THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE DIVIDE
Human rights law requires State agents to respect, protect and fulfil human
rights standards and rules established at the international, regional and
national levels.
Historically, this set of rules and the concomitant scrutiny have focused on
actions directly attributable to State agents, based on their commission
or acquiescence, such as killings, torture and arbitrary detention. The
obligation of States to respect human rights, including women’s rights,
referred to the obligation to refrain from doing anything that could violate
those rights. Any wrong committed within the private sphere, without any
direct intervention by State agents, was not considered a human rights
violation. However, since the 1980s and 1990s, the women’s rights
movement has increasingly criticized this interpretation of human rights
as perpetuating violations of women’s human rights and stemming from
male bias.
It is now recognized that the obligations of States to protect and fulfil
human rights clearly encompass the duty to protect women from violations
committed by third parties, including in the private sphere, and to take
positive steps to fulfil their human rights. The Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Discrimination against Women covers both public and
private acts. Its article 2 (e) specifically addresses the obligation of States
to address discrimination against women perpetrated by any person,
organization or enterprise, and its article 2 (f) concerns the modification
and abolition not only of discriminatory laws and regulations, but also
of customs and practices. Its article 5 (a) requires States “to modify the
social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view
to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other
practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority
of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women”.
The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women as
well as other United Nations human rights bodies and mechanisms have
observed that States have obligations to address acts committed by private
actors. In particular, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination
against Women’s general recommendation No. 19 (1992) on violence
against women spells out that “States may also be responsible for private
acts if they fail to act with due diligence to prevent violations of rights ….”
Similarly, the Human Rights Committee confirmed, in its general comment
No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on
States parties to the Covenant, that States have both negative and positive
obligations—to refrain from violating human rights and to protect as well
as fulfil human rights, including by protecting rights holders against acts
committed by private persons or entities. Under human rights law, the
due diligence standard serves to determine whether the State has taken
effective steps to comply with its human rights obligations, in particular the
obligation to protec.
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/HR-PUB-14-2.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.