At the start of the 21st Century, conversations centered on human rights became more prevalent and complex than they had ever been before. These new complexities prompted discussions about how international institutions were affecting the advancement of human rights. Some scholars believe that certain international institutions create cyclical, damaging relationships with those most in need of human rights improvement. Others are convinced that international institutions create the only avenues applicable for the development of human rights. This validity of the argument within this paper is developed in three sections. The first section considers the definition of human rights and how they are perceived in a global view. The second section …show more content…
According to Kim (2013), “global public goods are goods whose benefits extend to all countries, people and generations without discrimination of beneficiaries” (p. 28). The structural and collective nature of human rights leads to the conclusion that they must be viewed as a public good on the global level. This reconceptualization of human rights provides more identifiable goals when attempting to advance human rights. Also, with this reformulation of thought comes an increased amount of accountability for international institutions to recognize and promote human rights in a productive …show more content…
This includes the World Bank and the IMF. In 2013, the World Bank launched a project in Ethiopia that included a process called villagization, which required the forced relocation of the indigenous people of Ethiopia (Evans, 2013). Individuals within the deliberative school of human rights, would be most appalled by this violation because they associate human rights so closely with culture, and an indigenous person being removed from his or her home infringes upon the cultural rights of that person. Sarfaty (2009), further emphasizes the importance of financial institutions recognizing culture by advising the World Bank to create policies regarding three things: the effect of its plans on human rights, a country’s ' responsibility in international human rights law, and when to interrupt operations due to human rights abuses (p. 648). Similar patterns can be seen when one evaluates the IMF. Eriksen and Soysa (2009) claim that, “their [IMF’s] loans are associated with increasing human rights, but these rights deteriorate when countries face financial crises” (p. 498). When looking towards countries like Jamaica—one that claims its economy has been severely damaged by its cooperation with the IMF—the claim made by Eriksen and Soysa begins to hold some validity. Evans (2013), makes an eloquent point that can be applied to all international financial institutions when he states that, “the
The issue of human rights has arisen only in the post-cold war whereby it was addressed by an international institution that is the United Nation. In the United Nation’s preamble stated that human rights are given to all humans and that there is equality for everyone. There will not be any sovereign states to diminish its people from taking these rights. The globalization of capitalism after the Cold War makes the issue of human rights seems admirable as there were sufferings in other parts of the world. This is because it is perceived that the western states are the champion of democracy which therefore provides a perfect body to carry out human rights activities. Such human sufferings occur in a sovereign state humanitarian intervention led by the international institution will be carried out to end the menace.
The current century has witnessed immense improvement and re-conceptualization of standards and sovereignty of human rights in Latin America. With the endemic repression and violations of human rights throughout Latin American in the mid to late 20th century, the International human rights regime, an amalgam of international and intergovernmental organizations and bodies, expanded exponentially. By conducting investigations within certain countries, or simply monitoring overt violations of human rights, the international human rights regime stimulated global awareness of violations of human rights in different countries; soon to follow was change in domestic policy in response to international policy. This also led to increased opposition by domestic NGOs against repressive governments or dictatorships largely responsible for human rights violations. Just as well, a number of organizations and groups aided domestic non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in their growing efforts to establish judicial practices that better protected human rights. Declarations, conventions, and charters, established a number of values that served as the credo for the organizations that constituted the international human rights regime. Over time, more and more countries were pressured and held accountable for these values, which developed into universal standards for human rights practices. Thus the International Human right regime and the pressure they imposed upon governments ultimately resulted in widespread positive changes in human rights.
Treaties are the highest source of international law besides jus cogens norms that have binding effect on the parties that ratify them.2 International human rights treaties rely on the “name and shame” mechanisms to pressure states to improve practices.3 However with “toothless” international human rights norms, moral coercion is not always effective. An empirical study conducted by Professor Oona Hathaway assessing the effect of human rights treaty ratification on human rights compliance, maintains in its findings that ratification of human rights treaties has little effect on state practices.4 States do not feel pressured to comply and change their practices, rather, signing treaties is “more likely to offset the pressure rather than augment it.”5 So, is it time to abandon human rights treaties and remit protection of human right to domestic institutions. Hathaway posits elsewhere that despite this treaties “remain an indispensable tool for the promotion of human rights.”6 Instead of getting rid of the treaty system, it is necessary to enhance the monitoring and enforcements mechanism to strengthen the human rights regime to ensure compliance.7 This article evaluates the extent to which international law serves as a useful tool for protection of human rights.
In this age of change, the international financial is progressing promptly on various fronts, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) play a pivotal role in international financial system. Yet at the same time, many criticisms point out that IMF are not efficient enough to react to settle the problems that have accompanied with this trend. This issue has drawn widespread attention in recent decades. This essay will give an overview about what the IMF it is first, and then put forward by some examples that what kind of role the IMF has done to address financial issues, good or bad. Finally, this essay will propose some solutions about the IMF how could it be more useful to solve the financial crisis.
On December 10th in 1948, the general assembly adopted a Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This declaration, although not legally binding, created “a common standard of achievement of all people and all nations…to promote respect for those rights and freedoms” (Goodhart, 379). However, many cultures assert that the human rights policies outlined in the declaration undermine cultural beliefs and practices. This assertion makes the search for universal human rights very difficult to achieve. I would like to focus on articles 3, 14 and 25 to address how these articles could be modified to incorporate cultural differences, without completely undermining the search for human rights practices.
the effect that the work of the IMF and the World Bank have had on the
While on one hand there is a growing consensus that human rights are universal on the other exist critics who fiercely oppose the idea. Of the many questions posed by critics revolve around the world’s pluri-cultural and multipolarity nature and whether anything in such a situation can be really universal.
The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were created as a result of the Bretton Woods Conference. Both provide assistance to countries suffering economically. While the IMF is a cooperative institution that aims to create an organized global system of payments and receipts, the World Bank is an institution that aims to help developing countries (Driscoll 1). Both play a part in the economies of struggling nations with the goal of reducing their burden and helping them to survive in the global economic system. Unfortunately, in many cases their practices within developing nations have been seen to create more harm than good. This is possibly because both institutions use a one size fits all approach when aiding countries rather than gaining a deep understanding of each country they are involved in and catering their approach as a result. In this paper I will examine the practices of the IMF and World Bank in developing nations that have led to failure and the effects the policies had on these countries.
Many critics and even followers of the IMF do not even know what the IMF really is. It is not a development or even a central bank. It is a credit union. It pays interests on deposits it receives from member nations. The IMF lends money to members having trouble meeting financial obligations to other members, but only the condition that they undertake economics reforms to eliminate these difficulties for their own good and that of the entire membership. Some people believe that if the IMF tells a country to do something, they must do it. This statement is false. The IMF has no authority over the domestic economic policies of its members. The IMF is a cooperative institution that 182 countries voluntarily joined because they see the advantage of consulting with one another to maintain a stable system of buying and selling their currencies.
There have been individuals and even countries that oppose the idea that human rights are for everybody. This argument shall be investigated in this essay, by: exploring definitions and history on human rights, debating on whether it is universal while providing examples and background information while supporting my hypothesis that human rights should be based on particular cultural values and finally drawing a conclusion. A general definition of human rights is that they are rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled, simply because they are human. It is the idea that ‘all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.’
The role that globalization plays in spreading and promoting human rights and democracy is a subject that is capable spurring great debate. Human rights are to be seen as the standards that gives any human walking the earth regardless of any differences equal privileges. The United Nations goes a step further and defines human rights as,
According to Pease (2012), an international organization are conceived as formal institutions whose members are states and these are divided into two sub-groups called intergovernmental organizations (IGO) and non-governmental organizations (NGO). An IGO consists of states that voluntarily join, contribute financially, and assist in the decision making process. All of their members’ resolves, structures, and administrative protocols are clearly outlined in the treaty or charter. An example of an IGO is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). First, all IGOs comes from an established government which can be further categorized by rules of membership which qualifies NATO because it is an alliance of about 30 members from North America and Europe. Secondly, IGOs can have limited participation in membership or restricted membership which qualifies NATO because this is a security agreement and it limits its involvement by confining it to an amalgamation of specific governmental, geographical, and martial considerations. Thirdly, IGOs are categorized by their purpose meaning the member can be multi or general purpose organization and they can take on any global issue (Pease, 2012). This qualifies NATO because over the years the organization has participated in several international war related issues such as the Korean War and the Cold War. Most recently, NATO, for the first time in history had to engage Article 5 of the treaty after the 9/11 attacks in New York City and the no-fly zone in the country of Libya.
Over the past thirty years, Human Rights Watch has become one of the most recognized non-governmental organizations in the world due to its global promotion of human rights. But despite its claims to be an advocate of international human rights law, the reports issued by Human Rights Watch over the past decade have increasingly exhibited a bias towards certain rights over others. More precisely, Human Rights Watch repeatedly focuses on political and civil rights while ignoring social and economic rights. As a result, it routinely judges nations throughout the world
The next, major international business issue is human rights. In many nations today basic human rights are not respected. In much of the developed world are basics rights are taken for granted such as freedom of speech, or freedom of movement. It is often questioned by the international business world if we should...
In 2015, President Barack Obama addressed the United Nations General Assembly and talked about the significance the United Nations has had since its creation in 1945, claiming: “This institution [U.N.] was founded because men and women who came before us had the foresight to know that our nations are more secure when we uphold basic laws and basic norms, and pursue a path of cooperation over conflict. And strong nations, above all, have a responsibility to uphold this international order.” President Obama argues that the U.N. is the glue which holds the international system together and promotes mutually beneficial outcomes for the world. The fact that an international organization (IO) such as the U.N. has endured for over 70 years is some