Limiting power of governments over people. (The Human Rights Committee).

March 23 marked the twenty-fifth anniversary of the entry into force of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The event prompted a number of questions, not the least of which is how effective and pervasive the Covenant and other treaties like it really are. Justice Praffullachandra Natwarlal Bhagwati of India, Chairman of the Human Rights Committee that monitors the implementation of the Covenant, said that treaties like this one embody moral and political values, and give them a legal shape: "Human rights are legal, by all means, because they involve the implementation of rights and obligations. They are moral, because they are a value-based system that preserves human dignity. And they are political in the larger sense of the word. Human rights govern the structuring of Governments. The also operate to limit the power of Governments over individuals."

This Covenant, along with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, expands and elaborates on the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It explicitly sanctions rights such as the one to self. determination, that are only mentioned in passing in the Declaration. It also has two Optional Protocols--one which advocates abolishing the death penalty, and the other that provides for individual complaints. Both Covenants, along with the protocols and the Declaration, make up the International Bill of Human Rights.

The Civil and Political Rights Covenant was opened for signature in the General Assembly on 16 December 1966. Unlike its parent body--the Universal Declaration, which was adopted with eight abstentions in 1948--the Covenant took almost ten years to meet the minimum number of signatures required for its ratification. Even today, only 148 of the 189 United Nations Member States are party to the Covenant.

Justice Bhagwati attributed these lags to the fact that the Covenant, unlike the Declaration, is legally binding. "Once States ratify the Covenant, they are bound by it. Some countries, though they are willing, even anxious, to sign, feel that they won't be able to meet its their legal systems are not geared to comply with it." He adds that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is making efforts to persuade all Governments to ratify not just this Covenant but also the five related human rights instruments, i.e. the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms o Discrimination against Women; the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Human Rights Committee operates through working groups and special rapporteurs that investigate, and report upon, human rights violations in State parties. States parties report to the Committee on the judicial, legislative and administrative measures they have taken to comply with treaty provisions. "Our monitoring mechanisms are pretty effective", says Justice Bhagwati. "The concluding observations that we make, after considering the reports, do have an impact on the existence of human rights in the countries concerned. These countries are induced to improve their human rights conditions by carrying Out our recommendations. If they do not, then the Human Rights Committee calls on them to explain why not, within the UN General Assembly."

The Human Rights Committee is comprised of eighteen experts from the field. Justice Bhagwati says its diversity keeps the Committee unbiased. "We are a totally independent body. Our members come from different parts of the world. We are not governed by political concerns, but look at situations objectively and with a commitment to preserving human rights."

Rajsoomer Lallah, former Chief Justice of Mauritius and member of the Committee, is also of the opinion that the Committee is an authoritative and influential body. "As a committee, we have established some kind of reputation in the sense that the views of the Human Rights Committee are taken into account by a number of courts in a number of countries, from the highest to the lowest. That is a measure of the success of the Committee over the last quarter of a century since the Covenant came into force", he says. He also attests to the Committee's impartiality and says that it gives all States concerned a fair hearing. "We get information from a number of sources: inter-governmental like the International Labour Organization; the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees; and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) like the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. We're very careful to ensure that any allegations that are made are presented to the State Party and they are asked in the framework of the ir laws whether in the first place these situations are true, and secondly how did they deal with them."

In its operations, the Human Rights Committee, like all United Nations bodies, is always cognizant of having to strike a balance between State sovereignty and the larger human rights norm. As recently as 1993, at the United Nations Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, some countries did stress the precedence of national and regional particularities over universal standards. Justice Lallah says that though the United Nations respects State sovereignty, it is very firm with Governments that use national sovereignty or economic concerns as a pretext to infringe on an individual's civil and political rights.

Indeed, the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has certain basic rights--for instance, the right to life, the right not to be subjected to torture, and the right not to be held m slavery--that cannot be derogated under any circumstances, "not even in an emergency", says Justice Bhagwati. "The Covenant plays a leading role in the protection and preservation of universal human rights. It helps to create national and international public opinion. And it is that public opinion that is the ultimate sanction of the Human Rights Committee. When States don't comply with the Covenant, we point out their shortcomings, and then they become answerable to the other United Nations organs," he adds. Not only does the Committee Chairman affirm the universality of the Covenant, but he also deflects any criticism on the grounds that it is gender-biased.

I agree that the language of these international instruments is not gender neutral, but that's only because they were drafted at a time when people weren't so conscious or aware of gender issues. Some countries may try to justify violations of women's human rights on the basis of their religion or culture. In these cases, we point out that whatever their traditions, gender equality is absolutely essential."

Jessica Neuwith, President of the Board of Directors of Equaliy Now, an NGO, is of the opinion that the Covenant, as enforced by the Human Rights Committee, has made a difference to women's rights. "The work of the Committee serves as a model of United Nations! NGO interaction that has advanced in concrete and meaningful ways the human rights of women in countries around the world", she says.

Joya Rajadhyaksha, an intern with the Chronicle, is a student at the School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), Columbia University, United States, where she co-edits the SIPA News.

RELATED ARTICLE: A Conversation with Justice Bhagwati

Human Rights: a political, legal, or moral issue?

All three. It is legal, by all means, because it involves the implementation of rights and obligations. It's moral, because human rights are a value-based system to preserve human dignity. And it's political in the larger sense of the word. Human rights govern the structuring of Governments. They also operate to limit the power of Governments over individuals. My own view is that both sets of human rights--civil and political, as well as economic and social-are equally essential. It's true that civil and political rights cannot thrive on empty stomachs, but at the same time, economic growth alone does not lead to peace and freedom. We cannot realize one set of rights at the cost of the other. Wherever there's a violation of one set of rights, it will necessarily lead to a violation of the other.

Is the Civil and Political Rights Covenant universal?

Treaties like the Covenant embody moral and political values and give them a legal shape. Countries that ratify the treaty are bound by it. Not all UN Member States have ratified the Covenant. Even now, as many as 41 countries are still abstaining. Some countries. though they are willing-even anxious-to sign, feel that they won't be able to meet its conditions because their legal systems are not geared to comply with it.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is making efforts to persuaded all Governments to ratify not just this Covenant, but also the five related human rights instruments. Once a State joins, the Human Rights Committee monitors their implementation of human rights embodied in the Covenant. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the parent source of the provisions that have been expanded and claborated in this and other international covenants. I agree that the language of these international instruments is not gender neutral, but that's only because they were drafted at a time when people weren't so conscious or aware of gender issues.

On State sovereignty and human rights norm:

The United Nations respects State sovereignty, of course, but when Member States sign treaties like the Covenant, they undertake certain obligations with which they must comply. They also agree to be monitored by the Human Rights Committee. The Covenant helps create national and international public opinion; and it is that public opinion that is the ultimate sanction of the Committee. When States don't comply with the Covenant, we point out their shortcomings and then they become answerable to the other United Nations organs. The basic rights in the Covenant, for instance the right to life, the right not to be subjected to torture. and the right not to be held in slavery, cannot be derogated under any circumstances, not even in an emergency.

How effective is the monitoring mechanism?

Pretty effective. The concluding observations that we make, after considering the aforementioned reports, do have an impact on the existence of human rights in the countries concerned. These countries are induced to improve their human rights conditions by carrying out our recommendations. If they do not, then the Human Rights Committee calls on them to explain within the General Assembly why not.

Ours is a totally independent body. We are not governed by political concerns, but look at situations objectively and with a commitment to preserving human rights.

Some countires try to justify violations of women's human rights on the basis of their religion or culture. In these cases, the Committee points out that whatever their traditions, gender equality is absolutely essential and that they should strive for equality in all respects.