[afro-nets] Food for thoughts (and deeds) that go unsanctioned

Food for thoughts (and deeds) that go unsanctioned
--------------------------------------------------
Human Rights Reader 89

UNFORTUNATELY, HUMAN (PEOPLE'S) RIGHTS VIOLATIONS DO NOT CALL
FOR CONCRETE INTERNATIONAL SANCTIONS.

1. In international law, a violation of human rights (HR) is
deemed to be an offence, not only against the state, but also
against all members of the international community. But unfortu-
nately, this does not necessarily imply an international crime,
so that many HR violations do not actually call for pub-
lic/worldwide action. Ergo, force and sanctions cannot be used
in the case of despondency towards poverty alleviation, low and
unfair pricing of commodities (food included) and against the
inequitable provision of health care and educational services.

2. The question is: Does the international community have the
responsibility to intervene legally in cases of clear violations
of the right to food or to health, or to education? In a utopian
world, perhaps yes. However, the direction in which HR 'soft
laws' are applied, the inherent responsibility is vaguely given
to international development organizations instead.

3. This vagueness in the language of international law is prob-
lematic, because it allows for the manipulation of this inex-
actly-defined-body-of-laws. There is an urgent need for further
codification of this body of international law related to HR.
But, in today's world, the codification of international law is
a reality we can only dream about. The US, for example, is con-
sistently disrespecting international law by not ratifying trea-
ties it has signed. The US will certainly veto any codification
of international law that may hold it responsible for its ac-
tions, both domestically (e.g., CO2 emissions) and overseas
(e.g., the International Court of Crimes Against Humanity). This
begs the question: If there is no codification and no means of
enforcing it, what is the point of this international law? From
unenforceable laws come no rights!

4. International law is primitive and subject to individual
countries' recognition of each norm as being a legally binding
norm. Because the international community lacks a central au-
thority, the creation of international law is consensual through
treaties. Treaties are documents often bilaterally or multilat-
erally signed that are agreements by governments who consent to
be bound by their contents. Treaties fall into the category of
'soft law' (documents that are not directly enforceable in
courts and tribunals, but that nonetheless, have an impact on
international relations). Many such international agreements may
prove useful and may serve as a basis for future legally binding
agreements.

5. However, the name given to these laws ('soft laws') is inher-
ently problematic, because soft law is not law at all. Essen-
tially, soft law is comprised of declarations of principles,
codes of practice or conduct, recommendations, guidelines, stan-
dards, charters and resolutions. These instruments have no legal
authority, but there is an expectation they will be respected
and followed by those countries and governments who have signed
them.

6. One problem with non-legal instruments is that countries can
sign on to them without the fear of having to be held account-
able -- legally. Pressure comes (or is supposed to come) from
the international community. But it is only an assumption that,
if a treaty is signed, a country will do everything in its power
to maintain the integrity of the contract.

7. While the analogy is only approximate -- because there actu-
ally is enforceability and punishment for people driving too
fast -- there are some parallels between the importance of in-
ternational law and the importance of signs marking the speed
limit in a highway. When the speed limit is 100 km/hr, one can
assume that traffic will be moving at an average of 105-110
km/hr. So, if the speed limit is 100, why do people drive 5-10
km/hr faster? The answer is simple: If there were no speed limit
signs, people would drive at 120 or more km/hr. The speed limit
signs work as a limit of what is acceptable. People cross that
line all the time, but they measure their breaking of the law
according to the line. Treaties signed by governments put forth
by the international community serve as the line equivalent to
the speed limit sign, in a way serving the same purpose.

Claudio Schuftan
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
mailto:claudio@hcmc.netnam.vn

--
Mostly taken from a 2004 course term paper by Noah Levinson,
mailto:gbnl@aol.com