children "shall be protected from practices" which foster racial, religious and other forms of discrimination, and call on society to bring up children “in a spirit of understanding, tolerance, friendship among peoples, peace and universal brotherhood. . . ." These principles were developed in much greater detail in the "Declaration on the Promotion among Youth of the Ideas of Peace, Mutual Respect and Understanding between Peoples," which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1965. They are also reflected in the 1974 UNESCO Recommendation concerning Education for International Understanding, Co-Operation and Peace and Education relating to Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. IV. CONCLUSION Space limitations have allowed us to discuss only a small number of existing international human rights instruments. But this chapter would be incomplete if the reader were not at least made aware of the fact that the International Labor Organization has over the years adopted numerous conventions and recommendations relating to trade union and worker rights. The following are among the principal ILO conventions dealing with important human rights matters: Convention (No. 111) concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation (1958); Convention (No. 100) concerning Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value (1951); Convention (No.87) concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Rights to Organize (1948); and Convention (No. 98) concerning the Application of the Principle of the Right to Organize and to Bargain Collectively (1949). 25 Another area bearing significantly on international human rights that should not be overlooked is usually subsumed under the heading of humanitarian law. This is the branch of international law that has been developed to provide rules designed for the protection of combatants and civilians during military conflicts. The best known treaties dealing with this subject are the Geneva Conventions of 1949. They consist of the following four instruments: Convention for the Protection of War Victims; Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field; Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of the Armed Forces at Sea; and Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. 26 It is seldom realized, but certainly worth emphasizing, that these treaties, having been ratified by almost every nation in the world, are the most widely accepted international human rights instruments in existence today. 27 Not to be forgotten, in this context, are regional human rights instruments. The major ones are the European Convention of Human Rights and the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man; they will be analyzed in the next chapter. What, if anything, do all of these international and regional human rights instruments add up to? The answer, it is submitted, is that their adoption by the UN, its specialized agencies, and the regional governmental organizations reflects the surprisingly broad consensus that exists in the world regarding the meaning or definition of basic human rights. This does not mean, of course, that most of these rights are respected by all or even a majority of governments, or that the massive denials of human rights being committed in various parts of the world will come to an end in the near future. It does mean, however, that despite existing ideological, national and cultural barriers, the nations of the world have been able to agree, at least in principle, on the way that human beings everywhere should and should not be treated. This is an important and indispensable first step towards the actual realization of these rights. The next step- to transform principle into practice - is of course much more difficult. But the existence of a broadly-based international consensus on the meaning of human rights greatly facilitates the task. It helps arouse international public opinion against violations of human rights. And when all is said and done, this may well be the only remedy in today's world against governmental violations of human rights. Chapter Three: FOOTNOTES 1. See, e.g., UNESCO, Human Rights: Comments and Interpretations (Columbia U. Press, 1949); M. Cranston, What Are Human Rights? (New York: Tapplinger Press, 1973); D.D. Raphael (ed), Political Theory and the Rights of Man (Indiana U. Press, 1967); F. Vallat (ed), An Introduction to the Study of Human Rights (London: Europa Publications, 1970). 3. See generally, E. Schwelb, Human Rights and the International Community: The Roots and Growth of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948-1963 (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1964); L.B. Sohn, "A Short History of United Nations Documents on Human Rights," in United Nations and Human Rights, p. 39, at pp. 71-73 (18th Report of the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, New York, 1968); A.H. Robertson, Human Rights in the World, pp. 25-28 (Manchester Univ. Press, 1972); L.B. Sohn & T. Buergenthal, International Protection of Human Rights, pp. 518-22 (Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1973). 4. The Proclamation of Teheran is reproduced in the official publication Human Rights: A Compilation of International Instruments of the United Nations, pp. 18-19 (U.N. Publ. Sales No. E.73.XIV.2, 1973). The text can also be found in L.B. Sohn and T. Buergenthal, Basic Documents on International Protection of Human Rights, pp. 65-69 (Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1973). 5. See UN Secretariat, United Nations Action in the Field of Human Rights, pp. 9-15 (U.N. Publ. Sales No. E.74.XIV.2, 1974). 6. Quoted in J. Carey, UN Protection of Civil and Political Rights, p. 13, n. 18 (Syracuse Univ. Press, 1970). 7. UN Economic and Social Council, Official Records, 13th Sess., pp. 406-7 (1951), quoted in Sohn, supra note 3, at p. 106. 8. See Article 2 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 9. 10. Article 2(1) of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Part VI (Arts. 16-25) of the Covenant deals with the so-called "measures of implementation," that is, the procedures or machinery for the international supervision of the rights that it guarantees. 11. The relevant provisions are set out in Part IV (Arts. 28-45) of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. lla. See, e.g., the testimony of Martin Ennals, Secretary General of Amnesty International, before hearings of the House Subcommittee on International Organizations and Movements, International Protection of Human Rights: The Work of International Organizations and the Role of U.S. Foreign Policy, pp. 252-58 (U.S. Gov't Printing Office, 1974). See also the testimony on the same subject by Niall MacDermot, Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists, id. at pp. 2-29. 11b. The Optional Protocol provides in Article 9(2) that it shall enter into force only after ten States ratified it and if the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is also in force. When that Covenant entered into force on March 23, 1976, twelve States had already ratified the Optional Protocol, thus bringing it into effect. 12. The modern concept of genocide can be traced to a book by R. Lemkin, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, pp. 79-95 (Washington, D.C., 1944). Professor Lemkin, more than any other individual, deserves most of the credit for promoting the idea of a treaty outlawing genocide and for bringing about the adoption of the Genocide Convention. See generally, R. Lemkin, “Genocide as a Crime under International Law," American Journal of International Law, vol. 41, p. 145 (1947); N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: Its Origin and Interpretation (New York, 1949). UN Charter, Art. 94. 13. 14. E. Schwelb, "The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination," International & Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 15, p. 996, at p. 1057 (1966). On the Racial Convention generally, see Sohn & Buergenthal, supra note 3, at p. 856. See discussion on pp. 53-55 supra. 15. 16. See Charles D. Ammoun, Study of Discrimination in Education, (UN Publ. Sales No. 57.XIV.3, 1957). 17. The UNESCO Recommendation against Discrimination in Education was adopted on December 11, 1960. UNESCO, Records of the General Conference, Eleventh Session, Paris, 1960, Resolutions, p. 123. 18. UNESCO Director-General, Activities of UNESCO in Connexion with the Promotion of Human Rights, UN Doc. A/Conf. 32/10, p. 38 (1968). 19. On the operation of this system, see id. at pp. 17-18. 20. The U.S., not being a party to the Convention, has to complete the reports relating to the Recommendation. For the very informative U.S. report, see U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, United States Report to the Questionnaire on Implementation of the UNESCO Recommendation on Discrimination in Education: 1965-1971 (mimeo, Sept. 15, 1971). 21. See UNESCO General Conference, Res. 31.1 of 17 November 1972, Records of the General Conference, 17th Sess., vol. I, pp. 154-55 (1972), UNESCO General Conference, Res. 35.1 of 20 November 1974, id., 18th Sess., vol. I, pp. 139-42 (1974). 22. For an analysis of the Declaration, see U.N. Office of Public Information, Equal Rights for Women-A Call for Action: The United Nations Declaration on Discrimination against Women (1973). 23. United Nations Action on the Field of Human Rights, supra note 5, at p. 50. See, in this connection, the very valuable analysis of current international legal policies relating to sex-based discrimination by M. McDougal, H. Lasswell & L. Chen, “Human Rights for Women and World Public Opinion: The Outlawing of Sex-Based Discrimination," American Journal of International Law, vol. 69, p. 497 (1975). 24. See J. Klemesrud, “A Plan to Improve Status of Women Approved at Parley," New York Times, July 3, 1975, p. 1, col. 4. For excerpts from the text of the Action plan, see id. p. 8. 25. The treaties are reproduced in Human Rights: A Compilation of International Instruments of the United Nations, supra note 4. On the human rights work of the ILO, see C. W. Jenks, Human Rights and International Labour Standards (New York: Frederick A. Praeger, Inc., 1960); I.L.O. Director-General, The I.L.O. and Human Rights (Report presented by the International Labour Organization to the International Conference on Human Rights, 1968); E.A. Landy, The Effectiveness of International Supervision: Thirty Years of I.L.O. Experience (Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana Publications Inc., 1966). 26. The texts of these treaties are reproduced in United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 75, 1950. 27. Generally on this subject, see United Nations Action in the Field of Human Rights, supra note 5, at pp. 110-17; A.H. Robertson, Human Rights in the World, pp. 162-184 (1972); J. Pictet, Humanitarian Law and the Protection of War Victims (Leyden: A.W. Sijthoff, 1975). Other works of interest are T. Farer, The Law of War 25 Years After Nuremberg (Int'l Conciliation, No. 583, 1971); and T. Taylor, Nuremberg and Vietnam: An American Tragedy (Chicago: Quadrangle Press, 1970). The U.S. Government codification of humanitarian law is found in U.S. Department of the Army, The Law of Land Warfare (Field Manual 27-10, 1956), which can be purchased from the U.S. Government Printing Office. CHAPTER FOUR International and Regional I. INTRODUCTION In the preceding chapter we discussed the major human rights instruments of the UN and UNESCO. Some of them, notably the Covenants, the Racial Convention and the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education, provide for international controls designed either to monitor compliance by governments with their obligations under these instruments or to prod them into doing so. These controls consist for the most part of reporting procedures of one type or another. And, as we have seen, the few instruments that envisage some form of adjudication or mediation are either not yet in force or give only governments, but seldom individuals, the right to file complaints. But some more promising developments are also taking place. First, two regional organizations the Council of Europe and the Organization of American States-maintain permanent institutions for the protection of human rights. Second, the International Labor Organization - a specialized agency of the UN has developed an international machinery to protect trade union and worker rights.1 Third, the UN recently established a formal procedure that makes it possible for individuals and private groups to bring complaints documenting allegations of large-scale violations of human rights to the attention of the UN. These institutions and systems for the protection of human rights, particularly the regional systems, comprise the most advanced international human rights machinery in existence today. Unless we study these systems, we cannot hope to understand what has thus far been achieved in the international human rights field, what is possible, and what remains to be done. Since space does not permit us to discuss all international and regional institutions and techniques for the protection of human rights, we shall attempt to describe only the European and inter-American systems, and the procedures for dealing with gross violations of human rights that the UN has developed in recent years. II. THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS The European Convention of Human Rights is generally regarded as the most |