Search Results

This chapter deals with the first fifteen years of General Assembly actions in the field, a period which it provided the political momentum for action. It examines first the developments leading up to the adoption by the Assembly in 1975 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture or Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It then describes the General Assembly's initiatives in developing several documents: the Body of Principles of Medical Ethics relevant to the role of health personnel, particularly physicians, in the protection of prisoners and detainees against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The chapter also briefly outlines the three major Assembly initiatives: the decision to mandate the drafting of a convention against torture or other ill-treatment; the devising of a questionnaire by means of which compliance by governments with the Declaration against Torture might be determined; and the promotion of unilateral declarations against torture and other ill-treatment.

This chapter discusses the definition of institutions and then of ideology. Ideology is a set of widely understood more or less cohesive and stable ideas about how a set of issues should be resolved and who should resolve them. It is a vehicle not just for spreading values but also for transmitting information. This information is especially valuable in contexts where actors care deeply about the future intentions of others, including international institutional politics. The chapter then assesses how this definition differs from other treatments in the international relations literature, how ideology constrains policy positions, and what global ideological debates are about. It also outlines an approach to estimate the ideological positions of states from votes in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). It evaluates the validity of this measure. For example, changes in UNGA ideal points correlate strongly with various indicators of liberalism: such as changes in government ideology, regime type, and capital openness.

It was not until the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, “the Brundtland Report” and the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development that the term “sustainable development” gained global currency. Over 7,000 delegates from 178 countries recognised a global need for environmental protection with economic and social development, and called for sustainable development. In 1997, governments met in the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Sustainable Development to review progress; they urged further development of the concept, and greater efforts for its implementation on all levels. In 2002, at the World Summit for Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, more than 22,000 official delegates gathered to call for coherence between the three pillars of sustainable development — social justice, economic growth, and environmental protection. This section briefly examines the evolution of the concept of sustainable development and its prospects beyond the “Johannesburg Summit”.

Direct comparisons between Eritrea and CIS self-determination claims are made difficult by Eritrea’s status as both a colony and a territory whose disposition was controlled by a peace treaty among the major powers—none of the CIS territories share these crucial characteristics, which in various formulations form the basis for two of the three Eritrean claims. The Eritrean case does provide useful guidance, however, on the effect of time on claims of self-determination. It may stand as a clear example of the ex injuria jus non-oritur maxim. Despite almost 30 years of effective control by Ethiopia accompanied by acquiescence by the international community, one may argue that Eritrea’s self-determination rights were not extinguished. The response to this argument is that Eritrea did not achieve independence in 1993 pursuant to a legal entitlement but rather a military victory followed by Ethiopia granting permission to secede.

This chapter identifies factors that have influenced the direction in which UNHCR has expanded and developed over its sixty years’ history. Four sets of factors are described: First, UNHCR’s Statute, which prescribes the agency’s core principles and responsibilities. Second, UNHCR’s external governing bodies, the UN General Assembly, the UN Secretary-General and the UN Security Council—all of whose requests and recommendations have allowed a gradual and significant widening of UNHCR’s mandate and operational scope. Third, the interests of states, the structure of international society, and the nature of refugee emergencies. Together, these may be denoted UNHCR’s ‘operational environment’, restricting the agency’s scope for action, limiting its range of options and forcing it to think innovatively about how to fulfil its mandatory tasks. Fourth, UNHCR’s institutional features, since an organization’s bureaucratic structure and institutionalized priorities help channel its choice of activities and sense of identity and purpose.

Acknowledging that US encouragement of Sihanouk’s anticommunist opposition had been counterproductive, the Eisenhower administration formally amended its policy in Cambodia in NSC 6012. US efforts to get along with Sihanouk were hindered by provocative South Vietnamese diplomatic and military moves—for example, a demand by the Diem regime that Cambodia renounce its claim to several small offshore islands in the Gulf of Thailand. And instead of trying to work cooperatively with Cambodia on measures to control Vietnamese communists along the border, the Diem government continued to support the Khmer Serei. In the fall of 1960, Sihanouk visited the United States but was disappointed with President Eisenhower’s noncommittal response to his request for enhanced military aid. As the leader of the Cambodian delegation at the fifteenth session of the United Nations General Assembly, he also resented the disproportionate public attention focused on the Soviet Union and other major powers.

Chapter 3 explores how global actors promote the human right to water and sanitation at the global level, the venues in which they carry out their campaigns, and the resistance they face to redefining water and sanitation as human rights. The chapter analyzes how the water justice movement works to build political will for the human right to water and sanitation in the first stage in the “moments of social transformation” model, when abstract norms become accepted as held beliefs. The analysis focuses on three venues where activists advocate for the human right to water and sanitation: the United Nations General Assembly, the Human Rights Council, and the World Water Forum. The chapter explores the mechanisms at play in these campaigns, revealing a highly contested process pitting rights promoters against powerful adversaries in the global system, including representatives from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada.