M.

Sc (CS & IT ) Human Rights Unit 4

Amnesty International Human Rights and the Helsinki process

After World War II, international concern for human rights was evident at the global
level outside the UN as well as within it, most notably in the proceedings and aftermath of
the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE), convened in Helsinki, Finland,
on July 3, 1973, and concluded there (after continuing deliberations in Geneva) on August 1,
1975. Attended by representatives of 35 governments—including the NATO countries,
the Warsaw Pact nations, and 13 neutral and nonaligned European states—the conference had as
its principal purpose a mutually satisfactory definition of peace and stability between East and
West, previously made impossible by the Cold War.

In particular, the Soviet Union wished to gain recognition of its western frontiers as

established at the end of World War II (which ended without the conclusion of an omnibus peace
treaty). The West, with no realistic territorial claims of its own, sought concessions primarily on
security requirements and human rights, largely in that order.

The Final Act of the conference, also known as the Helsinki Accords, begins with a
Declaration on Principles Guiding Relations between Participating States, in which the
participating states solemnly declare “their determination to respect and put into practice,”
alongside other “guiding” principles, “respect [for] human rights and fundamental freedoms,
including the freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief” and “respect [for] the equal
rights of peoples and their right to self-determination.” It was hoped that this declaration, the
importance of which is reflected in its having been signed by almost all of the principal
governmental leaders of the day, would mark the beginning of a liberalization
of authoritarian regimes.

Seeking to reduce tension between the Soviet and Western blocs, the Helsinki
process initiated discussions of human rights and fundamental freedoms and fostered
economic, scientific, and humanitarian cooperation between East and West.

The Helsinki Process, including the review meetings, led to greater cooperation
between Eastern and Western Europe. Representatives from non-aligned countries acted as
intermediaries, helping to broker deals between members of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization and the Warsaw Pact.

Signed on 1 August 1975 following the Conference on Security and Cooperation in

Europe which was launched in 1973, the Helsinki Accords establish the inviolability of
European frontiers and reject any use of force or intervention in internal affairs.

*************************************************************************

European Human system

The Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs has overall responsibility for
the development and implementation of the human rights and rule of law standards of the
Council of Europe, including the promotion of democracy through law, the operation of relevant
treaties and related monitoring mechanisms and the development and implementation of
activities in these fields.
Human rights, democracy and the rule of law are core values of the European Union. Embedded
in its founding treaty, they have been reinforced by the adoption of a Charter of Fundamental
Rights. Countries seeking to join the EU must respect human rights. So must countries which
have concluded trade and other agreements with it.

 Council of Europe. Directorate of Human Rights and Legal Affairs

The Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs has overall
responsibility for the development and implementation of the human rights and rule of
law standards of the Council of Europe, including the promotion of democracy through
law, the operation of relevant treaties and related monitoring mechanisms and the
development and implementation of activities in these fields.

 Council of Europe. Human Rights (Convention and Protocols only)

 European Union. Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) / Union européenne. L’Agence
des droits fondamentaux

The FRA helps to ensure that fundamental rights of people living in the EU are
protected. It does this by collecting evidence about the situation of fundamental rights
across the European Union and providing advice, based on evidence, about how to
improve the situation. The FRA also informs people about their fundamental rights. In
doing so, it helps to make fundamental rights a reality for everyone in the European
Union.

 European Union. Human Rights

Human rights, democracy and the rule of law are core values of the European
Union. Embedded in its founding treaty, they have been reinforced by the adoption of a
Charter of Fundamental Rights. Countries seeking to join the EU must respect human
rights. So must countries which have concluded trade and other agreements with it.

 European Union. The Charter of Fundamental Rights

The European Union's respect for human rights is based on Articles 6, 7 and 13 of
the Treaty on European Union and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Its activity focuses
on combating discrimination, racism and xenophobia and on protecting minorities in
fields such as asylum, immigration or employment.

 Committee of Experts on the Evaluation of Anti-Money Laundering Measures and the

Financing of Terrorism (MONEYVAL)
 Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime
and on the Financing of Terrorism
 European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI)
 European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment (CPT)
 European Social Charter (ESC)
 Execution of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (CM-EXEC)
  Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM)
 Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA) and
Committee of the Parties
 Group of States against Corruption (GRECO)


African Human right system

The African System is the youngest of the three judicial or quasi-judicial regional human
rights systems, and was created under the auspices of the African Union (AU).

Like the Inter-American System (and the European System, as originally designed), it

includes a commission and a court with complementary mandates. The African Commission on
Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), African Court on Human Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR),
and African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) all assess
States’ compliance with human rights standards, including by deciding individual complaints of
human rights violations. However, the jurisdiction and activities of each body are distinct.

For quick reference, view IJRC’s one-page overviews of the AfCHPR, ACHPR,

and ACERWC, as well as two-page country factsheets on the human rights obligations of the 55
AU Member States. View IJRC’s exhaustion guide for an overview of how the African human
rights bodies interpret and apply the procedural requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies
in their complaints processes

IJRC’s publication Advocacy before the African Human Rights System: Manual for

Attorneys and Advocates (2016) provides detailed information on the System, its components,
complaints procedure, and decisions. The manual addresses the continental human rights bodies,
as well as regional courts engaged in human rights protection. It also contains a list of additional
books, articles, and websites with information and analysis relevant to understanding the African
human rights bodies’ work.

IJRC’s publication Civil Society Access to International Oversight Bodies: African

Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2018) analyzes the opportunities and barriers to
civil society engagement with the ACHPR, as part of a series on advocates’ access to human
rights oversight bodies.

African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights

Seat: Arusha, Tanzania   Instrument: Protocol to ACHPR  Operating Since: 2006

The African Court on Human and Peoples Rights (AfCHPR) is a regional human rights tribunal
with advisory and contentious jurisdiction concerning the interpretation and application of
the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (“Banjul Charter”) and other instruments. Its
jurisdiction extends to those States that have ratified the Protocol to the African Charter on
Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’
Rights. In addition to deciding cases, the Court may issue advisory opinions and adopt
thematic reports.
 The AfCHPR issued its first judgment, in the case of Yogogombaye v. Senegal, in
December of 2009 and has taken up more than 300 other cases since then. The Court may decide
complaints against any State party to the Protocol that are referred to it by: the African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights; a State party (as respondent or petitioner in a case
before the Commission, or on behalf of a individual citizen); or, African intergovernmental
organizations.

As of November 2021, 32 States have accepted the Court’s jurisdiction by ratifying the

Protocol establishing the Court. These States are: Algeria, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi,
Cameroon, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Comoros, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, Gabon,
Gambia, Ghana, Guinea Bissau, Kenya, Libya, Lesotho, Mali, Malawi, Mozambique,
Mauritania, Mauritius, Nigeria, Niger, Rwanda, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, South
Africa, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, and Uganda. See AfCHPR, Basic Information. The
Democratic Republic of Congo became the 31st State to ratify the Protocol, in December 2020,
followed by Guinea Bissau in November 2021. [AfCHPR]

To see the most recent ratification information, visit the African Union’s Treaties,
Conventions, Protocols & Charters webpage.

Jurisdiction over Individual Complaints

The Court also has jurisdiction to hear cases brought by individuals and non-
governmental organizations with observer status before the African Commission, but only when
the relevant State has accepted this jurisdiction by making a declaration under Article 34 of the
Protocol.

As of November 2021, the Court has jurisdiction to receive complaints by individuals and
NGOs against eight States: Burkina Faso, the Gambia, Ghana, Guinea Bissau, Malawi, Mali,
Niger, and Tunisia.

Four States withdrew their acceptance of the Court’s jurisdiction over individual and
NGO complaints, between 2017 and 2021. Those States are: Rwanda, Tanzania, Côte d’Ivoire,
and Benin [IJRC: Rwanda; IJRC: Tanzania; IJRC: Benin and Côte d’Ivoire] The Court has
determined that such withdrawals are permissible and take effect one year after notification by
the State. See AfCHPR, Ingabire Victoire Umuhoza v. Rwanda, App. No. 003/2014, Ruling on
Jurisdiction of 3 June 2016, paras. 67-68.

Composition

The 11 judges of the court are elected for renewable, six-year terms. The Protocol to the
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on
Human and Peoples’ Rights, along with the AfCHPR’s Rules of Court, set out the Court’s
functions and operating procedures. To read more about the judges and their election process, see
our AfCHPR Composition & Election guide.

In July 2020, the AU Assembly was scheduled to elect four judges to the Court; three of
the four judges whose terms are expiring are eligible for reelection. This election has apparently
been postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In June 2018, four seats on the Court were
filled in an election. To read about the candidates and election process, see our two-page
overview.
African Court of Justice and Human Rights

Additionally, the States of the African Union have adopted two protocols that would
replace the AfCHPR with a new African Court of Justice and Human Rights, intended to hear
disputes arising under all African Union instruments, and give that new court jurisdiction to
prosecute individuals for serious international crimes. However, neither of the two protocols has
been ratified by the required 15 States.

African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights

Seat: Banjul, The Gambia        Instrument: ACHPR       Operating Since: 1987

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) promotes and

protects human rights in the 54  Member States of the African Union that have ratified the
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Morocco rejoined the African Union in 2017,
becoming its 55th Member State, but has not yet ratified the African Charter. [IJRC]

The African Charter and the Commission’s Rules of Procedure establish its composition

and procedures. The Commission is composed of 11 Commissioners, who are elected in their
individual capacity and do not represent any State. To read more about the Commissioners and
their election process, see our ACHPR Composition & Election guide.

The Commission accepts complaints (“communications“) from individuals, groups of

individuals, non-governmental organizations, and States concerning alleged violations of the
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. It may also issue general comments and other
guidelines and principles interpreting African human rights standards. The ACHPR periodically
reviews States’ reports on their implementation of the Charter and issues concluding
observations.

The ACHPR holds two ordinary sessions a year and may also hold extraordinary sessions
upon the request of the Chairperson of the Commission or a majority of Commissioners. During
the biannual ordinary sessions, the ACHPR considers periodic reports submitted by States
parties, as well as reports from members of the Commission and its Special
Mechanisms (rapporteurs, committees, and working groups). The Commission also considers
reports concerning country visits (“Special Missions”), which are typically dispatched to
countries experiencing political or social unrest, and may conduct promotional missions in
African Union Member States to promote the African Charter and other regional and
international legal instruments on human rights, and to strengthen relations between the
Commission and the relevant State.

ACHPR Rapporteurs and Working Groups

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has established multiple special

mechanisms to assist the Commission with the promotion and protection of human rights. The
special mechanisms’ mandates extend to all African Union (AU) Member States who are States
parties to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Fifty-four of 55 AU Member
States are States parties to the Charter. The special mechanisms are dedicated to protecting and
promoting specific rights or the rights of specific vulnerable groups.
 The ACHPR has established various working groups, special rapporteurships, and
committees to advance specific thematic areas of work and to guide its functioning. The
responsibilities of these special mechanisms include gathering and disseminating information on
respect for the human rights of certain vulnerable groups. The special mechanisms use this
information to provide States or the Commission with guidance toward effectively securing
human rights in Africa.

Each special mechanism has been overseen by one of the Commission’s

11 Commissioners, who undertakes his or her duties on a part-time basis. Each individual
appointed as Special Rapporteur or as Chairperson to a Working Group or Committee has been a
Commissioner, simultaneously serving on the Commission. Commissioners also serve as
members of the Working Groups and Committees, alongside non-Commissioner expert
members.

The special mechanisms have a duty to provide the Commission with reports on their
activities during each Ordinary Session. In turn, the Commission presents annual Activity
Reports to the African Union Assembly that contain information gathered from the special
mechanisms, summarizing positive developments and areas of concern regarding human rights in
Africa.

In 2020, the ACHPR adopted Standard Operating Procedures for its special mechanisms.
[IJRC]

Principal Functions

Each special mechanism has a specific mandate. Generally, special mechanisms may:

 conduct country visits to Member States to investigate the enforcement of human rights;
 make recommendations to Member States to guide them toward the fulfillment of their
international obligations;
 lend expertise to the Commission when it is considering communications that concern the special
mechanism’s mandate;
 submit annual reports to the Commission detailing its activities;
 propose that the Commission send urgent appeals to Member States regarding imminent human
rights violations;
 send letters to State officials requesting information regarding human rights violations;
 analyze States’ domestic laws and their compliance with international standards;
 engage in promotional activities, including seminars, workshops, and expert meetings; and,
 collaborate with civil society organizations and international human rights bodies.

Creation of Special Mechanisms

The African Commission appoints Special Rapporteurs, Chairpersons, and members of
the special mechanisms either by consensus or by a vote. See ACommHPR, Rules of Procedure
of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2020), rules 25 and 26. Typically,
the ACHPR authorizes a special mechanism for a two-year mandate, which may renewed
through a resolution. Each special mechanism’s website contains a list of the resolutions that
have authorized the continuing mandate for that mechanism. In 2020, the ACHPR
adopted Standard Operating Procedures for its special mechanisms.
 Committees, Special Rapporteurs, and Working Groups

The ACHPR has established the following special mechanisms:

 Advisory Committee on Budgetary and Staff Matters

 Committee on the Protection of the Rights of People Living with HIV (PLHIV) and Those at
Risk, Vulnerable to and Affected by HIV
 Committee for the Prevention of Torture in Africa
 Committee on Resolutions
 Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information
 Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders
 Special Rapporteur on Prisons and Conditions of Detention
 Special Rapporteur on Refugees, Asylum Seekers, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons
 Special Rapporteur on Rights of Women
 Working Group on Communications
 Working Group on Death Penalty and Extra-Judicial, Summary or Arbitrary Killings in Africa
 Working Group on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
 Working Group on Extractive Industries, Environment and Human Rights Violations
 Working Group on Indigenous Populations/Communities in Africa
 Working Group on Rights of Older Persons and People with Disabilities

 Working Group on Specific Issues Related to the Work of the African Commission

African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC)

Seat: Maseru, Lesotho        Instrument: ACRWC       Operating Since: 2002

The African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) is
charged with protecting human rights in Africa and interpreting the African Charter on the
Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC). Until December 2020, the ACERWC had been
based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, but it relocated its headquarters to Lesotho following an
agreement between the AU and Lesotho. The Committee generally holds biannual ordinary
sessions at its headquarters. It is made up of 11 individuals elected by the Assembly of the
African Union to serve for one term of five years.

Out of the African Union’s 55 Member States, 50 have ratified the African Charter on the
Rights and Welfare of the Child. Those 50 States are: Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana,
Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Central African Republic, Comoros,
Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea,
Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia,
Libya, Madagascar, Mali, Malawi, Mozambique, Mauritania, Mauritius, Namibia, Niger,
Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principle, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, South Africa,
Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The Democratic Republic
of Congo became the 50th State to ratify the ACRWC, in December 2020. [ACERWC]

The Committee’s activities include issuing “general comments,” guidance and

interpretation regarding the ACRWC; monitoring the ACRWC’s implementation; reviewing
reports by States and civil society organizations concerning States parties’ implementation of the
ACRWC and issuing recommendations (“concluding observations”); deciding
“communications,” complaints that allege violations of the ACRWC by States parties;
conducting fact-finding and promotional missions concerning systematic violations of child
 rights in States parties; and, establishing standards and guidelines to guide States parties in
fulfilling their obligations.

The ACRWC and the Committee’s revised Rules of Procedure establish its composition and

procedures.

The African Instruments

The Commission and Court are charged with interpreting and applying a number of
regional human rights instruments, which include:

 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (“Banjul Charter”)

 African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child
 Protocol to the African Charter on the Rights of Women in Africa
 OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa
 African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance

They also interpret the principles contained in the following non-treaty documents:

 Guidelines for African Union Electoral Observation and Monitoring Missions

 Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa
 Pretoria Declaration on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Africa
 Declaration on Gender Equality in Africa
 Kigali Declaration, 2003
 Resolution on Guidelines and Measures for the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Africa (Robben Island Guidelines), 2008
 Ouagadougou Declaration and Plan of Action on Accelerating Prisons and Penal Reforms in
Africa
 Grand Bay (Mauritius) Declaration and Plan of Action, 1999

Additional Tools for Victims & Advocates

See IJRC’s publication Advocacy before the African Human Rights System: Manual for
Attorneys and Advocates (2016) for detailed information on the System, its components,
complaints procedure, and decisions.

Decisions of the African human rights bodies can be accessed on the websites of
the Commission, Court, and ACERWC. However, the most effective tool for researching their
caselaw is the Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa’s Case Law Analyser. For
additional research tools, see IJRC’s guide on Researching International Human Rights Law.

The NGO Forum supports and coordinates civil society engagement with the African
Commission, through twice yearly meetings ahead of the Commission’s sessions.

Additional information on engagement with the African Commission and Court can be
found in the Commission’s Guide to the African Human Rights System and Guidelines for the
Submission of Communications, as well as in the International Service for Human Rights’
publications, Road Map for Civil Society Engagement: State Reporting Procedure of the African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2011) and A Human Rights Defenders’ Guide to
the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2012).
 International human rights in domestic coursts
Dualism. For States with a “dualist system”, international law is not directly applicable
domestically. It must first be translated into national legislation before it can be applied by the
national courts.

Iinternational Court of human rights?

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a court of last resort for the prosecution of serious
international crimes, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

Timeline of Major International Human Rights Treaties

 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Universal Declaration) ...
 1948 Genocide Convention. ...
 1951 Refugee Convention. ...
 1960 Discrimination in Employment Convention. ...
 1966 Racial Discrimination Convention. ...
 1966 Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Covenant.

International law is all about behaviors and actions of persons, companies or states and
countries in cross border situations. Domestic law arises from legislature that is created by a
group of people within one country.29-Jul-20

If conflict between an international treaty and a rule of domestic law is inevitable, the

State must amend the latter as quickly as possible in order to bring it into line with the
international obligation.

The International Criminal Court (ICC), established in 2002, seeks to hold to account
those guilty of some of the world's worst crimes. Champions of the court say it deters would-be
war criminals, bolsters the rule of law, and offers justice to victims of atrocities.

What is the relationship between international and domestic law?

Thus, while international law involves the regulation of the relationship between
sovereign states, domestic law confers rights to persons and entities within the sovereign
state. In the eyes of the monists, the state merely represents an amassing of individuals who are
subjects of international law

There is a substantial body of norms of international human rights law, both in

international conventions and customs. However, the international mechanism to enforce human
rights world wide is rather weak. On the other hand, domestic courts have remained largely
unutilized as concerns enforcing international human rights law.
 This is primarily owing to different state perceptions concerning the interrelation between
international law and municipal law, and the resultant diverging views they take to implement
norms of international law in the state territories. This tends to weaken the international human
rights enforcement regime. There is a need to emphasize the legal and binding nature of
international obligations and to involve domestic courts to ensure compliance.

The importance of and contemporary movement for the protection and promotion of
human rights has further underlined this need. The increasing recognition of individuals as
subjects of international law, especially international human rights law, has added new
dimension. Invoking international human rights law in domestic courts, therefore, merits special
consideration.

Factors of state sovereignty, the dualist view on the relation between international law
and municipal law and implementing legislation, appear to be impediments for direct application
of international human rights law, for it is argued that as long as treaty-making is primarily
executive prerogative, the legislature ought not to be by-passed in implementing treaties.
However, to overcome these impediments, it is suggested that legislative approval precede
ratification of treaties, or legislature effectively participate in the process of ratification.

This will benefit the so-called ‘democratic deficit’ of the process of treaty-making, and
facilitate direct application of international human rights law by domestic courts. Many countries
of the world, especially in Continental Europe and Latin America, which hold a monistic view,
are increasingly opting for this model of human rights compliance. This would greatly enhance
the protection and promotion of human rights.

*******************************************************************