THE ROLE OF STATES IN THE SUPERVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61837/mbuir020124087kKeywords:
International Law, Human Rights, Monitoring of Human Rights, States, Diplomatic Protection, Abuse of RightsAbstract
In addition to norms, institutes, and mechanisms for their enactment, publication, and interpretation, each legal system also has elements that provide insight into how the adopted rules are implemented and what is undertaken when it is determined that there is a discrepancy between what is prescribed and what happens in reality. This also applies when it comes to human rights law - that part of international and national law that regulates human rights. After the introductory part, the paper deals with fundamental problems concerning the concept and types of supervision over the observance of human rights, and then the concept and types of internal supervision of states over the observance of human rights. After that transboundary supervision of states over respect for human rights (the concept of cross-border supervision by states, diplomatic protection, etc.) and supervision over respect for the rights of foreign citizens - groups and individuals are discussed. In the concluding remarks, the author points out that not only do states themselves or on the initiative of other subjects exercise control over the state of human rights, provide protection of specific human rights and their holders, etc. but they also monitor the state of human rights in other countries and, when necessary, take steps within the limits of international law. The author underlines that efforts to ensure the free, complete, and safe enjoyment of human rights must not turn into some form of abuse. For better understanding, he gives a few interesting examples from contemporary practice.
References
Krivokapić B. (2011). „Klasifikacija ljudskih prava“. U: Sreto Nogo (ur.) Zaštita ljudskih prava, Tara, 155-175.
Farooq H. (1983). “Solidarity Rights: Progressive Evolution of International Human Rights Law?“. Human Rights Annual, Vol. 1, 51-74.
Freedman R. (2014). “Third generation’ rights: is there room for hybrid constructs within International Human Rights Law?”. Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, No. 4. 935-959.
Macklem P. (2015). „Human rights in international law: three generations or one?“. London Review of International Law, No. 1, 61-92.
Krivokapić B. (2014). „The Position of People in the Slave Owning ans Feudal Sosieties – The First Human Rights? Megatrend Review, No. 2, 3-34.
Кривокапич Б. (1988). „Судебный контроль за администрацией в Югославии“. Советское государство и право, No. 12, 77-85.
Кривокапић Б. (1988), „Инстанциона административна контрола као облик заштите субјективних права у Совјетском Савезу“. Одговорност, No. 2, 70-83.
Simović D., Stanković M., Petrov V. (2018). Ljudska prava. Beograd, 305-357.
Paunović M., Krivokapić B., Krstić I. (2023). Međunarodna ljudska prava. Beograd.
Krivokapić B. (2010). Enciklopedijski rečnik međunarodnog prava i međunarodnih odnosa. Beograd.
Кривокапич Б. (2019). „Злоупотребление правами человека со стороны государств“.Вестник Тверского государственного университета, серия: Право, No. 1, 170-184.
Krivokapić B. (2017). Međunarodno javno pravo. Beograd.
Shaw M. N. (2017). International Law. Cambridge University Press.
Whitten D. (1986). “The Don Pacifico Affair”. Historian, No. 2, 255–267.
Hicks G. (2004). “Don Pacifico, Democracy, and Danger: The Protectionist Party Critique of British Foreign Policy, 1850–1852”. International History Review, No. 3, 515–540.
Krivokapić B. (2023). Rat i pravo: Teorija i praksa oružanih sukoba i međunarodno pravo. Banja Luka.
Кривокапич Б. (2022). Проблемы международного права. Самара.
Borchard E. M. (1925). The Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad. New York: The Banks Law Publishing.
Milano E. (2004). „Diplomatic Protection and Human Rights before the International Court of Justice“. Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 35, 85–142.
Künzli A. (2006) “Exercising Diplomatic Protection: The Fine Line Between Litigation, Demarches and Consular Assistance”. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht,
Vol. 66, No. 2, 321-350.
Pergantis V. (2006). „Towards a ‘Humanization’ of Diplomatic Protection?“. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, Vol. 66, 351-391.
Vermeer-Künzli A. (2007). „As If: Legal Fiction in Diplomatic Protection“. European Journal of International Law, No. 1, 37-68.
Leya D. (2016). „Diplomatic Protection and Individual Rights: A Complementary Approach“. Harvard International Law Journal Online, Vol. 57, 1-14. On https://harvardilj.org/wp-content/ uploads/sites/15/January-2016_Vol-57_Leys1.pdf (January 18, 2024).
Mégret F. (2020). „The Changing Face of Protection of the States’s Nationals Abroad“. Melbourne Journal of International Law, No. 2, 1-19.
De Vattel (1844). The Law of Nations; or Principles of the Law of Nature, applied to Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns. Philadelphia: T. & J. W. Johonson.
Dugard J. (2006). “Articles on Diplomatic Protection”. United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law. On https://legal.un.org/avl/ pdf/ha/adp/adp_e.pdf (January 18, 2024).
Burgis M. (2011). „Transforming (Private) Rights through (Public) International law: Readings on a ’Strange and Painful Odyssey’ in the PCIJ Mavrommatis Case. Leiden Journal of International law, No. 4, 873-897.
Кривокапич Б. (2020). Мирное разрешение международных споров, Самара.
The Mavrommatis Jerusalem Concessions (1924). Permanent Court of International Justice, 26 March 1924, Collection of Judgments, Series A, No. 2, August 30th, 1924. On www.icj-cij.org/sites/ default/files/permanent-court-of-international-justice/serie_A/A_02/06_Mavrommatis_en_ Palestine_Arret.pdf (January 18, 2024).
Ghandhy S. (2011). “Human Rights and the International Court of Justice The Ahmadou Sadio
