International Bibliographic Index (IBI)

[Wu Han]

Title: In Search of Human Rights
Author(s): Demartino, Alessia

Published: Harat: University of Harat Press
Year: 5405
Language(s): Gziri (original); multiple translations.
Physical Details: 354 p.
Subjects: Non-fiction; political theory; international law.
Wiki Page: N/A.

Summary: In their book In Search of Human Rights (5405), Cildanian political scientist and international legal scholar Alessia Demartino argues that "human rights" remain a normative concept with a deeply contested meaning, and unclear or unequal application within the institutions of international politics, and in global politics writ large.

Demartino begins the book by recounting the famous exchange of letters (Appendix I) between Sekowan lay Daenist leader Okuno Kayoko and Human Rights Foundation Secretary-General Ibezimako Nkemdilim. In this exchange, Okuno asks Nkemdilim to locate what his organization considers the basis for essential human rights in law. Nkemdilim cites the Declaration of Natural Human Rights (SC R100) as the “most significant statement of global rights,” though it has notable flaws, including its “restrictive language regarding the… promotion of human rights abroad” and the “marginal” commitment of the World Congress and its constituent bodies/agencies in the “improvement in the state of international human rights.”

Demartino picks up from this exchange, agreeing with Nkemdilim that while the Declaration remains the core and foundational document underlying the norm of human rights, it is lacking in many ways, such as its overemphasis on state responsibilities and the relations between states; Demartino argues that the Declaration prioritizes the sovereignty and integrity of states over promoting and protecting the rights of human beings. Demartino asks: “what human rights-based claim can a stateless individual make, to whom, in view of the Declaration?”

In the text, Demartino further contends that the Declaration provides little by way of enshrining a right to the material needs of human beings to actualize the rights they have been granted elsewhere in the document. Moreover, the Declaration fails to incorporate and reiterate other important liberal international norms guiding human rights, such as the prohibition of slavery and racial segregation. Here, Demartino suggests that it may be more constructive and efficient to develop norms and international human rights law "from the bottom up" through treaties, rather than depending solely on the Security Council; the Security Council can then adopt the norms and standards developed through such agreements and conventions, as it has in SC R109 (Appendix II), which "Proclaims the Law of the Sea as jus cogens, peremptory norm that is applicable erga omnes, to all states, whether they are party to the treaty or not." To this end, Demartino highlights agreements such as the Convention on the Humane Treatment of Prisoners of War and the Global Emancipation Treaty as representative examples of treaties which have enshrined certain international legal norms related to human rights within the body of customary international law, instead of relying on the "top-down" approach of Security Council Resolutions.

Reiterating an argument made in her earlier book Constructing International Law (5402), Demartino suggests that an important issue for the Security Council to resolve is the extent to which certain resolutions may be binding, while others may be non-binding. Examining the area of human rights and human rights enforcement is informative to this end, for while the Declaration is non-binding, the norm of human rights have been routinely invoked to legitimize Security Council enforcement actions, such an interventions and/or sanctions.

“The Security Council has an important monopoly in the international legal apparatus, in that it is the sole institution which has legal authority to determine the legitimacy or illegitimacy of military intervention,” writes Demartino. “Thus, it would seem that the distinction between non-binding and binding SC resolutions depends strictly on the politics and capacities of the powers elected to the Security Council; all resolutions have the latent capacity to be binding, if the political determination to enforce them is present amongst the Security Council majority.”

Notable Quotations: N/A

Appendix (OOC: references originally linked to are included in full here since they were on the PT Classic server):

I. Letter exchange between Okuno Kayoko and the Secretary-General of the Human Rights Foundation Ibezimako Nkemdilim.

Letter from Ms. Okuno Kayoko and Dr. Sonoda Saburo of Seko to the Secretary-General of the Human Rights Foundation Mr. Ibezimako Nkemdilim,
1 June 4848:

Dear Secretary-General Nkemdilim,

For over 700 years, the Human Rights Foundation has stood at the vanguard of the struggle to advance justice, freedom, truth and dignity for all peoples throughout Terra. In recognition of this profound living legacy, we are writing to ascertain the Foundation’s interpretation of international human rights law (IHRL) at the present moment. We would be most honoured to receive guidance with respect to the questions posed below:

(A) Former HRF Secretary-General Stefan Zeltser once explained that the International Declaration of Human Rights “was the basis for what constituted essential human rights.” Given that this declaration has been lost to history, what currently constitutes the basis for essential human rights?

(B) How should the Declaration of Natural Human Rights (SC R100) be interpreted within the scope of international human rights law? What other legal precedents, if any, are relevant?

(C) What is the role of the World Congress in legislating international human rights law? What are the consequences of recognizing the World Congress as a body imbued with the authority to legislate international law?

We thank you for your consideration and time.

Best wishes in solidarity,

Ms. Okuno Kayoko, BA, MA, LLB.
Chairwoman of the Hasu Gakkai
President of the Sekowan Association for Human Rights

Dr. Sonoda Saburo, LLB, LLM, SJD, PhD.
Dean of the Ito Makiko Law School (Nago National University)
Research Chair in International and Transnational Legal Studies

(OOC: Originally written by Wu Han, Nov 22, 2020)

Response from Secretary-General Ibezimako Nkemdilim:

Ms. Okuno and Dr. Sonoda,

Thank you for your letter and for your commitment to the cause of international justice and human rights. The role of the Human Rights Foundation is important in the context of global justice and rights issues but it is sustained only with the support of partner organisations and individuals throughout the world like yourselves.

Attempting to strengthen international human rights law is a key objective of the Human Rights Foundation (as I am sure you are both aware). Recent years have proven frustrating on this front, as the international community has largely fractured and human rights issues have been challenged primarily at the national level or by non-governmental organisations, rather than by states applying pressure to those who fail in their duty to provide freedom and justice for their citizens.

With respect to your specific questions, the principles that were foundational to the International Declaration of Human Rights remain the guiding principles of the Human Rights Foundation. No codified statement of these principles and associated rights exists within the international sphere since the abrogation of that document and it is an important aim of the Foundation to pursue the creation of such a document, which might serve as a focus for our campaigning efforts.

In the current legal context Security Council Resolution 100 is the most significant statement of global rights and you are right to highlight it. Leaving aside the lack of enforcement of its provisions, the broad agreement on the principles that it laid out remains a positive symbol of the potential for international co-operation regarding human rights. In spite of this we cannot say that the resolution is perfect and the restrictive language regarding the use of promotion of human rights abroad is particularly problematic.

Outside of this there are a number of international treaties that outline states' duties with respect to the fundamental rights of citizens that are only partially enforced. Nonetheless many of these treaties have served an important function in providing a focus for the work of human rights campaigns as well as shaping subsequent international agreements. Consider the Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons for a key example of such an agreement.

A matter of persistent concern in the sphere of international human rights is the approach that organisations should take to the role of the World Congress. On the face of it the World Congress represents a genuine miracle in international relations, in that it has managed to convene representatives of every country on the globe in the same room consistently for centuries. At the same time there has been only marginal improvement in the state of international human rights in that period.

In recent times there have been positive developments in the World Congress, such as the inclusion of all of the countries of Dovani, Temania and Vascania and the abolition of the permanent members. Even so the Security Council in particular has been slow to take action in many instances of rights abuse and the action that it does take tends to be motivated by political and economic self-interest and not global justice. From the perspective of the Foundation, we continue to work with the World Congress in certain capacities and hope that it will continue to take positive steps, however it will not move forward the agenda of human rights alone.

I hope this response shines some light on the work of the Human Rights Foundation and its perspective on international human rights law.

Regards,

Mr. Ibezimako Nkemdilim
Secretary-General of the Human Rights Foundation

(OOC: Originally written by Jamescfm, Nov 26, 2020)

II. Security Council Resolution 109: International Maritime Law

The Security Council,

Recognizing the importance of maritime trade for global peace and prosperity,

Affirming the impossibility of any nation to claim the high seas or any part thereof as its national territory,

Condemning the vile practices of piracy and slavery,

Recognizing the existence of admiralty law as a part of customary international law,

Proclaims the Law of the Sea as jus cogens, peremptory norm that is applicable erga omnes, to all states, whether they are party to the treaty or not,

Declares all bodies of water not included in the Territorial waters or Exclusive Economic Zone as the High Seas, and proclaims that all vessels sailing the High Seas are under the jurisdiction and protection of their flag state,

Proclaims the High Seas the common patrimony of all humanity and all nations,

Asserts that pirates and slavers, by engaging in private war against all nations or by trafficking slaves on the High Seas, render themselves hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race, and holds that all nations have the right and the duty to capture, try, and, if their laws permit it, execute any pirate and slaver they come across,

Recognizes the ancient custom of privateering and proclaims it distinct from piracy, recognizing that privateers are at war with only one nation, not all nations.

Yes: Selucia; Aldegar; Liore; Dorvik
No:
Abstain: Dankuk

(OOC: Originally written by Polites, published on Jan 12, 2021).

---

Originally posted by Wu Han on Jan 31, 2024.