1 the Privy Council held that a British Prize Court had to apply international
law even though it conflicted with the order- in – council. But the prize court would always
be bound by the British statute. In India, the Naval and Aircraft Prize Act, 1971 provides that
where a matter is not specifically regulated by the Act, the Prize Court shall apply the
principles of international law.2 The Zamora A Swedish ship bound to Stockholm from New
York was stopped by a British cruiser. It had a cargo of copper and grains. Copper was
contraband and the ship was bound to a neutral port. By an order of the British war
department, the copper was requisitioned. On appeal by the Swedish company to the Privy
Council, it was held that prize courts are specifically appointed to apply international law and
are not bound by an executive orderin-council, which contravenes international law although
they are presumably obliged to follow an Act o f parliament altering international law.

Law of Neutrality Neutrality, non-war armed conflict and the UN charter When two or more
States engage in war, they are known as belligerents. As belligerents, they acquire certain
rights and are bound by certain obligations towards third States who do not take the side of
either of the belligerents. Such third are called neutral States. Definition of neutrality
Neutrality is derived from the Latin word "neuter" which means neither. Neutrality thus
connotes the status of a State which does not favor or disfavor either of the belligerents. Such
neutral State remains indifferent to both the warring groups. Oppenheim defines neutrality as
"the attitude of impartiality adopted by third States towards belligerents, such attitude
creating Rights and duties between the impartial States and the belligerents1 . Starke
examines the concept of neutrality from two angles: 1) popular sense, and 2) Technical sense
In its popular sense, it denotes the attitude of a State which is not at war with belligerents, and
does not participate in the hostilities. In its technical sense, neutrality is more than an attitude
and denotes a legal status of a special nature, involving a complex of rights, duties, and
privileges at international law, which must be respected by belligerents and neutrals alike2 .
Neutrality and non-war armed conflict Neutrality generally refers to the status of belligerents
and third States in a war. War ceases to be legal in view of the Charter of the UN. However,
practically, war in the garb of non-war armed conflict subsists. Such war is continuing since
1950 when the Korean conflict started. Vietnam, Suez, Indo-China, Indo-Pak, Iran-Iraq,
Arab-Israel, the Balkan and Anglo-American attack on Iraq is some of the leading examples.
A question therefore arises whether the term neutrality will apply to such conflicts? Taking
the orthodox view neutrality is relevant in a war. But the basic object of neutrality is to
segregate the belligerents and the third States and keep international trade and commerce
alive. The rules of warfare have been applied by the States in case of non- war armed
conflicts. Therefore neutrality is also applicable in armed conflicts. Starke prefers to
designate it as quasi-neutrality or non-belligerency3 . Neutrality and the UN Charter
Neutrality in relation to the members of the UN is not a voluntary act. Under Article 2(5) of
the Charter, members are bound to give every assistance to the UN in any action it takes
under the Charter and to refrain from giving assistance to any State against which preventive
or enforcement action is being taken by the organization. Under Article 25, members are
bound to carry out the decisions of the Security Council and under Article 41, the Council
may ask the members to apply economic or trade sanctions against a State. Under Article 43.
the Security council may ask the Member States to make available their armed forces ant:
under Article 45, the members may be asked to take combined action. But certain Member
States of the UN may maintain neutrality when the are not involved by the Security Council.
This is "qualified" neutrality because such States cannot assist the belligerents and must assist
the Member States taking measures. A permanent member of the Security Council with veto
power may remain neutral by exercising veto. Duties of neutral States Similarly, the duties of
neutral States are as given below: 1) Abstention.—The neutral State must not give any direct
or indirect assistance to either belligerent. For instance, it must not supply troops or provide
shelter or allow construction or fitting of warships in its territory. 2) Prevention.—It is the
duty of a neutral State to prevent within its territory such activities as the enlistment of troops
for the belligerent armies or other warlike measures in its territory. 3) Duty of acquiescence.
—The neutral State must acquiesce in the legitimate acts of belligerents as are permitted by
the laws of war. This acquiescence is required in acts like seizure of contraband meant for the
other belligerent or adjudication by the Prize Courts. Kinds of neutrality Neutrality has been
classified as under: 1) Perfect and imperfect neutrality.— When a neutral State, neither nor
passively favour either belligerent, it is perfect neutrality. Any favour to one of the
belligerents is imperfect neutrality. 2) Absolute and qualified neutrality. — In absolute
neutrality, the belligerent States can fight effectively without affecting the territorial integrity
economic activities of the nonbelligerents. Direct or indirect help neutral State to a belligerent
is a case of qualified neutrality. 3) Permanent neutrality.—When a State is neutralized
through an international treaty it is a case of permanent neutrality. 4) Voluntary neutrality.—
Declaration by a State of its neutrality is the case of voluntary neutrality. 5) Sui gener is
neutrality. —Austria and Switzerland are neutralized States. They are members of the UN.
Under Article 2(5) of the Charter, members. Commencement of neutrality Neutrality is an
attitude of a State towards the belligerents in a war. Therefore, such attitude can be shown
only on the commencement of war. Neutrality commences at the outbreak of war between the
belligerents and when such commencement is conveyed or becomes known to the States not
involved in the conflict. End of neutrality Neutrality comes to an end when the war is
terminated. A neutral State, at any-time during war, may withdraw its neutrality. A State
when attacked by the belligerents has to defend itself. Its neutrality automatically comes to an
end. When a neutral State actively joins one of the belligerents, its neutrality comes to an end.
With the termination of neutrality, the rights and obligations of neutrality also come to an
end. Unneutral service Originally the doctrine of unneutral service was related to the duties
timid citizens in naval warfare and was regarded similar to contraband. But unneutral service
is now not confined to ships at sea but includes aircraft which are commonly used for
transport of troops during war. It is the duty of the neutral vessel or aircraft not to advance the
interests of one State and injure the same interests of the opponent. If this duty is not done, it
amounts to unneutral service. Vessels or aircraft in unneutral service may be captured and
subjected to adjudication by Prize courts.
Laws of Maritime Warfare:

The main objects of land warfare are to defeat the enemy army and to occupy the enemy
territory. As opposed to this, the aims of maritime warfare are the defeat of the enemy navy,
the annihilation of the enemy merchant navy, destruction of enemy coast, fortifications and of
maritime as well as military establishments on the enemy coast, cutting off intercourse with
the enemy coast, prevention of carriage of contraband and of rendering unneutral service to
the enemy, all kinds of support to military operations on land, such as protection of landing of
troops on the enemy coast, and lastly, defence of the home coast and protection to the home
merchant fleet.

Leaving aside the customs, the laws of maritime warfare are mainly contained in the
Declaration of Paris (1856), and the Sixth Hague Convention of 1907. The main provisions
regarding naval warfare, as in vogue in International Law may be enumerated under the
following sub-heads thus-

(1) Attack on Private and Public Vessels of the Enemy- The general rule is that public and
private enemy ships may be attacked and seized in their own ports, as well as in the ports of
invading nations and the ‘high seas’. This should, however, not be attacked or captured in
neutral ports and waters. To this general principle of International Law, there are the
following exceptions-
(a) Hospital Ships- According to the principles worked out by the Hague Conventions of
1899, and 1907, hospital ships are exempted from capture, and attack, such hospital ships
were to be painted white and fly the Geneva flag.
This rule was flagrantly violated during the First World War when the Germans used
submarines to sink hospital ships of the allied powers. During the Second World War Japan
violated this principle. The Geneva Convention of 1949, made detailed provisions for the
amelioration of the condition of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of the armed
forces at sea provided that military hospital ships should not be attacked or captured under
any circumstances.

The belligerents have a right to search hospital ships. According to Article 31 of the Geneva
Declaration, the belligerents can refuse assistance from hospital ships, order them off, make
them take a certain course, control the use of their wireless, and even detain them for a period
not exceeding seven days if the circumstances so demand.

(b) Vessels Employed on Religious Mission- The Eleventh Hague Convention of 1907

exempts vessels, engaged in religious, scientific or philanthropic work from capture. But the
immunity is withdrawn if the ships take part in hostilities directly or indirectly.
(c) Costal Ships- Ships employed for purposes of exchange of war prisoners are also immune
from capture by belligerents.
(d) Fishing Smacks and Market Boats- Such ships as are protected by a licence for purpose
of carrying on local trade or fishing, etc. are also exempted from capture. Lord Stowel
refused to recognize such an immunity. Article 3 of the Hague Convention XI, provided that
vessels exclusively employed in coastal fisheries and small boats employed in local trade
were to be exempted from capture along with their appliances, rigging, tackle and cargo.
(e) Limited Immunity on Merchantmen- A somewhat restricted immunity is conferred by
the Hague Convention of 1907, on the following classes of merchantmen-
 Those who are found in enemy port at the time when the hostilities commenced.
 Those who were unaware of the commencement of hostilities and entered the
port under the impression that peace still prevailed.
 Thos who are encouraged on the high seas under the impression that there was
no outbreak of war and that the peace still prevailed.
(f) Mail Boats and Mail Bags- Although there is no recognized rule of International Law
with regard to the immunity of mail boats and mail bags, yet states have frequently stipulated
for such immunity, in the case of war by means of special treatises.
It is enacted in Article I of the Hague Convention that the postal correspondence of neutrals
or belligerents, whether official or private in character, which may be found on board of a
neutral or enemy ship at sea, is inviolable, and that, in case the ship is detained, the
correspondence is to be forwarded by the captor with the least possible delay. There is only
one exception to the rule, correspondence destined to, or proceeding from, a blockaded port
does not enjoy immunity.

(2) Bombardment of Coastal Towns- Article 1, of the Hague Convention provides that the

bombardment of undefended ports, towns, villages, dwellings or other buildings by naval
force is under all circumstances and conditions forbidden. Article 2, provides that even in the
case of undefended places, military or naval establishment depots of arms of war material,
workshops or plants capable of hostile use and men of war in harbour might be bombarded if
the local authorities failed to destroy them on giving notice. Bombardment may not be
resorted to as a reprisal for the non-payment of contribution, though Article 3, authorizes the
bombardment of undefended places if the authorities fail to meet the demands for requisitions
provided those are in proportion to their resources. Warning of the impending bombardment
must be given if military possible. Buildings meant for public worship, art, science, charitable
purposes marked with distinctive signs are not to be bombarded.
(3) Mines- The Hague Convention forbids the laying of unanchored contact mines unless
they were so constructed as to become harmless within one hour after control of them had
ceased. It also prohibited the laying down of anchored contact mines that did not become
harmless on getting loose, from their moorings. It also prohibited the laying of contract mines
away from the coast or enemy ports. The point is that when mines are laid every possible
precaution must be taken for the security of peaceful shipping. According to Holland the
terms of the Convention were timid enough, as there were no restrictions on locality for the
placing of anchored mines. Germany claimed a right to sow mines on the high seas. The
provisions of the convention were violated by Germany during the two World Wars.
Laws of Aerial Warfare:

Navigable air vessels were for the first time used in the First World War as an auxiliary arm
for both land and naval operations, for a direct attack upon troops and ships, as well as for
observing and surveying the enemy resource. “As the war progressed, its use was extended to
cover operations outside the actual theatre of war. It was resorted to in this connection by
belligerents on both sides not only with the object of attacking and destroying military
objectives proper but also as a measure directed against the civilian population. In all the
spheres, experience showed the need for an agreed regulation of this new weapon of warfare.
The rules of aerial warfare have been framed from time to time by different conventions. A
brief study of these conventions follows-

(I) Brussels Conference- The conference was convened in 1874 by the Emperor of Russia to

lay down rules on aerial warfare. The rules laid down that open or undefended town or
villages were not to be attacked or bombarded.
But if a town or village was defended, it could be bombarded after due warning. It was also
laid down that all necessary steps should be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings
devoted to religion, art, science and charity, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded
were collected, on condition that they were not used at the same time for military purposes.

(II) The Hague Conference of 1899- The conference laid down that the bombardment of
towns, villages, and dwellings that were undefended was prohibited. The Hague Convention
of 1907 forbade the discharge of projectiles and explosives from balloons or by other similar
new methods for a period of five years. The convention also imposed a duty on a neutral state
to see that no fight in the air took place between the belligerents over its territory.
The institute adopted the principle in 1911, that “aerial war is allowed provided it does not
present for the person or property of the peaceable population greater danger than land or sea
warfare”.

(III) World War I (1914-18)- The rules of warfare had been ruthlessly violated in the First
World War. The distinction between combatant and non-combatant had become almost non-
existent in the eyes of those who were engaged in actual warfare. By the time the war came to
its close, ruthless destruction of the civilian population, which actually fell outside military
regions, became a common practice.
(IV) Washington Conference, 1922- With a view to regulate the use of aircraft against the
armed forces, the maritime commerce and military objectives of the enemy and to protect the
civilian population from the dangers of indiscriminate bombardment, the states, represented
at the Washington Conference of 1922 on the Limitation of Armaments decided on the
appointment of a commission of Jurists charged with the task of proposing code of Air
Warfare Rules. In 1923, the commission produced the proposed code of rules. Although these
have not been ratified, they are of importance, as an Authoritative attempt to clarify and
formulate rules of law governing the use of aircraft in war, and they will doubtless prove a
convenient starting point for any future step in this direction. On occasions government have
announced, that they would act in accordance with the provisions of the Hague Air Warfare
Rules.
The following are the most important rules of aerial warfare which were incorporated in the
Air Warfare Rules, 1923-

(1) It is forbidden to arm a private aircraft even on grounds of self-defence.

(2) To coerce payment of many or any contribution, pressure should not be exerted by means
of aerial bombardment.

(3) To bombard by air or to territories non-combatant civilian population is strictly

prohibited. Private property of non-military character should not be destroyed.

(4) In order that aerial bombardment may be treated to be legitimate, it should be aimed at
military objectives, the destruction of which would bring about a distinct military advantage
to the belligerent. In other words, only military establishments, ammunition factories, lines of
communication used for military purposes should be aimed to be destroyed by aerial
bombardment.

(5) Destruction of such cities, towns or buildings as are not in close proximity of the
operation of land forces is strictly prohibited.

(6) Areas in close proximity of the operations of the land forces may be bombarded only
when there is sufficient and reasonable presumption that the concentration of military troops
near the civil or non-combatant areas are important.

(7) Buildings meant for public worship, religion, art, science and charity as also historical
monuments, hospitals, refugee shelters etc. should not be bombarded.

(8) Laws of war and neutrality applicable to land troops apply to aerial warfare as well.

(9) If any of the rules as mentioned above are violated by any of the belligerent’s officers or
forces the belligerent state would be liable to compensate the loss sustained through such
violations.

(V) The Geneva Protocol- The Geneva Protocol of 1925 forbade the use of gas and bacteria
in warfare.
(VI) Disarmament Conference 1932- The Disarmament Conference resolved that air attacks
on the civilian population shall be strictly prohibited.
(VII) The Second World War- The Second World War witnessed an utter disregard of the
rules of aerial warfare. There was a complete violation of the rules by indiscriminate
bombing of Warsaw and Polish cities in 1939 by German aircraft. The British and American
air fleets also, in their turn, carried on an equally indiscriminate and ruthless bombing of
German cities. The whole war was fought without any regard for the rules of warfare, non-
combatants were mercilessly killed, and buildings devoted to public worship, art, religion and
historical monuments were bombarded. At the climax of it all came the use of the atom
bombs by the U.S.A. against Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, without
giving the warning of danger to the non-combatants and in defiance of the protests of many
of the scientists, who had worked on the project. A few days later, on account of the
devastation caused by the dropping of the atom bombs, Japan acknowledged her defeat, and
thus the Second World War came to an end.
The use of atom bombs is a clear violation of International Laws since they are highly
destructive, so their use should not be made. The United Nations Organization has been
attempting to work out a plan for the peaceful use of atomic energy. It has been remarked that
disarmament could also open up possibilities for joint international ventures of an ambitious
kind such as the utilization of atomic energy for peaceful purposes, space research,
exploration….for the benefit of mankind and projects to change the climate of large areas of
the world. The future will tell the story of the success of the United Nations in this regard.

Laws of Land Warfare:

War is an armed contest between two or more nations. In this contest, each party tries to
overpower its opponent. The rules which regulate the conduct of belligerents in war
operations on land are known as laws of land warfare.

new conference to meet at The Hague in June 1907. When it adjourned on 18 October 1907,
it had drafted 13 separate conventions and a declaration. Among the conventions was the
1907 Hague Convention IV with its Annexed Regulations setting forth the laws and customs
of war on land. These were a not very radical revision of their predecessor, the 1899 Hague
Convention II with its Annexed Regulations (DOCUMENT NO. 28). They represented the
applicable law of war on land in both of the World Wars of the first half of the 20th century.

The rules of land warfare are broadly set out in the Hague Convention IV of 1907, and the
Geneva Convention of 1949. Prior to and after these two conventions some other conventions
and declarations had laid down laws of land warfare. Among these other conventions, the
notable ones are the Geneva Convention of 1884, Declaration of St. Petersburg 1808, Hague
Convention of 1809, Protocol of 1925 and Geneva Convention of 1929. The following is a
brief summary of these rules-

(1) The Hague Regulations defined the status of belligerents i.e., those who will be treated as
lawful combatants. To constitute lawful Combatants, the troops must-

 Be properly commanded.
 Have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance.
 Carry arms openly.
 Conduct their operations in accordnace with the laws and customs of war.
(2) The Hague Regulations forbid the use of the following methods and means of war.
  Painful instruments of war especially the poison or poisoned weapons.
 Asphyxiating of delterious gases, the dum dum bullets.
 Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or
army.
 Misleading of enemy by treachery or perfidy.
 Improper use of a flag of truce, of the national flag or of military insignia and
unfiorm of the enemy.
 Killing or wounding of the enemy who has surrendered.
 Attack or bombardment of undefended cities, villages and buildings.
 Compelling the subjects of the opponent belligerent to take part in the
operations of war directed against their own country.
 Destruction of enemy property unless demanded by military necessity or the
pillage of town or place when taken by assault.
Unfortunately, however, the above rules were observed in both the world wars more in their
breach.

During the First World War libraries and cathedrals were either burnt or destroyed. But, as
Fenwick observes, “It remained for the Second World War to impress devastation on a scale,
which made a mockery of the prohibitions of the Hague Conventions. Enemy property of
every character was seized without regard to its public or private character. Vast areas in
Rusia were laid waste in the path of the advancing German armies and even more in the wake
of their retreat”.

The Hague Regulations of 1907 also contrived provisions relative to the treatment of
provisions of war. The Geneva Convention of 1949 dealt with this topic more exhaustively.
At the Geneva Convention of 1949, four conventions were concluded, relating to-

 The treatment of prisoners of war.

 The amelioration of the condition of the wounded, and sick in Armed Forces in
the field.
 The amelioration of the conditions of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked
members of armed forces at sea.
 The protection of civilian prisoners in time of war.
The Indian constitution and international law have links dating back to the pre-independence
days when India was a separate member of the league of nations even during the times of
British rule.
The Indian Constitution which was adopted on 26th November 1950 was greatly influenced
by the values imbibed in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR) which is an
international document adopted by the United Nations General Assembly with the basic
motive to protect and preserve the basic fundamental rights which all human beings are
entitled to.
The Fundamental Rights in Part III of the constitution and the Directive Principles of state
policy in Part IV of the constitution can be compared with the UDHR and many common
points can be seen.
Further it can be seen that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
is reflected in Part III of the constitution whereas The United Nations Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC) is reflected in Part IV and the Preamble to the constitution, thus greatly
benefiting the scope of human rights law in India.
Fundamental Duties: Article 51 A of the constitution of India gives force to Article 29(1) of
the UDHR which mentions the duties of the citizens towards the state which help to build the
nation and understand the importance of individual responsibility.
India is a party to more than one hundred and sixty treaties and conventions dealing with
various fields of law like air law, space law and maritime law.
The Government is responsible for implementation of the international treaties and
agreements to which India is a party.
The Legal & Treaties Division was established in the Ministry of External Affairs in 1957 as
a nodal point to deal with all aspects of international law advice to the Government of India.
It advises the Ministry of External Affairs in particular and other Ministries and Departments
on issues pertaining to international law and treaty, including treaty negotiations, practice and
interpretations.
Constitutional Provisions

Article 51: According to the provisions in this Article, the state has the responsibility to
promote international peace and security in the nation and maintain just and honourable
relations with other nations.
The Article specifically mentions that the state shall respect all the provisions related to
international law and shall make its best efforts to fulfill its treaty obligations and also
encourage the settlement of international disputes with the help of arbitration.
This Article tells the state to respect international law but does not explicitly make it a part of
the Indian laws.
Article 51 of the constitution is a directive principle which is to be understood with Article 37
of the Constitution of India.
International law and the powers of the Executive:
Article 53: It says that the executive power is conferred to the president of India and the
president shall exercise them directly in accordance with the constitution of India or through
the officers subordinate to him.
When exercising his power directly, the president should take the advice of the council of
ministers.
Although all executive functions are said to be executed in the name of the president they are
subject to the provision that they must not infringe the powers of the legislature and the
judiciary.
Also, every contract entered into by India shall be made in the president’s name.
Article 73: The executive power of the union is extended to all the matters with respect to
which the parliament has the power to make laws subject to the provisions of the constitution
or to any other laws made by the parliament.
Since Article 73 of the Constitution of India puts no restriction on the powers of the executive
with relation to international law, this allows the executive to enter into any type of treaty
obligations.
Legislative powers of the government:
Article 253 is the specific Article that gives the parliament the special power to legislate and
pass laws in order to implement international agreements.
According to Article 253, the parliament has the sole right to make laws for the whole or any
part of the territory of India with the motive of executing an international treaty, agreement or
convention with other countries or any decision made at any association or conference.
Thus Article 253 empowers the parliament to pass laws on matters mentioned in list II of
schedule VII in order to execute international treaties, agreements and conventions.
Indian Judiciary and International Law
Although the Indian judiciary does not have the power to make laws, it interprets the
obligation of India in international law by adjudicating domestic cases concerning issues of
international law.
In this respect, the Indian judiciary has played a very active role in the implementation of
India’s international obligations under international treaties especially, in the areas of
environmental law and human rights.
The role of international treaties in the implementation of domestic laws cannot be
undermined. International treaties have been used for the following purposes:
To fill a gap in the existing law.
To aid interpretation of the law.
To support and defend a stand taken.
To implement international conventions when they are not inconsistent with domestic laws.
To honor international treaty ratifications and international law.
The question that has come up very frequently in front of the Indian courts with regard to the
implementation of international law treaties is whether such treaties are binding automatically
or they require any enabling legislation.
The supreme court has reflected a dualist approach of the Indian legal system.
In the case of Jolly George Verghese vs Bank of Cochin (1980), it is stated that unless the
municipal law is altered to accommodate the treaty, what is binding on the court is the former
and not the latter.
Further, the supreme court in the case of State of West Bengal vs Kesoram industries (2004)
reemphasized that India obeys the doctrine of dualism and stated that any treaty that has been
entered into by India cannot become the law of the land unless the parliament passes a law as
under section 253 of the constitution of India.
In the landmark case of Vishaka vs the state of Rajasthan(1997), the court while drafting the
guidelines on sexual harassment of women at the workplace referred to many international
conventions and norms which were relevant for the purpose of guaranteeing gender equality,
right to work with dignity and the adherence to Article 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the
constitution.
In the case of Neelabati Behera vs. State of Orissa(1993), the court relied upon Article 9(5) of
the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) while granting compensation to the victim
for the matter of custodial death.
In the case of Chairman Railway Board vs. Chandrima Das(2000), the court utilized the
principles of the Universal declaration of human rights while widening the scope of Article
21 of the constitution by providing security to rape victims of foreign nationals.
Thus it can be observed from the above cases that the court has the liberty to apply
international treaties to domestic law provisions if they are not inconsistent with the existing
municipal laws.
Key observations and Recommendations of the Committee
Applying International Law:
The Committee noted that India follows the principle of dualism (that is, international law is
not directly applicable domestically, and must be implemented through a law by Parliament).
It observed that on certain occasions, the Supreme Court has digressed from this principle.
To ensure coordination between different institutions of the State, the Committee
recommended the Ministry of External Affairs to coordinate with the concerned Ministries
regarding matters where there is a vacuum in domestic law.
Further, it recommended setting up a Working Group in close coordination with concerned
ministries to strengthen India’s capacity and expertise in International Law.
Extradition treaties:
Extradition is a process for surrender, upon request, of a person who is alleged to have
committed an offence and is wanted for trial in one country, and is found residing in another.
India has signed extradition treaties with 50 countries and extradition arrangements with 11
countries.
The Committee took note of the delays in extraditing offenders who take refuge in countries
with which India already has an extradition treaty or arrangement.
Further, it observed that offenders take advantage of the absence of such treaties with certain
countries where they can get citizenship or residency through investment.
The Committee recommended identifying such countries and signing extradition treaties with
them on priority.
The Committee noted that India has signed Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs) with
40 countries.
Under MLATs, requests can be made for assistance in matters such as identifying and
locating persons, taking evidence, and obtaining statements.
The Committee observed that 845 such requests are pending with various countries.
It recommended: (i) instituting a task force to identify the reasons and suggest solutions for
the issue of pendency of such requests, and (ii) entering into more MLATs with other
countries on a priority basis.
Asylum issues:
An individual seeking international protection from persecution is called an asylum seeker. A
country may grant refugee status to an asylum seeker.
The Committee observed that existing domestic laws regulating the entry, stay and exit of
foreign nationals in normal circumstances are inadequate to deal with refugees.
It recommended that, in the absence of a domestic law for refugees and asylum seekers, there
should be a domestic protocol on their status, assigning specific responsibilities to specific
agencies. This will ensure prompt response and enhance accountability.
The Committee found the Government of India’s stance on the issue, that India’s Domestic
laws are adequate to effectively handle refugee crises facing the country, as demonstrated in
the past crises involving Tibetan refugees and Tamil refugees, not fully convincing.
The Domestic Laws like the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939,
the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 are legislations that govern the regulation of entry,
stay and exit of foreign nationals during normal times and under normal circumstances,
whereas a refugee situation demands prompt and specified response owing to the crisis nature
and the urgency of response required to avoid potent humanitarian crises resulting therefrom.
India is not a signatory to the United Nations’ 1951 Convention on the status of refugees and
the 1967 Protocol amending it.
The Committee noted that India believes in the concept of shared responsibility of all
countries in refugee crises, however, the Convention and the Protocol do not contain this
concept.
It recommended the Ministry to make a strong case for reviewing these instruments by
advocating India’s stand on shared responsibility.
Cyber Security:
India follows a multilateral and multi-stakeholder approach on the matters related to
Cyberspace, including on cyber crime, internet governance etc., guided by our democratic
values.
India’s stand has been that while International Law does apply to cyberspace, however, it is
insufficient in its current form to address the issues of attribution in cyberspace, violation of
sovereignty in cyberspace, and the threshold for reaction and proportionality of counter-
measures when it comes to a cyber incident, and hence more deliberations would be
necessary to define further modalities to deal with these issues.
While the objectives and principles of these provisions of International L se remain the same
in cyberspace, their applicability, modality and usability would have to be customized for
cyberspace.
India acknowledges that States must observe sovereignty, sovereign equality, the settlement
of disputes by peaceful means and non-intervention in the internal affairs of other States and
comply with their obligations under international law to respect and protect human rights and
fundamental freedoms.
India endorses that common understanding on how international law is applicable to State use
of ICTS is important for promoting an open, secure, stable, accessible, inter-operable and
peaceful ICT environment.
The European Convention on Cybercrime (Budapest Convention), is an initiative of the
Council of Europe.
Many European Countries and a few non-EU countries are Party to the Convention.
India is not a Party to the Convention.
The Committee noted India’s diplomatic efforts to design a global architecture for
cybersecurity.

It recommended leveraging India’s IT resources to collaborate on cybersecurity with various

regional instruments.
Further, the Committee took note of India’s lack of control over root servers.
Root servers allow countries to regulate, modify, or block internet traffic.
The Committee noted that out of 13 root servers in the world currently, none are in India.
It recommended: (i) strengthening domestic laws on cyber security in line with international
norms, (ii) focusing on preventing and pre-empting cyber attacks, and (iii) leveraging our
algorithm development capabilities to achieve data localisation.
The Committee note that the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In) and the
Information Technology Act are the administrative and legal mechanisms in the country to
respond against cyber attacks and to tackle cyber crimes.
The Committee are concerned with the reactive disposition of CERT-In since the benefit is
greater in pre- empting and preventing possible fraud, cyber attacks and such other cyber
crimes.
The Committee appreciates the efforts to make the CERT-in mechanism more proactive, but
desire that more effort needs to be devoted and the Ministries concerned must work together
to attract adequate talent in IT and software engineering to strengthen the capabilities and
capacity of CERT-In.
They also recommend that the IT Act, and rules under the Act must be constantly reviewed to
address fast changing requirements due to ever evolving technology and progress in the
information technology realm to keep the country safe and in a leadership position for
international mechanisms and instruments of cooperation.
Financial Crimes:
India has several mechanisms in place for domestic coordination and cooperation at both the
policy and operational levels to identify new and emerging trends and to formulate
appropriate responses to tackle financial crimes.
India is a member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), Asia Pacific Group (APF) and
Eurasia Group (EUG).
India has always been fully complying with the FATF recommendations from time to time.
The Anti Money Laundering / Counterfinancing of Terrorsim (AML/CFT) regime in India is
relatively young.
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), which came into force in 2005,
was further amended in 2009 following an assessment of vulnerabilities in the financial
sector, to include Full Fledged Money Changers (FFMCs), Money Transfer Service Providers
(MTSP), such as Western Union, and International Payment Gateways (IPG), such as Visa
and Master Card.
Thus, since mid-2009, India has increased its focus on money laundering and the use of the
ML provisions and has progressively expanded and strengthened its preventive measures for
the financial sector.
India continues to be a significant target for terrorist groups and has been the victim of
numerous attacks.
The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) was amended in 2004 to
criminalise, inter alia, terrorist financing.
The UAPA was further amended in December 2008 to broaden its scope and to bring the
legislation more in line with the requirements of the United Nations Convention for the
Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (FT Convention).
The amendment also established the National Investigation Agency (NIA) which, among
other actions, further strengthened the fight against terrorism and its financing.
UAPA was further amended in August, 2019 to provide special procedures to deal with
terrorist activities, including designation, as a terrorist, of an individual or organisation.
The amendment also broadened the scope of terrorist acts dealt by the Act by adding the
International Convention for Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism (2005) in its
Schedule.
The 2019 amendment also empowered NIA to attach properties acquired from the proceeds
of terrorism.
India signed the United Nations Convention against Corruption (the MeridaConvention) on 9
December 2005.
Corruption is one of the predicate offences for money laundering. The Government of India
has taken steps at both the policy and law enforcement levels to limit corruption.
To that end, India has established a high-level Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).
It is an independent statutory body responsible for laying down strict vigilance norms, which
issues guidelines and conducts inquiries in this regard. In principle, the jurisdiction of the
CVC extends to all the organisations to which the executive power of the Union Government
extends.
The Committee recommended having an international legal framework to tackle financial
crimes, which are increasingly trans-border in nature.
It also recommended increasing the network of countries with which India has MLATs in
criminal matters (presently, there are 42 such countries).
Further, it noted that under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018 (seeks to confiscate
properties of economic offenders who have left the country to avoid facing criminal
prosecution or refuse to return to the country to face prosecution): (i) the judicial process for
declaring a person a fugitive offender has been very slow, and (ii) for proceeding against
offenders, the money involved should be at least Rs 100 crore.
The Committee recommended reviewing this lower limit to enable proceeding against
smaller offenders.
THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER
When states become members of the UN they accept the obligations of the UN Charter that
sets out the four main purposes of the UN: to maintain international peace and security; to
develop friendly relations among nations; to co-operate in solving international problems and
in promoting respect for human rights; and to be a centre for harmonising the actions of
nations.

The UN Charter refers to human rights in the Preamble and Articles 1, 8, 13, 55, 56, 62, 68
and 76:

Article 1 defines one of the objectives of the UN as: ‘[?] promoting and encouraging respect
for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex,
language or religion’.
Article 8 states that ‘the United Nations shall place no restrictions on the eligibility of men
and women to participate in any capacity and under conditions of equality in its principal and
subsidiary organs [?]’.
Article 13 says that the responsibilities, functions and powers of the General Assembly shall
include ‘assisting in the realisation of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all [?]’.
Article 55 describes the purposes of the UN in international co-operation, which include
under (c): ‘universal respect for, and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms
for all without discrimination as to race, sex, language, or religion’. Article 56 contains a
pledge by all members ‘to take joint and separate action in co-operation with the Organisation
for the achievement of the purposes set forth in Article 55’.
Article 62 contains similar provisions in describing the responsibilities, functions and powers
of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
Article 68 authorises the ECOSOC to set up commissions ‘in economic and social fields and
for the promotion of human rights’.
Article 76 contains human rights provisions in the description of the international trusteeship
system.

II. Human rights provisions under UN Charter The preamble of the United Nations, declared
its aim to wipe out the fear of war, the promotion of human rights and the worth of human
person and dignity of mankind. It also seeks to establish justice, and promotes corporation
between the States to discharge their duties to create a just economic, social and cultural
order wherein mankind can realize the fundamental human rights in accordance with the
principles of international law. Accordingly, a number of provisions of the Charter have
incorporated human rights.
They are as follows: 1. Article 1 of the Charter lays down the purposes of the United Nations.
Accordingly, it is one of the duties of the UN as a world body to take necessary steps to
achieve international co-operation in order to reduce the inequalities of economic, social, and
cultural aspects. It also oversees to promote and encourage the nation-states to respect the
human rights of man and the promotion of all the fundamental freedoms without any
distinction to race, sex, language or religion.
2. Article 8 of the charter lays down that the UN shall place no restriction on the eligibility of
men and women to participate in any capacity equally in its principal and subsidiary organs.
According to the provisions of this article, all persons of the world are eligible to join the UN
and serve in its jobs as per the qualifications prescribed for each post. These jobs, the
internships, and various projects that are available with UN are open to all without any
discrimination to race, sex, language or any other ground.
3. According to Article 13, to achieve the purposes and objectives of the Charter, especially
with respect to the promotion of Human Rights, the General Assembly (since the General
Assembly represents all the nations), it has been entrusted with the task of taking harmonized
steps in the promotion of human rights of economic, social, cultural, educational and
fundamental freedoms.
4. According to Article 55, it is the responsibility of the United Nations to take General
Assembly (since the General Assembly represents all the nations), it has been entrusted with
the task of taking harmonized steps in the promotion of human rights of economic, social,
cultural, education and fundamental freedoms. (a) To suggest solutions to help the states to
help the states to achieve internationally economic, social, health, education, and cultural
relations of a high standard; and (b) To promote universal respect for human rights without
any discrimination on any grounds whatsoever. To achieve the objectives states in the Article
55, the member states established the Economic and Social Council as one of the significant
organs of the United Nations, in order to assist the General Assembly in realizing the
protection and promotion of human rights.
5. According to Article 76, the member states established a Trusteeship Council as another
principal organ. 6. The above are the most important objectives of UN to achieve the
fundamental freedoms of human beings across the globe.
According to Article 7 the UN will have six principal organs as discussed above. The
function of all the organs is to carry out the duties towards the nation-states, which includes
the promotion of human rights as their principal duty.
7. According to Article 51, if any country disobeys the mandate, especially in the promotion
and protection of human rights, or if any country is under threat from another country, the
Security Council is empowered to take all necessary steps including even to declare a war to
achieve peace and security, which includes the promotion and protection of human rights.
8. A part from the above, in accordance with Article 55, the Security Council may direct the
regional organizations (like European Union, SAARC etc., these organizations are
established by member states of the UN to settle their internal differences or to promote their
relations that are specific to their region only). The aim of these organizations is to assist the
Un and to achieve the economic, social, cultural aspects and fundamental freedoms of each
region quickly and to resolve the differences between them at the regional level.

Introduction

Conflicts are related to foreign affairs inextricably. These conflicts are largely no longer
solely between states, but also other groups, such as international organisations and other
non-state entities, and jointly between them. The Charter of the United Nations (UN) plays an
important role in this sense, especially with regard to conflicts between nations. International
dispute means a disagreement on a point of law or fact a conflict of legal views or of interest
between the States.” This dispute can arise on legal or political grounds between the parties.
Non-peaceful measures are the compulsive or coercive way of resolving an international
conflict. These tactics require coercion or intimidation on a conflict to be settled by a nation.
However, the use of compulsive/coercive interventions in such situations does not entail the
use of the armed services. It’s not really possible to describe the term ‘dispute’ exactly. In a
general context, it can mean “a disagreement between two parties on a point of law or fact, a
clash of legal opinions or interests.” In order to decide whether a dispute occurs, it must be
shown that one party’s argument is rejected by the other. If an international conflict persists,
though, is a matter for impartial assessment.

International Disputes

The fundamental resolution of the United Nations is to preserve world peace and stability and
to take steps such that violations of peace can be avoided. Towards this effect, the UN will
take preventive steps to eliminate violations or violations of peace and acts of violence. The
Charter of the United Nations has provided for the resolution of international disputes
amongst nations by negotiated means, and that these settlements should not threaten
international stability and justice. Through different perspectives, disputes can be deemed to
be international or transnational. Mentioning only a handful is important for present purposes.
For instance, because of the diversity of the nationalities of the parties to the dispute, a
dispute can be defined as international. Namely, there are at least three separate types of
diplomatic conflicts with respect to personalities alone.[1]

a. Disputes between States represent the first dimension of international disputes

specifically regulated by international law, but this does not exclude domestic law or
the relevant laws of international private law from being applicable.
b. Disputes amongst individuals or private organizations of various nationalities,
including matters relating to the applicable law and the preference of authority,
dispute laws, or to the rules of international private law.
c. Disputes among States and citizens of other States, such as, but not limited to,
investment disputes which represent third-dimensional international disputes and are
usually ruled by bilateral arrangements governed by general international law or by
particular standards of private international law or by differences of laws governed by
national law.[2]
Judicial arbitration is the ‘international tribunal’ method of settling a dispute in compliance
with the laws laid down in International Law. Multiple international dispute settlement
methods exist that could be said to be an option for international litigation or judicial
settlement. Among these alternative ways of dispute settlement, Article 33 of the Charter of
the United Nations states a method by, “negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation,
arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other means
of their own choice”.[3]
The International Court of Justice, albeit not the sole tribunal, is actually the most important
court in the world today. It is understood that the key role of the ICJ is to settle conflicts
between sovereign states. Only states will be the party to the case before them. Recently, The
International Court of Justice passed the judgement on the case of Jadhav (India vs Pakistan)
[4].  The disputants in this case were India and Pakistan. Jadhav was a former Indian Navy
soldier, and the Pakistani Military Court sentenced him to death. Terrorism and spying were
the allegations that were levied against him. After a four-year long fight to be arrested on 3
March 2016, he eventually found relief in a big victory for India after the detention orders for
his hanging were issued by the ICJ in 2019.  

Compulsive / Coercive modes of settlement of International disputes

The sense of the terms themselves, compulsive and coercive, indicates that both are non-
peaceful ways of resolving a conflict. Often, this approach can also require force and effort to
address the problem posed. In this strategy, force does not reflect the extent of the fighting
forces, but tactics that are short of a battle.[5]

Retorsion:

Retorsion in the international arena is the practical term that describes retaliation against a
derogatory act of a state. To a certain degree, it is based on the concept of tit for tat. If an act
is committed by a state identical to that performed by another state before, it is called
Retorsion. The object of retribution is to retaliate.

The actions committed by a state in retorsion are not unconstitutional. The aim of Retorsion
is to retaliate, but it is not possible to justifiably take those actions that are likely to jeopardize
international peace and security. Such measures are illegal if they are taken. They are, in
other words, permitted under International Law. It is, that being said, an unsympathetic act
and could be an effective law enforcement tool in certain circumstances. In practise, this is
recognised when international treaties sometimes provide employment of an unfriendly act in
response to the violation of an agreement.[6] There are several situations in which retortion
has been used as a form of dispute settlement. If people are handled poorly in another
Jurisdiction, the classic example of a better understanding is that the former should then make
equal rigorous laws with regard to the citizens of the latter State. The whole aim of retortion
is retaliation. It is not used for securing redress. To a broad range, the permissible use of
revenge has been influenced by the UN Charter. In retribution, such acts which are liable to
jeopardise international peace and stability, is regarded as unlawful, cannot be legally taken.
[7]

A State may, for instance, raise tariff rates against States that boycott or discriminate against
a particular nation’s goods. Such a retorsion move can be referred to as retribution in kind. In
some circumstances, in certain instances, retorsion is not restricted to retaliation in kind, a
State may conduct a lawful but downright rude act. The most relevant clause that regulates
and restricts the use of retribution is Article 2(3)[4] of the UN Charter. While revenge in
some circumstances is constitutionally appropriate, the Charter forbids its use in
circumstances where global peace and stability can be jeopardised. In other words, an act of
aggression does not contravene the possibility of establishing a situation that would have a
detrimental effect on international peace and security.[8]

One of the instances of the Retorsion occurred in December 1992, when India
announced persona non grata to two Pakistani High Commission officials, Pakistan also
ejected and named persona non grata to three Indian officials. Pakistan’s actions can be
referred to as “Retorsion”. In 1992, Pakistan declared a persona non-grata by an Indian High
Commission official while raising concerns about the operations of the Indian official who
violated the Vienna Convention, previously on the same day, after being caught with
sensitive defence files by the Delhi Police, India had declared a Pakistan High Commission
staff member a persona non grata for espionage operations.[9] Hence another act of retorsion
by Pakistan.

Reprisals:
If Retorsion does not address the problem, the States have the right to return to Reprisal. The
state will launch such a case in retribution, where the matter will be settled. Reprisal,
however, is one such tool and can only be used against a State if it has participated in an
immoral or improper practise. It’s a head that encompasses all sorts of vigorous steps that a
state normally takes. It is also the definition of revenge but hangs over an eye for an eye’s
values. In relation to the current situation, traditionally, reprisals were more associated with
the seizing of property and individuals, where it typically means compulsive actions used by
one state against the other to resolve a conflict resulting from the latter’s unjustified or
unlawful behaviour.[10]

The primary aim of the reprisals is to induce the criminal state to avoid the wrongdoing, or to
prosecute it, or both. Where a conflict has arisen as a result of an unjustified or
unconstitutional act by a State, the other State may, in order to resolve the dispute, take some
coercive action against that State. Although a state is entitled to take reprisal action, it needs
to satisfy certain legal requirements[11] set out in the Naulilaa Case, (Germany v. Portugal)
[12].  The biggest difference that can be made between retorsion and reprisals is that, while
being an unfriendly act, retorsion will also constitute a legal act, typically taking action in the
sense of a foreign military conflict. As years progressed, the principles of non-use of force
and peaceful settlement of disputes could be said to have become part of jus cogens
generality under international law. The UN General Assembly announced in 1970 that states
had a responsibility to avoid acts of reprisal including the use of weapons.[13]

Acts taken as reprisals are unconstitutional and are taken by a State for the purpose of seeking
punishment in an extraordinary way. A regime puts the rules into its own hands in reprisals.
For instance, Israel has repeatedly resorted to reprisals against Lebanon. It bombed those
areas of Lebanon where Israel’s territories were targeted by Arab terrorists. It is not necessary
for UN members to engage in reprisals of such a nature as to threaten international peace and
security. It is generally accepted if the other nation has perpetrated a foreign tort or violates
the rules of international law, the reprisal appears justified and legitimate. There must be an
appropriate proportion of the offensive conduct and reprisal, which is in relation to the
violation; the harm should be incurred. The reprisal is only applicable where the appeal for
reparation has been made and this has not been fulfilled.[14]

Embargo:

Embargos are a means of reprisal that acts primarily as an instrument of economic aggression
that can be used to satisfy different political goals, such as showing determination,
transmitting a political message, compelling reform in the actions of other nations,
discouraging other states’ unwanted practises. Normally, it means detention. Yet
internationally, the technical sense of the entail’s detention of ships in port. If a ship belongs
to a State which has violated an international tort or has committed any other international
misconduct and is accessible in the territorial waters of the State against which tort or
misconduct has been committed, the other State may, as a matter of law, prohibit such vessels
from travelling through that area.[15]

A State which extends the embargo in favour of its own ships or in respect of the ships of
other States. It is recognised as a ‘civil’ or ‘pacific’ embargo whenever a state restricts the
application of the embargo to its own vessels. Such activity shall be initiated in compliance
with an order provided by the authority of the State with a view to limiting or interrupting or
ending its commercial and economic links with another country. The intention is to bring the
other state under financial or economic stress.[16]

The ships of one state could also be seized by another state in reprisals. If for the intent of
pursuing relief, a vessel is seized, the embargo is considered a form of reprisal. Although if
the imprisonment is for some other reason, it is not deemed to be repressive. The embargo
can, under the jurisdiction of the United Nations, be implemented individually or jointly.
When a state applies an embargo, international stability and stability should not be
jeopardised. It will become illegal if it is done so. For example, in 1992, when the United
States made a significant effort to ensure adherence with the embargo against Cuba, the Air
Force of Cuba placed in motion an act of revenge for the sinking of an American passenger
plane.

Pacific Blockade:

If a nation blocks the coast of another state in order to prohibit the entry of vessels from all
nations by the usage of warships and other instruments to exert economic and political
leverage on that state, the action is specifically referred to as a blockade. The conditions for a
peaceful blockade are equivalent to those required during wartime for a regular blockade. A
pacific blockade is a barrier used without actual intervention to put pressure imposed by a
great power to bear on a weakened state.[17] This profoundly hampered the trade and other
economic operations of the blockaded state, thereby imposing sanctions on the blockaded
state to resolve the dispute. The key conditions are that the blockade must be proclaimed and
announced and also that it must be effective. There was a conflict of opinion among jurists as
to the legitimacy of international law, but with the formation of the United Nations, the
implementation of a peaceful blockade became unconstitutional in view of the danger to
peace and stability. Nevertheless, used under the jurisdiction of the Security Council, joint
blockades are not unlawful. Once it is enforced independently by a state, it is illegal.

Intervention:

Another compulsive way of resolving conflicts between states outside of conflict is

intervention. According to Professor Oppenheim, it is the autocratic intervention by a State in
the activities of another State for the purpose of preserving or changing the real status of
events. This is further divided into three classes, i.e., Internal, External, and Punitive
Interference by Professor Winfield.[18] It is necessary to remember that a state has been
significantly discouraged from taking compulsive steps to address foreign conflicts since the
creation of the United Nations.

Any step likely to jeopardise or endanger international stability and safety is prohibited.
Compulsive measures are also legal as long as they are in a position to protect world stability.
Accordingly, interference is viewed as illegal and is not permissible.[19] UNSC authorization
is seen as a compulsory step before any form of interference by one Country in the affairs of
another. In practicality, it’s not always followed, including the US interventions in Iraq
(1991,2002), in Pakistan (2011) to attack Osama Bin Laden, and during the Kosovo War by
NATO. This poses an important concern as to whether States are acting on the grounds of
terrorist acts and whether, in the future, such interventions could be deemed legal.
Humanitarianism, the preventing/stopping of civil war, the prevention of environmental
atrocities, the removal of established regimes or any related situation which may pose a
danger to international peace and security may be the key motives for collective
intervention. [20]

Conclusion

Peace will not be established in the world until governments are not willing to settle conflicts
as independent bodies from their people. As the size of a dispute between states is several
times greater than that of a dispute between individuals, the outcome of its settlement is,
therefore, several times greater than that of a dispute between individuals being settled.
International security and prosperity are a necessity for the growth of civilization as a whole.
States can use coercive tactics to obtain immediate relief, but this does not generally translate
into a permanent and lasting peace.[21]

The countries of the world are all in legal agreement at any moment in time, except during a
full-scale war. Criminal activities need to be stopped without hesitation, whether large or
small. Any violation of the rights of another State or States by another State could therefore
automatically cause their use or use of reprisals. International law provides the duty to
resolve conflicts by diplomatic means, but there is no duty to return to a particular process
unless the participants have decided otherwise. Attempts and initiatives have often been made
in order to mitigate some form of confusion and foster stability. The rule has shown itself to
be the factor that connects society’s leaders.

It is reasonable to assume that international law has always considered preserving peace to be
its central objective. To date, different methods have been undertaken in order to ensure
permanent harmony but these approaches in themselves pose many challenges and also have
failed at establishing a political and economic balance among the Countries of the world. By
nature, diplomatic means are friendlier and less hostile than adjudication.[22] But States may
resolve the issue at hand by using force or unfriendly actions against other nations to
accomplish their objectives, but they often end up generating an invisible problem of residual
animosity. And because of that, all rational and compulsive means are used for peaceful
resolution of conflicts under international law.

A Rough Guide to the Regional Human Rights Systems

Regional human rights systems, consisting of regional instruments and mechanisms, play an
increasingly important role in the promotion and protection of human rights. Regional human
rights instruments (e.g. treaties, conventions, declarations) help to localise international
human rights norms and standards, reflecting the particular human rights concerns of the
region. Regional human rights mechanisms (e.g. commissions, special rapporteurs, courts)
then help to implement these instruments on the ground. Currently, the three most well-
established regional human rights systems exist in Europe, the Americas and Africa.

Europe
The regional arrangements for protecting human rights in Europe are extensive, involving the
Council of Europe, the European Union and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in
Europe. Each of these intergovernmental organisations has its own regional human rights
mechanisms and instruments. Some of the most longstanding and developed of these exist in
the Council of Europe, with instruments including the European Convention on Human
Rights (ECHR), the European Social Charter and the European Convention for the
Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and
corresponding mechanisms such as the European Court of Human Rights, the European
Committee of Social Rights and the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The European system also has
a Commission against Racism and Intolerance, and a Commissioner for Human Rights. The
European Court of Human Rights, which is located in Strasbourg, has jurisdiction over
Council of Europe member States that have opted to accept the Court’s optional jurisdiction.
Once a state has done so, all Court decisions regarding it are binding. The Court accepts
applications of instances of human rights violations from individuals as well as States.
The Council of Europe

The Council of Europe is one of several regional inter-governmental organizations

established in the aftermath of World War II.  It is a separate and distinct entity from the
European Union, and its membership is larger, encompassing almost every country located
wholly or partly within the European continent, including Russia and Turkey.  The
Council's core mission is the promotion and protection of human rights. 

Other council initiatives include promoting the rule of law by combating corruption and
organized crime, facilitating the transition to democracy of post-communist and post-
conflict states, promoting uniform standards at the regional level, and the preservation of
cultural heritage.  Much of the Council's work in the field of human rights is accomplished
through the drafting of multilateral treaties.
 

European Human Rights Treaties

 European Convention on Human Rights

This treaty, formally known as the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms, guarantees core civil and political rights.  All 47
member states of the Council of Europe are state parties to the Convention, but not all
state parties have ratified each of its 16 protocols.
 
o Treaty Information:  This gateway page provides links to the official texts of
the Convention in English and French, signature and ratification information,
declarations and reservations by state parties, preparatory texts, protocols
(amendments), and more.
 
o Citation:  Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms, Nov. 4, 1950, E.T.S. No. 5., 213 U.N.T.S. 222.
 
 Directory of European Human Rights Treaties & Protocols
The Council of Europe's Treaty Office maintains this comprehensive list of all human
rights treaties drafted by the Council.  In addition to the European Convention on
Human Rights and its 16 protocols, the list includes eight more narrowly-focused
treaties and their protocols.  Click on the name of a treaty or protocol to access its
official text and related documentation.
 

Monitoring & Compliance - Country Reports

Commissioner for Human Rights

The Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights is an independent and impartial non-
judicial institution established by the Council of Europe to promote awareness of and
respect for human rights in the Council's 47 member states.  The Commissioner for Human
Rights is elected by Council's Parliamentary Assembly to serve a non-renewable six-year
term.

The Office of the Commissioner fulfills its mandate by monitoring each member state's
compliance with applicable human rights standards and issuing country reports; by
conducting thematic research on human rights topics; and by raising awareness of human
rights issues in cooperation with other inter-governmental organizations and non-
governmental civil society organizations.

Visit the Office of the Commissioner's website to access country monitoring reports and

related documentation, and to learn more about the Office of the Commissioner's thematic
work.  It is also possible to browse for publications by document type (country reports,
issue papers, opinions, etc.)
 

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)

The European Court of Human Rights was established by Article 19 of the European

Convention on Human Rights.  The Court is responsible for ensuring that member states
comply with their obligations under the Convention.  The Court hears the following types of
cases:

 Private Petitions - brought by an individual against a state party alleging a violation

of one or more rights guaranteed by the Convention.
 Interstate Complaints - brought by one state party against another.
 Requests for Advisory Opinions -  issued by the Committee of Ministers of the
Council of Europe.

The Americas
In the Americas, a regional human rights arrangement (the inter-American system for the
protection of human rights) exists within the intergovernmental organisation known as
the Organisation of American States (OAS). As with the United Nations (UN) human rights
system, the inter-American system features a declaration of principles (the 1948 American
Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man adopted seven months before the Universal
Declaration), a legally-binding treaty (the American Convention on Human Rights, which
entered into force in 1978), as well as Charter-based and treaty-based implementation
mechanisms (the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American
Court of Human Rights respectively). The Charter-based system applies to all member states
of the OAS, while the Convention system is legally binding only on the States parties to it.
The two systems overlap and interact in a variety of ways. The Inter-American Commission
(based in Washington DC) was established under the OAS Charter (Chapter XV) to promote
and protect human rights in the American hemisphere. It is composed of seven independent
members (Commissioners) who serve in a personal capacity. It receives individual petitions,
monitors the human rights situation in member States and addresses priority thematic issues.
The Inter-American Commission has created several Rapporteurships, one Special
Rapporteurship and a Unit to monitor OAS States’ compliance with inter-American human
rights treaties. This includes: a Rapporteurship on the Rights of Women, a Rapporteurship on
the Rights of the Child, a Rapporteurship on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a
Rapporteurship on the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty, a Rapporteurship on Migrant
Workers and their Families, a Rapporteurship on the Rights of Afro-Descendants and against
Racial Discrimination, a Rapporteurship on Human Rights Defenders, and a Special
Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression. This last position is the only Special Rapporteurship
at the IACHR, meaning that the mandate-holder is dedicated full-time to the job (all other
mandates are held by Commissioners). A Unit on the Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Trans,
Bisexual, and Intersex Persons was created in 2011. The Inter-American Court of Human
Rights (based in San Jose, Costa Rica) has two main responsibilities. First, to hear cases
submitted to it by the Commission or a State Party to the Convention and judge whether or
not a violation has been committed. The sentence is binding and cannot be appealed, but the
system does not provide for means of enforcement. Second, the Court gives advisory
opinions interpreting the American Convention or other international agreements relevant to
the protection of human rights in the Americas. All OAS member States, the Commission,
and OAS organs to a limited extent, can ask the Court for an advisory opinion. The member
States can also ask for an opinion on the compatibility of national law with international
instruments.

Inter-American Human Rights Instruments

 Charter of the Organization of American States (1948)

Article 5(j) recognizes the "fundamental rights of the individual without distinction as
to race, nationality, creed or sex," but it does not define what these fundamental rights
are.
 
 American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man  (1948)
Although it was not considered legally binding at the time it was adopted, the
Declaration has evolved into a normative instrument which identifies the
"fundamental rights" guaranteed by Section 5(j) of the Charter.
 
 American Convention on Human Rights (1969)
Chapter II (Articles 3-25) recognizes core civil and political rights.  Chapter I
obligates state parties to uphold these rights with respect to all persons, regardless of
race, sex or social condition.  Twenty-three of the 35 OAS member states are
 currently state parties to the Convention.
 
o 1st Protocol (1988) - social & economic ("2nd generation") rights.
Sixteen of the 35 OAS member states have ratified this protocol.
 
o 2nd Protocol (1990) - abolition of death penalty in peacetime.
Thirteen of the 35 OAS members states have ratified this protocol.
 
 Basic Documents of the Inter-American Human Rights System
Visit this gateway page to access the full texts of all human rights instruments drafted
under the auspices of the OAS, information about the ratification status of each
instrument, and related documentation.
 

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is also an official organ of the OAS.  It was
established in 1979, upon the entry into force of the American Convention on Human Rights,
and is located in San José, Costa Rica.  The Court's principle role is to act as the final
adjudicator of petitions seeking redress for the violation of rights guaranteed under the
Convention.  It also issues advisory opinions.

 Contentious Jurisdiction
o The Court only hears petitions upon referral by the Commission.  Individuals
may not petition the Court directly.
 
o State parties to the Convention still must consent to the Court's jurisdiction,
either on a blanket basis or on a case-by-case basis.  To date, 20 of the 23 state
parties have done so on a blanket basis.
 
 Advisory Jurisdiction
o The Court may issue an advisory opinion at the request of any OAS organ or
member state, even one that has not ratified the Convention.
 
o An advisory opinion may interpret any human rights treaty to which the
requesting member state is a party.
 

Africa
The African regional human rights system has been established within the intergovernmental
organisation known as the African Union. The main regional human rights instrument in
Africa is the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the main mechanisms
are the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the recently-
established African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The African Charter (which
entered into force in 1986) incorporates universal human rights standards and principles, but
also reflects the virtues and values of African traditions. Thus, the African Charter is
characterised by the concept of a reciprocal relationship between the individual and the
community, linking individual and collective rights. The African Charter established an
African Commission for Human Rights, located in Banjul, Gambia. It is a quasi-judicial body
made up of eleven independent experts and tasked with promoting and protecting human
rights and collective (peoples’) rights throughout the African continent (by receiving periodic
reports from States Parties on the implementation of the Charter’s provisions) as well as
interpreting the African Charter and considering individual complaints of violations of the
Charter. The African Commission has also established several Special Mechanisms including
six Special Rapporteurs who monitor, investigate and report on allegations of violations in
member states of the African Union, and eleven working groups, committees or study groups
that monitor and investigate human rights issues under the purview of the Commission. The
Special Rapporteur mandates cover: Extra-judicial, Summary or Arbitrary Execution;
Freedom of Expression and Access to Information; Human Rights Defenders; Prisons and
Conditions of Detention; Refugees, Asylum Seekers, Migrants and Internally Displaced
Persons; and Rights of Women. The Working Groups cover specific issues related to the
work of the African Commission; Indigenous Populations/Communities in Africa; Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights; Rights of Older Persons and People with Disabilities; the Death
Penalty; Extractive Industries, Environment and Human Rights Violations; Fair Trial; and
Communications. And finally, there is a Committee for the Prevention of Torture in Africa; a
Committee on the Protection of the Rights of People Living with HIV; and a Study Group on
Freedom of Association. The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights was established
in 2004 following the entry into force of a Protocol to the African Charter  on the
Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The Court has jurisdiction
over all cases and disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the
African Charter, the Protocol, and any other relevant human rights instrument ratified by the
States concerned.
he African Court on Human & Peoples' Rights

The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights was established under a 1998

protocol to the African Charter.  The Court, based in Arusha, Tanzania, compliments the
work of the Commission by adjudicating applications seeking redress for the violation of
rights guaranteed under the Charter and other human rights instruments.  It also issues
advisory opinions. 

 Contentious Jurisdiction
o The Court hears applications brought directly by individuals and state parties. 
It also hears applications on a referral basis from the Commission and NGOs
granted observer status by the Commission.
 
 o However, the Court may only adjudicate a claim against an AU member state
if it has ratified the 1998 protocol to the African Charter and explicitly
consented to the Court's jurisdiction.  Consult this document to determine
which AU member states have done so.
 
o Unlike the recommendations made by the Commission, the Court's decisions
are considered legally binding.
 
 Advisory Jurisdiction
o The Court may issue an advisory opinion at the request of any AU entity or
member state or other organization recognized by the AU.
 
o The opinion may interpret any provision of the African Charter or other
human rights instrument, provided that the subject is not related to any matter
currently under investigation by the Commission.