ASEAN and European Human Rights Mechanisms, What Should be Improved?

Nurhidayatuloh Nurhidayatuloh, Febrian Febrian
{"title":"ASEAN and European Human Rights Mechanisms, What Should be Improved?","authors":"Nurhidayatuloh Nurhidayatuloh, Febrian Febrian","doi":"10.22304/pjih.v6n1.a8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The human rights mentioned in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) are universal values agreed upon countries in the world. This is reflected by the fact that no state rejects the United Nations General Assembly Resolution in 1948. It is even strengthened by the ratification of two major international human rights covenants, which have binding legal powers. They are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights in 1966. European states are legally bound to human rights through the European Human Rights Convention that is signed in 1950 and come into force in 1953. On the other hand, ASEAN states are bound to human rights as parties of ICCPR, ICESCR, and their commitment to the regional level ASEAN Declaration of Human Rights. Both in European Union and ASEAN have their own human rights mechanisms: the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). This study employed a comparison method with a normative legal research approach to compare the human rights mechanisms in Europe and in ASEAN. It also deals with the implementation of human rights protection by the states in the two regional organizations. As a result, although the two regional organizations have human rights mechanisms applied in their areas, with experiences through cases appealing to European Human Rights Courts, Europe provides more assurance and legal certainty towards individuals when a state commit human rights violations against individuals. On the other hand, the AICHR, as the equal commission in ASEAN region, tends not to have sufficient legal power in handling human rights cases occurred in its territory.","PeriodicalId":404335,"journal":{"name":"PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v6n1.a8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

The human rights mentioned in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) are universal values agreed upon countries in the world. This is reflected by the fact that no state rejects the United Nations General Assembly Resolution in 1948. It is even strengthened by the ratification of two major international human rights covenants, which have binding legal powers. They are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights in 1966. European states are legally bound to human rights through the European Human Rights Convention that is signed in 1950 and come into force in 1953. On the other hand, ASEAN states are bound to human rights as parties of ICCPR, ICESCR, and their commitment to the regional level ASEAN Declaration of Human Rights. Both in European Union and ASEAN have their own human rights mechanisms: the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). This study employed a comparison method with a normative legal research approach to compare the human rights mechanisms in Europe and in ASEAN. It also deals with the implementation of human rights protection by the states in the two regional organizations. As a result, although the two regional organizations have human rights mechanisms applied in their areas, with experiences through cases appealing to European Human Rights Courts, Europe provides more assurance and legal certainty towards individuals when a state commit human rights violations against individuals. On the other hand, the AICHR, as the equal commission in ASEAN region, tends not to have sufficient legal power in handling human rights cases occurred in its territory.
东盟与欧洲人权机制,哪些有待改进?
《世界人权宣言》中提到的人权是世界各国共同认同的普世价值。没有一个国家拒绝1948年联合国大会决议这一事实反映了这一点。它甚至因批准两项具有法律约束力的主要国际人权公约而得到加强。它们是1966年的《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》和《经济、社会、文化权利公约》。通过1950年签署、1953年生效的《欧洲人权公约》,欧洲国家在法律上受到人权的约束。另一方面,东盟国家作为《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》和《经济、社会、文化权利国际公约》的缔约国,必须遵守人权,并对区域一级的《东盟人权宣言》作出承诺。欧盟和东盟都有自己的人权机制:欧洲人权法院和东盟政府间人权委员会。本研究采用比较方法和规范的法律研究方法来比较欧洲和东盟的人权机制。它还涉及各国在这两个区域组织中实施人权保护的情况。因此,尽管这两个区域组织都有适用于其领域的人权机制,并通过向欧洲人权法院上诉的案件获得了经验,但当一个国家侵犯个人人权时,欧洲向个人提供了更多的保证和法律确定性。另一方面,东盟人权委员会作为东盟地区的平等委员会,在处理其领土内发生的人权案件时往往没有足够的法律权力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信