Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:40:20.985Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

ESTABLISHING STATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR BREACHING HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY OBLIGATIONS: AVENUES UNDER UN HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2009

Get access

Abstract

United Nations human rights treaties dealing with specific concerns contain provisions in terms of obligations for states, rather than individual rights. This has consequences for the assessment by treaty monitoring bodies of the level of compliance by States Parties. While human rights norms generally impose obligations on states, the opposite is not always the case; not all obligations in human rights treaties contain corresponding rights for individuals. While the ILC Articles on State responsibility address the establishment of state responsibility in contentious procedures established by the regional human rights conventions; they do not take into account other monitoring procedures that exist, in particular under United Nations human rights treaties. These instruments create different mandates for treaty monitoring bodies, under which they can and do examine treaty implementation in much more general terms than would be possible under the contentious procedure. The individual complaint procedure under some of the treaties, the inquiry procedure and the reporting procedure offer possibilities to assess whether states' non-compliance with treaty obligations. This article examines these possibilities in the light of the ILC Articles on state responsibility.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Instituut and Contributors 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)