Timeline: Human Rights Conventions
Source:
Al Jazeera
On December 10, 1948 the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Its 30 articles have been enforced in international treaties, local human rights tools, national bills and constitutions. The following timeline is a review of the most significant conventions and declarations that marked the UN's role in the affirmation of human rights.
June 26, 1945: UN Charter is signed in San Francisco.
December 9, 1948: Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
December 10, 1948: Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
November 4, 1950: European Convention of Human Rights (Council of Europe).
January 12, 1951: Convention on the prevention of the crime of genocide.
July 28, 1951: Convention relating to status of refugees.
December 20, 1952: Convention on the political rights of women.
October 23, 1953: Protocol amending the convention to suppress the slave trade and slavery originally signed in Geneva, Switzerland on September 25, 1926, under the auspices of the League of Nations.
September 28, 1954: Convention relating to stateless persons.
September 7, 1956: Convention on the abolition of slavery, the slave trade, and institutions and practices of slavery.
June 25, 1957: Convention on the abolition of forced labour.
November 20, 1959: Declaration of the right of the child.
December 14, 1960: Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and people.
November 20, 1963: Declaration on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.
December 21, 1965: International convention on the elimination of all forms of racial
discrimination. A committee on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination established.
December 16, 1966: International covenant on civil and political rights - Human Rights committee established.
November 7, 1967: Declaration of the elimination of discrimination against women. Proclamation of Tehran – International conference on human rights.
November 26, 1968: Convention on the non-applicability of statutory limitations to war crimes against humanity.
December 20, 1971: Declaration of the rights of the elderly.
December 20, 1971: Declaration of the rights of mentally retarded persons.
November 30, 1973: International convention on the suppression and punishment of the crime of apartheid.
December 9, 1975: Declaration on the rights of disabled persons. Declaration on the protection of all persons from being subjected to torture and other cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
December 9, 1978: Convention concerning migrations in abusive conditions and the promotion of equality of opportunity and treatment of migrant workers.
December 18, 1979: Convention on the Elimination of All Kinds of Discrimination against Women. Committee on the Elimination of All Kinds of Discrimination Against Women established.
June 27, 1981: African charter on hand people's rights (African Charter).
November 25, 1981: Declaration on the Elimination of All Intolerance and Discrimination based on Religion or Belief.
December 10, 1984: Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
May 28, 1985: Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural rights established to monitor International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural rights.
December 4, 1986: Declaration on the right to development.
November 20, 1989: Convention on the right of the child. Committee on the right of the child established.
December 15, 1989: Second optional protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – aimed at the abolition of death penalty.
August 5, 1990: Cairo declaration on human rights in Islam.
December 14, 1990: Basic principles for the treatment of prisoners.
December 18, 1990: International convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families.
December 18, 1992: Declaration on the protection of all persons from enforced disappearance. Declaration on the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic or religious or linguistic minorities.
June 14, 1993: World conference on human rights opens in Vienna.
December 20, 1993: Declaration on the elimination of violence against women.
December 21, 1993: International decade of the world's indegenous peoples proclaimed.
September 15, 1994: Declaration of the Arab charter on human rights.
December 23, 1994: International decade for human rights education proclaimed: 1995 – 2004
September 15, 1995: World conference on womens rights at Beijing.
April 3, 1998: Declaration on the right and responsibility of individuals, groups and organs of society to promote and protect universally recognised human rights and fundamental freedoms.
December 7, 2000: Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union.
September 4-8, 2001: World conference against racism, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination in Durban, South Africa.
June 29, 2006: United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples.
May 3, 2008: Convention on the rights of people with disabilities came into force.
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/humanrightsun/2008/12/20081278493266190.html
2 comments:
The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
Some wrongly state that executions are a human rights violation. The human rights violation argument often comes from European leadership and human rights organizations.
The argument is as follows: Life is a fundamental human right. Therefore, taking it away is a fundamental violation of human rights.
Those who say that the death penalty is a human rights violation have no solid moral or philosophical foundation for making such a statement. What opponents of capital punishment really are saying is that they just don't approve of executions.
Certainly, both freedom and life are fundamental human rights. On this, there is virtually no disagreement. However, again, virtually all agree, that freedom may be taken away when there is a violation of the social contract. Freedom, a fundamental human right, may be taken away from those who violate society's laws. So to is the fundamental human right of life forfeit when the violation of the social contract is most grave.
No one disputes that taking freedom away is a different result than taking life away. However, the issue is the incorrect claim that taking away fundamental human rights -- be that freedom or life -- is a human rights violation. It is not. It depends specifically on the circumstances.
How do we know? Because those very same governments and human rights stalwarts, rightly, tell us so. Universally, both governments and human rights organizations approve and encourage taking away the fundamental human right of freedom, as a proper response to some criminal activity.
Why do governments and human rights organizations not condemn just incarceration of criminals as a fundamental human rights violation? Because they think incarceration is just fine.
Why do some of those same groups condemn execution as a human rights violation? Only because they don't like it. They have no moral or philosophical foundation for calling execution a human rights violation.
In the context of criminals violating the social contract, those criminals have voluntarily subjected themselves to the laws of the state. And they have knowingly placed themselves in a position where their fundamental human rights of freedom and life are subject to being forfeit by their actions.
Opinion is only worth the value of its foundation. Those who call execution a human rights violation have no credible foundation for that claim. What they are really saying is "We just don't like it."
copyright 2005-2008, Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas
Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS, VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O'Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.
A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally.
Pro death penalty sites
http://homicidesurvivors.com/categories/Dudley%20Sharp%20-%20Justice%20Matters.aspx
www.dpinfo.com
www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPinformation.htm
www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/links/dplinks.htm
www.coastda.com/archives.html see Death Penalty
www.lexingtonprosecutor.com/death_penalty_debate.htm
www.prodeathpenalty.com
http://yesdeathpenalty.googlepages.com/home2 (Sweden)
This, from the French daily Le Monde, December 2006 (1):
Percentage of respondents in favor of executing Saddam Hussein:
Great Britain: 69%
France: 58%
Germany: 53%
Spain: 51%
Italy: 46%
USA: 82%
We are led to believe there isn't death penalty support in England or Europe. European governments won't allow executions when their populations support it: they're anti democratic. (2)
97%+ of Guatemalans support the death penalty. 2.6% oppose
(telephone survey, newspaper Prensa Libre, 2/14/08)
www(dot)latinamericapress.org/article.asp?lanCode=1&artCode=5545
79% support the resumption of hanging in Jamaica. 16% oppose. (Bill Johnson Polling for The Gleaner (Jamaica) Newspaper, 1/12-13/08
Two-thirds of Czechs for death penalty reintroduction - poll
Prague- Almost two-thirds of Czechs believe that death penalty should exist in the Czech Republic, while one-third believes the opposite, according to a poll the CVVM agency conducted in May and released. June 12, 2008, Ceskenoviny.cz/news/
(1) The recent results of a poll conducted by Novatris/Harris for the French daily Le Monde on the death penalty shocked the editors and writers at Germany's left-leaning SPIEGEL ONLINE (Dec. 22, 2006). When asked whether they favored the death penalty for Saddam Hussein, a majority of respondents in Germany, France and Spain responded in the affirmative.
(2)An excellent article, “Death in Venice: Europe’s Death-penalty Elitism", details this anti democratic position (The New Republic, by Joshua Micah Marshall, 7/31/2000). Another situation reflects this same mentality. "(Pres. Mandela says 'no' to reinstating the death penalty in South Africa - Nelson Mandela against death penalty though 93% of public favors it, according to poll. "(JET, 10/14/96). Pres. Mandela explained that ". . . it was necessary to inform the people about other strategies the government was using to combat crime." As if the people didn't understand. South Africa has had some of the highest crime rates in the world in the ten years, since Mandela's comments. "The number of murders committed each year in the country is as high as 47,000, according to Interpol statistics." As of 2006, 72% of South Africans want the death penalty back. ("South Africans Support Death Penalty", 5/14/2006, Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research).
Post a Comment