Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697748028361.pdf (India)
A Handbook on International Human Rights Conventions A Handbook on International Human Rights Conventions National Human Rights Commission India National Human Rights Commission India Under the guidance of Shri J.P. Meena, JS(P&A) and Shri B.S.
Nagar, Under Secretary (Coordination), Research & Prepared by Sonali Huria, Research Consultant, NHRC First Published : 10 December 2012 Contents Forward Introduction At a Glance: NHRC, India’s Mandate: International Conventions India’s Ratification of Core International Human Rights Treaties & Core ILO Conventions NHRC, India’s Role in the Ratification of International Conventions Core International Human Rights Conventions International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and Treaty Body International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR), Optional Protocols and Treaty Body International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Optional Protocol and Treaty Body VII 9 18 21 31 44 69 NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi 110 001, India Tel: 23385368 Fax:23384863 E-mail: covdnhrc@nic.in, Website : www.nhrc.nic.in Technical Assistance Shri J.S.
Kochher, Joint Secretary, NHRC Shir Utpal Narayan Sarkar, AIO, NHRC Printed At : AP India, D-15/1, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-20 Under the guidance of Shri J.P. Meena, JS(P&A) and Shri B.S.
Nagar, Under Secretary (Coordination), Research & Prepared by Sonali Huria, Research Consultant, NHRC First Published : 10 December 2012 Contents Forward Foreword Introduction NHRC, India’s Mandate: International Conventions At a Glance: India’s Ratification of Core International Human Rights Treaties & Core ILO Conventions NHRC, India’s Role in the Ratification of International Conventions Core International Human Rights Conventions International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and Treaty Body International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR), Optional Protocols and Treaty Body International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Optional Protocol and Treaty Body VII 9 18 21 31 44 69 (iii) NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi 110 001, India Tel: 23385368 Fax:23384863 E-mail: covdnhrc@nic.in, Website : www.nhrc.nic.in Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Optional Protocol and 87 Treaty Body Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 107 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) (CAT), Optional Protocol and Treaty Body Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Optional Protocols and Treaty Body International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICRMW) 123 153 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006 (CRPD), Optional Protocol 162 and Treaty Body International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, 2006 179 (ICPAPED) and Treaty Body Definition of Key Terms Core ILO Conventions Forced Labour Convention, 1930 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize (1948) 190 199 (iv) Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining (1949) Equal
 remuneration (1951) Abolition of Forced Labour (1957) (1958) (1999) Minimum Age Convention (1973) Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Constitutional Provisions on Human Rights & 259 Implementation of International Law NHRC, India and Implementation of International 264 Conventions Abbreviations Bibliography 208 216 225 233 243 251 290 295 298 against Women (CEDAW), Optional Protocol and Treaty Body Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, (CAT), Optional Protocol and Treaty Body Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Optional Protocols and Treaty Body International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICRMW) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006 (CRPD), Optional Protocol 162 and Treaty Body International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, 2006 179 87 123 153 190 199 Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining (1949) Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 107 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Equal remuneration (1951) Abolition of Forced Labour (1957) (1958) Minimum Age Convention (1973) Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour (1999) 208 216 225 233 243 251 Constitutional Provisions on Human Rights & 259 Implementation of International Law NHRC, India and Implementation of International 264 Conventions (ICPAPED) and Treaty Body Definition of Key Terms Core ILO Conventions Forced Labour Convention, 1930 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize (1948) Abbreviations Bibliography 290 295 298 (v) CHAIRPERSON NHRC F O R E W O R D This Handbook on International Human Rights Conventions is part of the continuous efforts made by the National Human Rights Commission of the India
 in fulfillment of its mandate under Section 12(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) to “study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation”.
A succession of international human rights treaties and other instruments adopted by the international community since 1945 have conferred legal status on human rights and made it incumbent on States to assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, protect and promote human rights.
The National Human Rights Commission, India has pursued the case for the signing and ratification of the core International Human Rights Instruments with the Government of India ever since its inception and has also reviewed the domestic laws of the country from time-to-time to ensure the implementation of these International Conventions at the national level and make certain that domestic laws are in conformity with our international human rights obligations.
The present Handbook will be of immense interest and value to all the institutions dealing with human rights issues besides students, human rights activists, NGOs, researchers, academics and other stakeholders.

The Handbook is indeed a significant contribution to the information based on international human rights law.

I hope it will be of widespread use to the readers.
Justice K. G. Balakrishnan (Former Chief Justice of India) CHAIRPERSON NHRC F O R E W O R D This Handbook on International Human Rights Conventions is part of the continuous efforts made by the National Human Rights Commission of the India in fulfillment of its mandate under Section 12(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) to “study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation”.
A succession of international human rights treaties and other instruments adopted by the international community since 1945 have conferred legal status on human rights and made it incumbent on States to assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, protect and promote human rights.
The National Human Rights Commission, India has pursued the case for the signing and ratification of the core International Human Rights Instruments with the Government of India ever since its inception and has also reviewed the domestic laws of the country from time-to-time to ensure the implementation of these International Conventions at the national level and make certain that domestic laws are in conformity with our international human rights obligations.
The present Handbook will be of immense interest and value to all the institutions dealing with human rights issues besides students, human rights activists, NGOs, researchers, academics and other stakeholders.

The Handbook is indeed a significant contribution to the information based on international human rights law.

I hope it will be of widespread use to the readers.
Justice K. G. Balakrishnan (Former Chief Justice of India) Introduction Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, irrespective of their nationality, gender, ethnicity, colour, religion, language, or any other grounds.

These rights are inherent to the human person and are inalienable and universal.

The principle of the ‘universality’ of human rights is the cornerstone of international human rights law.
This principle, first emphasized in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, 1948, has been reiterated since in numerous international human rights conventions, declarations, and resolutions.

Today, it is widely accepted that it is the duty of States to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of their populations, irrespective of their political, economic and cultural systems.
Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of covenants, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law.

International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups.
A series of international human rights treaties and other instruments adopted since 1945 have conferred legal form on human rights and have led to the development of the body of international human rights.

Other instruments have been adopted at the regional level reflecting the particular human rights concerns of the region and providing for specific mechanisms of protection.
While international treaties and customary law form the backbone of international human rights law, other instruments, such as declarations, guidelines and principles adopted at the international level contribute to its understanding, implementation and development.

Introduction Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, irrespective of their nationality, gender, ethnicity, colour, religion, language, or any other grounds.
These rights are inherent to the human person and are inalienable and universal.

The principle of the ‘universality’ of human rights is the cornerstone of international human rights law.

This principle, first emphasized in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, 1948, has been reiterated since in numerous international human and resolutions.
Today, it is widely accepted that it is the duty of States to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of their populations, irrespective of their political, economic and cultural systems.

conventions, declarations, rights Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of covenants, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law.
International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups.

A series of international human rights treaties and other instruments adopted since 1945 have conferred legal form on human rights and have led to the development of the body of international human rights.
Other instruments have been adopted at the regional level reflecting the particular human rights concerns of the region and providing for specific mechanisms of protection.

While international treaties and customary law form the backbone of instruments, such as international human rights declarations, guidelines and principles adopted at the international level contribute implementation and its understanding, development.
law, other to A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 9 International human rights law lays down obligations which States are bound to respect.

By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, protect and promote human rights.

The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights.
The obligation to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups against human rights abuses.

The obligation to promote means that States must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.

Through the ratification of international human rights treaties, Governments undertake to put into place domestic measures and legislation compatible with their treaty obligations and duties.
Where domestic legal proceedings fail to address human rights abuses, complaints or mechanisms and procedures communications are available at the regional and international levels to ensure that international human rights standards are respected, implemented, and enforced at the domestic level.
individual for International human rights instruments or treaties and other international documents relevant to international human rights law and the protection of human rights in general can be classified into two categories: 10 National Human Rights Commission, India International Human Rights Instruments Declarations Treaties Not legally binding, though they can, over time, obtain the status of customary international law.
Carry moral weight because they have been adopted by the international community International agreements concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, which come into force upon ratification by a certain number of States.

Used synonymously with ‘Covenant’ / ‘Convention’ The international human rights movement was strengthened when the United Nations General Assembly adopted of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on 10 December 1948.
Drafted as ‘a common standard of achievement for all peoples and nations', the Declaration for the first time in human history, outlined basic civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights that all human beings should enjoy.

The UDHR, together with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its two Optional Protocols, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, form the International Bill of Human Rights.
International human rights law lays down obligations which States are bound to respect.

By becoming parties to international treaties, States assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, protect and promote human rights.

The obligation to respect means that States must refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights.

The obligation to protect requires States to protect individuals and groups against human rights abuses.
The obligation to promote means that States must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights.

Through the ratification of international human rights treaties, Governments undertake to put into place domestic measures and legislation compatible with their treaty obligations and duties.
Where domestic legal proceedings fail to address human rights abuses, mechanisms and procedures for individual complaints or communications are available at the regional and international levels to ensure that international human rights standards are respected, implemented, and enforced at the domestic level.
International human rights instruments or treaties and other international documents relevant to international human rights law and the protection of human rights in general can be classified into two categories: International Human Rights Instruments Declarations Treaties Not legally binding, though they can, over time, obtain the status of customary international law.
Carry moral weight because they have been adopted by the international community International agreements concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, which come into force upon ratification by a certain number of States.

Used synonymously with ‘Covenant’ / ‘Convention’ The international human rights movement was strengthened when the United Nations General Assembly adopted of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on 10 December 1948.
Drafted as ‘a common standard of achievement for all peoples and nations', the Declaration for the first time in human history, outlined basic civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights that all human beings should enjoy.

The UDHR, together with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its two Optional Protocols, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, form the International Bill of Human Rights.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 11 The human rights treaty system has expanded enormously over the past few decades in terms of acceptance and ratification of international human rights treaties by States.

Acceptance of the treaties confers concomitant legal duties upon state actors, to protect against, prevent, and remedy human rights violations.
The treaty system establishes definitive validity of international supervision and accountability on the implementation of these treaties at the domestic level, with treaty standards serving as the benchmark for assessment.
Core International Human Rights Date of Adoption Treaties International Convention on the Elimination of 21 December 1965 All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) International Covenant on Civil and Political 16 December 1966 Rights (ICCPR) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of 18 December 1979 Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or 10 December 1984 Punishment (CAT) Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) 20 November 1989 UDHR International Bill of Human Rights ICCPR & Optional Protocols ICESCR Core International Human Rights Treaties and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) International Covenant on Economic, Social 16 December 1966 The core international human rights treaties set international standards for the protection and promotion of human rights to which States can subscribe by becoming a party to these treaties.
Each State party has an obligation to take steps to ensure that everyone within the State can enjoy the rights set out in the treaty.

There are nine core international human rights treaties which address a wide range of economic, social and cultural rights, civil and political rights, the elimination of racial and gender discrimination, protection against torture and forced disappearance and the rights of women, children, migrants, persons with disabilities.
12 National Human Rights Commission, India UDHR International Bill of Human Rights ICCPR & Optional Protocols ICESCR Core International Human Rights Treaties The core international human rights treaties set international standards for the protection and promotion of human rights to which States can subscribe by becoming a party to these treaties.

Each State party has an obligation to take steps to ensure that everyone within the State can enjoy the rights set out in the treaty.
There are nine core international human rights treaties which address a wide range of economic, social and cultural rights, civil and political rights, the elimination of racial and gender discrimination, protection against torture and forced disappearance and the rights of women, children, migrants, persons with disabilities.

The human rights treaty system has expanded enormously over the past few decades in terms of acceptance and ratification of international human rights treaties by States.
Acceptance of the treaties confers concomitant legal duties upon state actors, to protect against, prevent, and remedy human rights violations.

The treaty system establishes definitive validity of international supervision and accountability on the implementation of these treaties at the domestic level, with treaty standards serving as the benchmark for assessment.
Core International Human Rights Treaties Date of Adoption International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) 21 December 1965 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 16 December 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) 16 December 1966 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) 18 December 1979 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) 10 December 1984 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) 20 November 1989 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 13 Optional Protocols Date of Adoption Optional Protocol to the International Covenant 16 December 1966 on Civil and Political Rights Second Optional Protocol to the International 15 December 1989 Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty Optional Protocol to the Convention on the 6 October 1999 Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women Armed Conflict Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights 25 May 2000 of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights 25 May 2000 of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography Optional Protocol to the Convention against 18 December 2002 Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights 13 December 2006 of Persons with Disabilities Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 10 December 2008 International Convention on Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW) 18 December 1990 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) 13 December 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED) 20 December 2006 Optional Protocols Often, human rights treaties are followed by "Optional Protocols" which may either provide for procedures with regard to the principal treaty or address a substantive area related to the treaty.
Optional Protocols to human rights treaties are treaties in their own right, and are open to signature, accession or ratification by countries who are party to the main treaty.

An Optional Protocol to a United Nations treaty thus, is an additional document added to an existing treaty, sometimes years after the treaty has come into force.

An optional protocol can include more detail about matters that are in the original treaty or it can deal with issues that have come up since the treaty was written.
The optional protocol can add rights and obligations that were not in the original treaty and/or provide for procedures related to the principal treaty.
14 National Human Rights Commission, India International Convention on Protection of the 18 December 1990 Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW) Convention on the Rights of Persons with 13 December 2006 Disabilities (CRPD) International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance 20 December 2006 (ICPAPED) Optional Protocols Often, human rights treaties are followed by "Optional Protocols" which may either provide for procedures with regard to the principal treaty or address a substantive area related to the treaty.
Optional Protocols to human rights treaties are treaties in their own right, and are open to signature, accession or ratification by countries who are party to the main treaty.

An Optional Protocol to a United Nations treaty thus, is an additional document added to an existing treaty, sometimes years after the treaty has come into force.

An optional protocol can include more detail about matters that are in the original treaty or it can deal with issues that have come up since the treaty was written.
The optional protocol can add rights and obligations that were not in the original treaty and/or provide for procedures related to the principal treaty.
Optional Protocols Date of Adoption Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 16 December 1966 Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty 15 December 1989 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women 6 October 1999 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography 25 May 2000 25 May 2000 Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 18 December 2002 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 13 December 2006 Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 10 December 2008 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 15 Treaty Bodies Each of the core international human rights treaties has a monitoring body within the UN human rights system which monitors the implementation of the treaty provisions by its States parties.
A United Nations Treaty Body is a group of specialists or experts that is set up/established to monitor the implementation of an international treaty by its states parties.

Most treaty bodies also consider individual complaints, where a state party has recognized the competence of the committee to do so.
In addition to its obligation to implement the substantive provisions of the treaties to which it is a party, each State party is required to submit regular reports on how it has implemented a treaty’s provisions.

The relevant human rights treaty body considers these reports in the presence of a delegation of the State party and in the light of all information, including further written information provided by the State party.
The committees also receive information from United Nations agencies, National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) and civil society actors, in particular non-governmental organizations (NGOs), professional associations and academic institutions.

All of the treaty bodies are empowered to consider initial and periodic reports of states parties on how they are implementing the provisions of the treaty.

The reports that state parties are obliged to submit provide to information about implement the treaty.
The reports are considered through a public dialogue between representatives of the government concerned and members of the treaty body.

legislative and practical measures taken impeding the application of the treaty, principal subjects of concern and recommendations.
UN Treaty Body International Treaty ICCPR Human Rights Committee (HRC) Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural ICESCR Rights (CESCR) Committee on the Elimination of Racial ICERD Discrimination (CERD) Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination CEDAW Against Women (CEDAW) Committee Against Torture (CAT) CAT Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) CRC Committee on Migrant Workers (CMW) ICMRW The treaty body experts enquire on a series of issues of particular concern and on violations under the treaty to which the concerned government must respond.
The treaty body then formulates its concluding observations to the government as a collective assessment of the report, listing positive aspects as well as factors and difficulties Committee on the Right of Persons with CRPD Disabilities (CRPD) Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) ICPAPED 16 National Human Rights Commission, India Treaty Bodies Each of the core international human rights treaties has a monitoring body within the UN human rights system which monitors the implementation of the treaty provisions by its States parties.
A United Nations Treaty Body is a group of specialists or experts that is set up/established to monitor the implementation of an international treaty by its states parties.

Most treaty bodies also consider individual complaints, where a state party has recognized the competence of the committee to do so.
In addition to its obligation to implement the substantive provisions of the treaties to which it is a party, each State party is required to submit regular reports on how it has implemented a treaty’s provisions.

The relevant human rights treaty body considers these reports in the presence of a delegation of the State party and in the light of all information, including further written information provided by the State party.
The committees also receive information from United Nations agencies, National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) and civil society actors, in particular non-governmental organizations (NGOs), professional associations and academic institutions.

All of the treaty bodies are empowered to consider initial and periodic reports of states parties on how they are implementing the provisions of the treaty.
The reports that state parties are obliged to submit provide information about legislative and practical measures taken to implement the treaty.

The reports are considered through a public dialogue between representatives of the government concerned and members of the treaty body.

The treaty body experts enquire on a series of issues of particular concern and on violations under the treaty to which the concerned government must respond.
The treaty body then formulates its concluding observations to the government as a collective assessment of the report, listing positive aspects as well as factors and difficulties impeding the application of the treaty, principal subjects of concern and recommendations.
UN Treaty Body International Human Rights Committee (HRC) Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) Treaty ICCPR ICESCR Committee on Discrimination (CERD) the Elimination of Racial ICERD Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) CEDAW Committee Against Torture (CAT) CAT Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) CRC Committee on Migrant Workers (CMW) ICMRW Committee on the Right of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) CRPD Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) ICPAPED A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 17 NHRC, India’s Mandate: International Conventions The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India was established on 12 October 1993 by an Act of Parliament – the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA), 1993.
The NHRC has contributed significantly to the protection and promotion of human rights in the country through the powers accorded to it by the PHR Act, 1993.

Section 12(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) mandates the National Human Rights Commission of India to “study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation”.
this carries out function primarily The NHRC through recommendations to and discussions with the concerned Ministries of the Central Government.

The NHRC uses this power to ensure that draft bills conform to the international human rights standards that have been accepted by the Government of India.
It supplements this through a host of programmes, conferences, workshops and seminars that raise awareness, such as the workshop it organized in 2009 to highlight the problems faced by, and the steps needed to protect human rights defenders in keeping with best international practice.
In addition to pursuing the case for the signing and ratification of International Human Rights Instruments with the Government of India, the Commission also reviews the domestic laws of the country to ensure the implementation of the International Conventions at the national level and to ensure that domestic laws are in line with international human rights standards.

The Government of India usually sends to the NHRC for its comments, all draft legislation with a human rights component.
The NHRC examines these drafts, where necessary asking experts in the field for their advice, and sends its recommendations to the 18 National Human Rights Commission, India Government.

Select Committees of Parliament often refer important legislation on human rights issues to the NHRC for its comments and advice.
Apart from the mandate to study international treaties and make recommendations for their implementation, the PHR Act has accorded the following powers to the National Human Rights Commission of India: rights violations; Enquiring suo motu, or on a petition, into complaints of human Intervening in any proceeding involving any allegation of violation of human rights pending before a court with the approval of such court; Visiting jails or other institutions where persons are detained to study living conditions and make recommendations thereon; Reviewing the safeguards provided by the Constitution or laws for the protection of human rights and making recommendations for their effective implementation; Reviewing the factors, including acts of terrorism, that inhibit the enjoyment of human rights, and recommending appropriate remedial measures; and, undertaking such other functions as it may consider necessary for the protection of human rights; Assessing the functioning of public institutions, ensuring that laws are implemented in practice, and monitoring entitlements, the NHRC monitors situations where very serious violations of human rights have taken place, calling for reports from the Governments concerned, sending its own teams to investigate, framing recommendations, and monitoring compliance.
The PHR Act was amended by Parliament in 2006 to make the NHRC more effective and to give it greater powers.

The most significant amendment, to Section 18 of the Act, gave the NHRC the power, NHRC, India’s Mandate: International Conventions The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India was established on 12 October 1993 by an Act of Parliament – the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA), 1993.
The NHRC has contributed significantly to the protection and promotion of human rights in the country through the powers accorded to it by the PHR Act, 1993.

Section 12(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) mandates the National Human Rights Commission of India to “study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation”.
The NHRC carries out this function primarily through recommendations to and discussions with the concerned Ministries of the Central Government.

The NHRC uses this power to ensure that draft bills conform to the international human rights standards that have been accepted by the Government of India.
It supplements this through a host of programmes, conferences, workshops and seminars that raise awareness, such as the workshop it organized in 2009 to highlight the problems faced by, and the steps needed to protect human rights defenders in keeping with best international practice.
In addition to pursuing the case for the signing and ratification of International Human Rights Instruments with the Government of India, the Commission also reviews the domestic laws of the country to ensure the implementation of the International Conventions at the national level and to ensure that domestic laws are in line with international human rights standards.

The Government of India usually sends to the NHRC for its comments, all draft legislation with a human rights component.
The NHRC examines these drafts, where necessary asking experts in the field for their advice, and sends its recommendations to the Government.

Select Committees of Parliament often refer important legislation on human rights issues to the NHRC for its comments and advice.
Apart from the mandate to study international treaties and make recommendations for their implementation, the PHR Act has accorded the following powers to the National Human Rights Commission of India: Enquiring suo motu, or on a petition, into complaints of human rights violations; Intervening in any proceeding involving any allegation of violation of human rights pending before a court with the approval of such court; Visiting jails or other institutions where persons are detained to study living conditions and make recommendations thereon; Reviewing the safeguards provided by the Constitution or laws and making of human for recommendations for their effective implementation; the protection rights Reviewing the factors, including acts of terrorism, that inhibit recommending the enjoyment of human appropriate remedial measures; and, undertaking such other functions as it may consider necessary for the protection of human rights; rights, and implemented Assessing the functioning of public institutions, ensuring that laws are in practice, and monitoring entitlements, the NHRC monitors situations where very serious violations of human rights have taken place, calling for reports from the Governments concerned, sending its own teams and framing monitoring compliance.
recommendations, investigate, to The PHR Act was amended by Parliament in 2006 to make the NHRC more effective and to give it greater powers.
The most significant amendment, to Section 18 of the Act, gave the NHRC the power, A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 19 which it now exercises daily, to recommend to the Central or a State Government or any public authority, during and upon completion of an inquiry, that it: Make payment of compensation or damages to the complainant or to the victim or the members of his family as the Commission may consider necessary; Initiate proceedings for prosecution or such other suitable action as the Commission may deem fit against the concerned person(s); Take such further action as it may think fit.
The Commission has also achieved much by way of promoting human rights awareness at the grassroots level, which it does through human rights training programmes, conducted regularly through credible NGOs of various states, throughout the country, on various human rights issues.

The Commission regularly meets with SHRCs for better understanding of issues and to collaboratively discharge their roles in the defence of human rights in the country.
It also stays in close touch with NGOs and other civil society actors for better human rights protection.

The Core Groups on different human rights concerns that the NHRC has constituted, help tap into the experience and knowledge of experts, academics and civil society on various issues of human rights.
Further, it also engages regularly with other National Commissions such as those for Minorities, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Women, whose respective Chairpersons are also ex-officio Members of the NHRC, India.
20 National Human Rights Commission, India which it now exercises daily, to recommend to the Central or a State Government or any public authority, during and upon completion of an inquiry, that it: Make payment of compensation or damages to the complainant or to the victim or the members of his family as the Commission may consider necessary; Initiate proceedings for prosecution or such other suitable action as the Commission may deem fit against the concerned person(s); Take such further action as it may think fit.
The Commission has also achieved much by way of promoting human rights awareness at the grassroots level, which it does through human rights training programmes, conducted regularly through credible NGOs of various states, throughout the country, on various human rights issues.

The Commission regularly meets with SHRCs for better understanding of issues and to collaboratively discharge their roles in the defence of human rights in the country.
It also stays in close touch with NGOs and other civil society actors for better human rights protection.

The Core Groups on different human rights concerns that the NHRC has constituted, help tap into the experience and knowledge of experts, academics and civil society on various issues of human rights.
Further, it also engages regularly with other National Commissions such as those for Minorities, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Women, whose respective Chairpersons are also ex-officio Members of the NHRC, India.
AT A GLANCE India’s Ratification of Core International Human Rights Treaties, Optional Protocols & Core ILO Conventions Optional Protocol to the Convention India ratified the Optional Protocol on on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on 16 August 2005 the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, 2000 CORE ILO CONVENTIONS DATE OF ACCESSION / RATIFIED BY INDIA RATIFICATION Forced Labour Convention, 1930 India ratified Convention No.

29 on 30 (No.
29 on 30 (No.

29) November 1954 Equal Remuneration Convention, India ratified Convention No.

100 on 1951 (No.
100) 25 September 1958 Core International Human Rights Treaties, Optional Protocols & Core ILO Conventions Ratified by India CORE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES & THEIR OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS RATIFIED BY INDIA International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), 1965 DATE OF ACCESSION / RATIFICATION India ratified the Convention on 3 December certain reservations with 1968 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 India acceded to the Convention on 10 April 1979 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966 India acceded to the Convention on 10 April 1979 Abolition of Forced Labour India ratified Convention No.
105 on Convention, 1957 (No.

105) 18 May 2000 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 1979 India signed the Convention on 30 July 1980 and ratified it on 9 July 1993 with certain reservations 111) Discrimination (Employment and India ratified Convention No.

111 on Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No.
03 June 1960 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989 India acceded to the Convention on 11 December 1992 Convention on the Rights of Persons 2006 with Disabilities (CRPD), India ratified the Convention on 1 October 2007 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on the in Involvement of Children Armed Conflict, 2000 India ratified the Optional Protocol on 30 November 2005 22 National Human Rights Commission, India Core International Human Rights Treaties, Optional Protocols & Core ILO Conventions Ratified by India CORE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN DATE OF ACCESSION / RIGHTS TREATIES & THEIR RATIFICATION OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS RATIFIED BY INDIA International Convention on the India ratified the Convention on 3 Elimination of All Forms of Racial December 1968 with certain Discrimination (ICERD), 1965 reservations International Covenant on Civil and India acceded to the Convention on 10 Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 April 1979 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on the of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, 2000 Sale India ratified the Optional Protocol on 16 August 2005 CORE ILO CONVENTIONS RATIFIED BY INDIA DATE OF ACCESSION / RATIFICATION Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No.
29) India ratified Convention No.

29 on 30 November 1954 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No.

100) India ratified Convention No.

100 on 25 September 1958 International Covenant on Economic, India acceded to the Convention on 10 Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), April 1979 1966 Abolition Forced of Convention, 1957 (No.

105) Labour India ratified Convention No.


105 on 18 May 2000 Convention on the Elimination of All India signed the Convention on 30 July Forms of Discrimination against 1980 and ratified it on 9 July 1993 with Women (CEDAW), 1979 certain reservations Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No.

111) India ratified Convention No.
111 on 03 June 1960 Convention on the Rights of the India acceded to the Convention on 11 Child (CRC), 1989 December 1992 Convention on the Rights of Persons India ratified the Convention on 1 with Disabilities (CRPD), 2006 October 2007 Optional Protocol to the Convention India ratified the Optional Protocol on on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on 30 November 2005 the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, 2000 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 23 Core International Human Rights Treaties, Optional Protocols & Core ILO Conventions Not Ratified by India Optional Protocol to Convention on India has not signed the Optional the Elimination of All Forms of Protocol to CEDAW Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 1999 CORE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES & THEIR OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS NOT RATIFIED BY INDIA Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), 1984 on International the Rights of All Protection of Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW), 1990 Convention for the International Convention Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED) 2006 First Optional Protocol the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1989 to STATUS Optional Protocol to Convention India has not signed the Optional against Torture and Other Cruel, Protocol to CAT Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), 2002 India signed the Convention on 14 October 1997, but has not ratified it yet India has not signed the Convention India signed the ICPAPED on 6 February 2007, but has not ratified it yet India has not signed Optional Protocol I the ICCPR India has not signed Optional Protocol II the ICCPR Optional Protocol to the Convention India has not signed the CRPD on the Rights of Persons with Optional Protocol Disabilities (CRPD), 2006 CORE ILO CONVENTIONS NOT STATUS RATIFIED BY INDIA Freedom of Association and India has not ratified ILO Convention Protection of the Right to Organize No.
87 Convention, 1948 (No.

87) Right to Organize and Collective India has not ratified ILO Convention Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No.

No.

98 98) Minimum Age Convention, 1973 India has not ratified ILO Convention (No.

138) No.

138 Worst Forms of Child Labour India has not ratified ILO Convention Convention, 1999 (No.

182) No.
182 to the Protocol Optional International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 2008 India has not signed the ICESCR Optional Protocol 24 National Human Rights Commission, India Core International Human Rights Treaties, Optional Protocols & Core ILO Conventions Not Ratified by India STATUS CORE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES & THEIR OPTIONAL PROTOCOLS NOT RATIFIED BY INDIA Convention against Torture and 1984 International Convention on Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW), 1990 Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading India signed the Convention on 14 Treatment or Punishment (CAT), October 1997, but has not ratified it yet Protection of the Rights of All India has not signed the Convention International Convention for the India signed the ICPAPED on 6 Protection of All Persons from February 2007, but has not ratified it Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED) yet 2006 First Optional Protocol to the India has not signed the ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Optional Protocol I Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 Second Optional Protocol to the India has not signed the ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Optional Protocol II Political Rights (ICCPR), 1989 Optional Protocol to the India has not signed the ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Optional Protocol Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 2008 Optional Protocol to Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 1999 Optional Protocol to Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), 2002 India has not signed the Optional Protocol to CEDAW India has not signed the Optional Protocol to CAT Optional Protocol to the Convention the Rights of Persons with on Disabilities (CRPD), 2006 India has not signed Optional Protocol the CRPD CORE ILO CONVENTIONS NOT RATIFIED BY INDIA STATUS of Association and Freedom Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No.
87) India has not ratified ILO Convention No.

87 Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No.

98) India has not ratified ILO Convention No.

98 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No.

138) India has not ratified ILO Convention No.

138 Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No.

182) India has not ratified ILO Convention No.
182 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 25 NHRC, India’s Role in the Ratification of International Conventions Core International Human Rights Conventions NHRC, India’s Initiatives for Signature / Ratification / Notification of the Convention the International Convention Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), 1965 on International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 in to the Government The Commission has written to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) regarding the formal notification of the Convention by the Government of India (GOI) and continues to pursue the matter.
The Commission has reviewed and its conveyed comments on various national laws and draft bills covering the rights ICCPR.
These the enshrined include the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA); Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000; Freedom of Information Bill, 2000; Prevention of Terrorism Act, Protection from 2002 2002; Bill, Domestic Violence (Prevention, Communal Violence Control of Victims) Bill, 2005; Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929; Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006; Copyright and Bill, (Amendment) Prevention of Torture Bill, 2009, among others.
and Rehabilitation (POTA); 2010; 26 National Human Rights Commission, India International Covenant on Economic, The Commission has reviewed and Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), conveyed to the Government its 1966 comments on various national laws and draft bills covering the rights enshrined in the ICESCR including, the National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2004; Food Safety and Standard Bill, 2005; Right to Education Bill, 2005; Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 2007; Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007; and National Food Security Bill, 2010, among others.
Convention on the Elimination of All The Commission wrote to the MHA Forms of Discrimination against for the formal notification of the Women (CEDAW), 1979 CEDAW by the GOI.

The Convention was notified by the GOI on 18 September 2009 via Notification Number 1494 under S.O.2397 (E) Convention against Torture and Other The Commission has been advocating Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading for the ratification of the Convention Punishment or Treatment (CAT), 1984 Against Torture for the past several years.
Pursuant to its efforts, India signed the Convention Against Torture in 1997.

The NHRC has since pursued the matter of the ratification of the treaty with the MHA, conveyed its comments on the Draft Prevention of Torture Bill 2009 to the MHA, and has also conveyed its views to the Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha which has examined the draft.
NHRC, India’s Role in the Ratification of International Conventions Core International Human NHRC, India’s Initiatives for Rights Conventions Signature / Ratification / Notification of the Convention International Convention on the The Commission has written to the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Discrimination (ICERD), 1965 regarding the formal notification of International Covenant on Civil and The Commission has reviewed and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 conveyed to the Government its the Convention by the Government of India (GOI) and continues to pursue the matter.
comments on various national laws and draft bills covering the rights enshrined in the ICCPR.
These include the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA); Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000; Freedom of Information Bill, 2000; Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA); Protection Domestic Violence Bill, from 2002; Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005; Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929; Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006; Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010; and Prevention of Torture Bill, 2009, among others.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966 to the Government The Commission has reviewed and conveyed its comments on various national laws and draft bills covering the rights enshrined in the ICESCR including, the National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2004; Food Safety and Standard Bill, 2005; Right to Education Bill, Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 2007; Rehabilitation and and Resettlement Bill, 2007; National Food Security Bill, 2010, among others.
2005; Land Convention on the Elimination of All Forms against of Discrimination Women (CEDAW), 1979 The Commission wrote to the MHA for the formal notification of the CEDAW by the GOI.
The Convention was notified by the GOI on 18 September 2009 via Notification Number 1494 under S.O.2397 (E) Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, and Degrading Punishment or Treatment (CAT), 1984 Inhuman The Commission has been advocating for the ratification of the Convention Against Torture for the past several years.

Pursuant to its efforts, India signed the Convention Against Torture in 1997.
The NHRC has since pursued the matter of the ratification of the MHA, conveyed its comments on the Draft Prevention of Torture Bill 2009 to the MHA, and has also conveyed its views to the Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha which has examined the draft.

treaty with the A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 27 with Disabilities, the Commission recommended the ratification of the Convention by the Government of India, which ratified the said Convention on 1 October 2007.
The Commission has also advocated to the GOI for the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

A new Bill is being prepared to replace the ‘Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995’.

The NHRC has made detailed recommendations to ensure that the new law incorporates the provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED), 2006 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989 The Commission wrote to the MHA for the formal notification of the CRC by the GOI.

The Convention was notified by the GOI on 18 September 2009 via Notification Number 1494 under S.O.2397 (E).

to to the CRC by The persistent efforts of the NHRC signing and contributed the the Optional ratification of both Protocols the Government of India.
While the GOI has the Optional Protocols to the CRC, it has not notified them.

The Commission has written to the MHA regarding their formal notification, and continues to pursue the matter.

ratified both International Convention on Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW), 1990 The Commission has written to the Ministry of Labour, GOI to sign and ratify the ICMRW.

The Commission continues to pursue the matter with the GOI.
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006 The Commission played an important role in the drafting of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which was adopted by General the United Nations Assembly in December 2006.

Following the Convention on the Rights of Persons the adoption of 28 National Human Rights Commission, India Convention on the Rights of the Child The Commission wrote to the MHA (CRC), 1989 for the formal notification of the CRC by the GOI.
The Convention was notified by the GOI on 18 September 2009 via Notification Number 1494 under S.O.2397 (E).

The persistent efforts of the NHRC contributed to the signing and ratification of both the Optional Protocols to the CRC by the Government of India.

While the GOI has ratified both the Optional Protocols to the CRC, it has not notified them.

The Commission has written to the MHA regarding their formal notification, and continues to pursue the matter.
International Convention on Protection The Commission has written to the of the Rights of All Migrant Workers Ministry of Labour, GOI to sign and and Members of Their Families ratify the ICMRW.

The Commission (ICMRW), 1990 continues to pursue the matter with the GOI.
Convention on the Rights of Persons The Commission played an important with Disabilities, 2006 role in the drafting of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2006.

Following the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons the ratified with Disabilities, the Commission recommended the ratification of the Convention by the Government of India, which said Convention on 1 October 2007.
The Commission has also advocated to the GOI for the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention the Rights of Persons with on Disabilities.

A new Bill is being prepared to replace the ‘Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995’.

The NHRC has made detailed recommendations to ensure that the new law incorporates the provisions of the UN Convention on the Rights Persons with Disabilities.
of the International Convention Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPAPED), 2006 for A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 29 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination defines and condemns racial discrimination, and commits state parties to change their national laws and policies which create or perpetuate racial discrimination.
It is regarded among the most important UN Conventions for it is aimed at the achievement of one of the purposes of the United Nations which is to ICERD The Convention was adopted by the UN General Assembly through Resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 December 1965 and is aimed at promoting racial equality.
Entry into force: 4 January 1969 Signatories: 86; Parties: 175 Treaty Body: Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination India ratified the ICERD on 3 December 1968 promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.

The Convention was the first human rights instrument to establish an international monitoring system.
One of the main objectives of the Convention is to promote racial equality, which allows the various racial, ethnic, and national groups to enjoy the same social development.
Furthermore, the Convention recognizes that certain racial or ethnic groups may need special protection or may need to be assisted by special measures to achieve adequate development, and the Convention provides that such special measures shall not be International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination defines and condemns racial discrimination, and commits state parties to change their national laws and policies which create or perpetuate racial discrimination.
It is regarded among the most important UN Conventions for it is aimed at the achievement of one of the purposes of the United Nations which is to ICERD The Convention was adopted by the UN General Assembly through Resolution 2106 (XX) of 21 December 1965 and is aimed at promoting racial equality.
Entry into force: 4 January 1969 Signatories: 86; Parties: 175 Treaty Body: Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination India ratified the ICERD on 3 December 1968 promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.

The Convention was the first human rights instrument to establish an international monitoring system.
One of the main objectives of the Convention is to promote racial equality, which allows the various racial, ethnic, and national groups to enjoy the same social development.
Furthermore, the Convention recognizes that certain racial or ethnic groups may need special protection or may need to be assisted by special measures to achieve adequate development, and the Convention provides that such special measures shall not be A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 31 considered racial discrimination as long as they are not continued after the objectives for which they were taken, have been achieved.

How does the ICERD define “racial discrimination”?
Article 1 of the Convention defines “racial discrimination” as under: “…any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.” important provisions Other imperative stipulations include obliging States parties to adopt legislation to criminalize and punish the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, racial discrimination, acts of violence against any race or group of persons of another color or ethnic in such origin, and assistance activities.
incitement to The Convention the structure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, with a preamble and twenty-five articles, divided into three parts.

follows Part I (Articles 1–7) commits parties to the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination and to promoting understanding among all races (Article 2).
Parties are obliged to not discriminate on the basis of race, not to sponsor or defend racism, and to prohibit racial discrimination within their jurisdictions.

They must also review their laws and policies to ensure that they do not discriminate on the basis of race, and commit to amending or repealing those that do.

Specific areas in which discrimination must be eliminated are listed in Article 5.
32 India’s Declarations/Reservations on the ICERD "The Government of India declares that for reference of any dispute to the International Court of Justice for decision in terms of Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the consent of all parties to the dispute is necessary in each individual case."
National Human Rights Commission, India The Convention imposes a specific commitment on parties to eradicate racial segregation and the crime of apartheid within their jurisdictions (Article 3).

Parties are also required to criminalize the incitement of racial hatred (Article 4), to ensure judicial remedies for acts of racial discrimination (Article 6), and to engage in public education to promote understanding and tolerance (Article 7).
Key rights in the enjoyment of which ‘racial discrimination’ is prohibited by the ICERD Right to equal treatment before organs administering justice; Right to security of person and protection by State against violence/bodily harm; Political rights; Other civil rights, including: Right to freedom of movement, residence and nationality; Right to choice of spouse; Right to own property and inherit; Right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, opinion and expression; association; Economic, social and cultural rights: Right to work; Part II (Articles 8–16) governs reporting and monitoring of the Convention and the steps taken by the parties to implement it.
It establishes the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and empowers it to make general recommendations to the UN General Assembly.

It also establishes a dispute-resolution mechanism between parties (Articles 11–13), and allows parties to recognise the to hear complaints from individuals about violations of the rights protected by the Right to freedom of peaceful assembly and competence of the Committee Right to form and join trade unions; Convention (Article 14).
Right to housing, public health, medical care, social security, social services, education and training; Right to equal participation in cultural activities; Part III (Articles 17–25) governs ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Convention.

 Right of access to any place or service intended for use by the general public, such as transport hotels, restaurants, cafes, theatres and parks.
Prohibition of slavery The Convention contains a non- exhaustive long list of rights and freedoms in the enjoyment considered racial discrimination as long as they are not continued after the objectives for which they were taken, have been achieved.

How does the ICERD define “racial discrimination”?
Article 1 of the Convention defines “racial discrimination” as under: “…any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.” Other important provisions include imperative stipulations obliging States parties to adopt legislation to criminalize and punish the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, acts of violence against any race or group of persons of another color or ethnic origin, and assistance in such activities.
The Convention follows the structure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, with a preamble and twenty-five articles, divided into three parts.

Part I (Articles 1–7) commits parties to the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination and to promoting understanding among all races (Article 2).
Parties are obliged to not discriminate on the basis of race, not to sponsor or defend racism, and to prohibit racial discrimination within their jurisdictions.

They must also review their laws and policies to ensure that they do not discriminate on the basis of race, and commit to amending or repealing those that do.

Specific areas in which discrimination must be eliminated are listed in Article 5.
India’s Declarations/Reservations on the ICERD "The Government of India declares that for reference of any dispute to the International Court of Justice for decision in terms of Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, the consent of all parties to the dispute is necessary in each individual case."
The Convention imposes a specific commitment on parties to eradicate racial segregation and the crime of apartheid within their jurisdictions (Article 3).

Parties are also required to criminalize the incitement of racial hatred (Article 4), to ensure judicial remedies for acts of racial discrimination (Article 6), and to engage in public education to promote understanding and tolerance (Article 7).
Key rights in the enjoyment of which ‘racial discrimination’ is prohibited by the ICERD Right to equal treatment before organs administering justice; Right to security of person and protection by State against violence/bodily harm; Political rights; Other civil rights, including: Right to freedom of movement, residence and nationality; Right to choice of spouse; Right to own property and inherit; Right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, opinion and expression; Right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association; Economic, social and cultural rights: Right to work; Right to form and join trade unions; Right to housing, public health, medical care, social security, social services, education and training; Right to equal participation in cultural activities; Right of access to any place or service intended for use by the general public, such as transport hotels, restaurants, cafes, theatres and parks.
Prohibition of slavery to Part II (Articles 8–16) governs reporting and monitoring of the Convention and the steps taken by the parties to implement it.

It establishes the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and empowers it general make recommendations to the UN General Assembly.
It also establishes a dispute-resolution mechanism between parties (Articles 11–13), and allows the parties competence of the Committee to from individuals about violations of the rights protected by the Convention (Article 14).

complaints recognise hear to Part III (Articles 17–25) governs into force, ratification, entry the amendment and Convention.
The Convention contains a non- exhaustive long list of rights and freedoms in the enjoyment of A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 33 of which racial discrimination is prohibited and sought to be eliminated.

The list includes certain rights not expressly contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), such as the right to inherit and the right of access to any place or service intended for use by the general public.
It also includes rights in regard to which racial discrimination is prohibited, such as the right to work, the right to join trade unions and the right to housing.

to Article 1, The principle of non-discrimination, according Paragraph 1, of the Convention, protects the enjoyment on an equal footing of human rights and fundamental freedoms “in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life”.
The list of human rights to which the principle applies under the Convention is not closed and extends to any field of human rights regulated by the public authorities in the State party.

The reference to public life does not limit the scope of the non- discrimination principle to acts of the public administration but should be read in the light of the provisions in the Convention mandating measures by States parties racial discrimination “by any persons, group or organization”.
to address 34 National Human Rights Commission, India Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is the body of independent experts that monitors the implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) by its State parties.
All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the CERD on how the rights contained in the Convention are being implemented.

States are initially required to report a year after acceding to the Convention and then every two years.

The Committee examines each report and informs the State party of its recommendations and concerns in the “concluding observations”.
In addition to the reporting procedure, the Convention establishes three other mechanisms through which the CERD performs its monitoring functions: 1.

Early-warning procedure; 2.

Examination of inter-state complaints; and 3.

Examination of individual complaints The Committee has 18 independent experts who are elected for a term of four years by the State parties.
Elections for nine of the eighteen members are held every two years ensuring a balance between continuity and change in the composition of the Committee.

The CERD also publishes its interpretation of the content of human rights provisions, known as General Recommendations (or General Comments), on thematic issues, and organizes thematic discussions.

The Committee meets in Geneva and normally holds two sessions per year comprising three weeks each.
In the exercise of its supervisory functions under the Convention, the Committee receives: of which racial discrimination is prohibited and sought to be eliminated.

The list includes certain rights not expressly contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), such as the right to inherit and the right of access to any place or service intended for use by the general public.
It also includes rights in regard to which racial discrimination is prohibited, such as the right to work, the right to join trade unions and the right to housing.

The principle of non-discrimination, according to Article 1, Paragraph 1, of the Convention, protects the enjoyment on an equal footing of human rights and fundamental freedoms “in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life”.
The list of human rights to which the principle applies under the Convention is not closed and extends to any field of human rights regulated by the public authorities in the State party.

The reference to public life does not limit the scope of the non- discrimination principle to acts of the public administration but should be read in the light of the provisions in the Convention mandating measures by States parties to address racial discrimination “by any persons, group or organization”.
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is the body of independent experts that monitors the implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) by its State parties.

the rights contained All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the CERD on how the Convention are being implemented.
States are initially required to report a year after acceding to the Convention and then every two years.

The Committee examines each report and informs the State party of its recommendations and concerns in the “concluding observations”.

in In addition to the reporting procedure, the Convention establishes three other mechanisms through which the CERD performs its monitoring functions: 1.

Early-warning procedure; 2.

Examination of inter-state complaints; and 3.


Examination of individual complaints The Committee has 18 independent experts who are elected for a term of four years by the State parties.

Elections for nine of the eighteen members are held every two years ensuring a balance between continuity and change in the composition of the Committee.
The CERD also publishes its interpretation of the content of human rights provisions, known as General Recommendations (or General Comments), on thematic issues, and organizes thematic discussions.

The Committee meets in Geneva and normally holds two sessions per year comprising three weeks each.
In the exercise of its supervisory functions under the Convention, the Committee receives: A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 35 Reports on measures adopted by States parties to give effect to International Convention on the Elimination of All their obligations under the Convention; Optional individual communications; and Optional inter-State complaints Some of the core functions of the CERD include: Considering the periodic reports submitted by the States on how they how they are implementing the obligations they have assumed by ratifying the Convention.
CERD examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of "concluding observations".

 Receiving and considering individual complaints, also known individuals who claim as violations of their Convention rights by a State party.

"communications", made by Considering certain complaints made by a State party that another State party is not abiding by the obligations assumed under the Convention.
Making general recommendations and comments.

 Informing the General Assembly of its activities.

CERD also includes in its regular agenda ‘preventive measures’, which include early-warning aimed at preventing existing situations escalating into conflicts and urgent procedures to respond to problems requiring immediate attention to prevent or limit the scale or number of serious violations of the Convention.
36 National Human Rights Commission, India Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Antigua and Barbuda Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 11 May 1994 a 14 Feb 1972 22 Sep 2006 25 Oct 1988 d 2 Oct 1968 23 Jun 1993 a 30 Sep 1975 9 May 1972 16 Aug 1996 a 5 Aug 1975 d 27 Mar 1990 a 11 Jun 1979 a 8 Nov 1972 a 8 Apr 1969 7 Aug 1975 14 Nov 2001 30 Nov 2001 22 Sep 1970 16 Jul 1993 d 20 Feb 1974 a 27 Mar 1968 9 Dec 1966 5 Aug 2002 13 Jul 1967 13 Oct 1966 22 Jul 1969 7 Mar 1966 17 Aug 1967 6 Sep 2000 2 Feb 1967 26 Mar 1973 7 Mar 1966 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 7 Jun 1966 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 Jun 1966 8 Aug 1966 Reports on measures adopted by States parties to give effect to their obligations under the Convention; Optional individual communications; and Optional inter-State complaints Some of the core functions of the CERD include: Considering the periodic reports submitted by the States on how they how they are implementing the obligations they have assumed by ratifying the Convention.
CERD examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of "concluding observations".

 Receiving and considering individual complaints, also known as "communications", made by individuals who claim violations of their Convention rights by a State party.

 Considering certain complaints made by a State party that another State party is not abiding by the obligations assumed under the Convention.
Making general recommendations and comments.

 Informing the General Assembly of its activities.

CERD also includes in its regular agenda ‘preventive measures’, which include early-warning aimed at preventing existing situations escalating into conflicts and urgent procedures to respond to problems requiring immediate attention to prevent or limit the scale or number of serious violations of the Convention.
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Signature 9 Dec 1966 5 Aug 2002 13 Jul 1967 13 Oct 1966 22 Jul 1969 7 Mar 1966 17 Aug 1967 6 Sep 2000 2 Feb 1967 26 Mar 1973 7 Jun 1966 7 Mar 1966 1 Jun 1966 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 11 May 1994 a 14 Feb 1972 22 Sep 2006 25 Oct 1988 d 2 Oct 1968 23 Jun 1993 a 30 Sep 1975 9 May 1972 16 Aug 1996 a 5 Aug 1975 d 27 Mar 1990 a 11 Jun 1979 a 8 Nov 1972 a 8 Apr 1969 7 Aug 1975 14 Nov 2001 30 Nov 2001 22 Sep 1970 16 Jul 1993 d 20 Feb 1974 a 27 Mar 1968 8 Aug 1966 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 37 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Burkina Faso Albania Burundi Algeria Cambodia Andorra Cameroon Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Canada Armenia Australia Cape Verde Central African Republic Austria Azerbaijan Chad Bahamas Chile Bahrain China Bangladesh Colombia Barbados Belarus Comoros Belgium Congo Costa Rica Belize Benin Côte d'Ivoire Bhutan Croatia Cuba Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Cyprus Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Czech Republic Brazil Democratic Republic of the Congo Bulgaria Denmark Djibouti Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt 1 Feb 1967 9 Dec 1966 12 Apr 5 Aug 1966 2002 12 Dec 1966 13 Jul 1967 24 Aug 1966 13 Oct 1966 7 Mar 22 Jul 1969 1966 3 Oct 1966 23 Mar 1967 7 Mar 22 Sep 1966 2000 17 Aug 1967 14 Mar 6 Sep 2000 1966 2 Feb 1967 26 Mar 1973 7 Jun 1966 7 Jun 1966 12 Dec 1966 7 Mar 1966 1 Jun 1966 21 Jun 1966 14 Jun 2006 28 Sep 1966
 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 18 Jul 1974 a 11 May 1994 a 27 Oct 1977 14 Feb 1972 28 Nov 1983 22 Sep 2006 24 Jun 1971 25 Oct 1988 d 2 Oct 1968 14 Oct 1970 23 Jun 1993 a 30 Sep 1975 3 Oct 1979 a 16 Mar 1971 9 May 1972 16 Aug 1996 a 17 Aug 1977 a 5 Aug 1975 d 20 Oct 1971 27 Mar 1990 a 29 Dec 1981 a 11 Jun 1979 a 2 Sep 1981 8 Nov 1972 a 8 Apr 1969 27 Sep 2004 7 Aug 1975 11 Jul 1988 a 16 Jan 1967 14 Nov 2001 30 Nov 2001 4 Jan 1973 a 12 Oct 1992 d 15 Feb 1972 22 Sep 1970 21 Apr 1967 16 Jul 1993 d 20 Feb 1974 a 22 Feb 1993 d 27 Mar 1968 21 Apr 1976 a 8 Aug 1966 9 Dec 1971 30 Sep 2011 25 May 1983 a 22 Sep 1966 a 1 May 1967 38 National Human Rights Commission, India El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Holy See Honduras Hungary Iceland India 30 Nov 1979 a 8 Oct 2002 a 31 Jul 2001 a 21 Oct 1991 a 23 Jun 1976 a 11 Jan 1973 d 14 Jul 1970 28 Jul 1971 a 29 Feb 1980 29 Dec 1978 a 2 Jun 1999 a 16 May 1969 8 Sep 1966 18 Jun 1970 18 Jan 1983 14 Mar 1977 1 Nov 2010 15 Feb 1977 19 Dec 1972 1 May 1969 10 Oct 2002 a 4 May 1967 13 Mar 1967 3 Dec 1968 6 Oct 1966 20 Sep 1966 10 Feb 1967 8 Sep 1966 8 Sep 1967 7 Mar 1966 17 Dec 1981 24 Mar 1966 12 Sep 2000 11 Dec 1968 30 Oct 1972 21 Nov 1966 15 Sep 1966 14 Nov 1966 2 Mar 1967 Cape Verde Central African Republic Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Ecuador Egypt Dominican Republic 1 Feb 1967 12 Apr 1966 12 Dec 1966 24 Aug 1966 7 Mar 1966 3 Oct 1966 23 Mar 1967 22 Sep 2000 14 Mar 1966 7 Jun 1966 12 Dec 1966 21 Jun 1966 14 Jun 2006 28 Sep 1966 18 Jul 1974 a 27 Oct 1977 28 Nov 1983 24 Jun 1971 14 Oct 1970 3 Oct 1979 a 16 Mar 1971 17 Aug 1977 a 20 Oct 1971 29 Dec 1981 a 2 Sep 1981 27 Sep 2004 11 Jul 1988 a 16 Jan 1967 4 Jan 1973 a 12
 Oct 1992 d 15 Feb 1972 21 Apr 1967 22 Feb 1993 d 21 Apr 1976 a 9 Dec 1971 30 Sep 2011 25 May 1983 a 22 Sep 1966 a 1 May 1967 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan El Salvador Albania Equatorial Guinea Algeria Eritrea Andorra Estonia Ethiopia Antigua and Barbuda Fiji Argentina Finland Armenia France Australia Gabon Austria Gambia Azerbaijan Georgia Bahamas Germany Bahrain Bangladesh Ghana Barbados Greece Belarus Grenada Belgium Guatemala Belize Guinea Benin Bhutan Guinea-Bissau Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Guyana Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Haiti Brazil Holy See Bulgaria Honduras Hungary Iceland India 9 Dec 1966 5 Aug 2002 13 Jul 1967 6 Oct 1966 13 Oct 20 Sep 1966 1966 22 Jul 1969 10 Feb 1967 8 Sep 1966 7 Mar 7 Mar 1966 1966 17 Dec 17 Aug 1981 1967 8 Sep 1967 6 Sep 2000 24 Mar 2 Feb 1967 1966 26 Mar 12 Sep 1973 2000 7 Jun 1966 11 Dec 1968 30 Oct 7 Mar 1972 1966 21 Nov 1 Jun 1966 1966 15 Sep 1966 14 Nov 1966 2 Mar 1967 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 30 Nov 1979 a 11 May 1994 a 8 Oct 2002 a 14 Feb 1972 31 Jul 2001 a 22 Sep 2006 21 Oct 1991 a 23 Jun 1976 a 25 Oct 1988 d 11 Jan 1973 d 2 Oct 1968 14 Jul 1970 23 Jun 1993 a 28 Jul 1971 a 30 Sep 1975 29 Feb 1980 9 May 1972 29 Dec 1978 a 16 Aug 1996 a 2 Jun 1999 a 5 Aug 1975 d 16 May 1969 27 Mar 1990 a 11 Jun 1979 a 8 Sep 1966 8 Nov 1972 a 18 Jun 1970 8 Apr 1969 7 Aug 1975 18 Jan 1983 14 Nov 2001 14 Mar 1977 30 Nov 2001 1 Nov 2010 22 Sep 1970 15 Feb 1977 16 Jul 1993 d 20 Feb 1974 a 19 Dec 1972 27 Mar 1968 1 May 1969 8 Aug 1966 10 Oct 2002 a 4 May 1967 13 Mar 1967 3 Dec 1968 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 39 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website
 http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Indonesia Albania Iran (Islamic Republic of) Algeria Andorra Iraq Antigua and Barbuda Ireland Argentina Armenia Israel Australia Italy Austria Azerbaijan Jamaica Bahamas Bahrain Japan Bangladesh Jordan Barbados Kazakhstan Belarus Kenya Kuwait Belgium Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Belize Republic Benin Latvia Bhutan Lebanon Lesotho Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Liberia Bosnia and Herzegovina Libya Botswana Liechtenstein Brazil Lithuania Luxembourg Bulgaria Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania 8 Mar 9 Dec 1966 1967 5 Aug 18 Feb 2002 1969 21 Mar 13 Jul 1967 1968 7 Mar 13 Oct 1966 1966 13 Mar 22 Jul 1969 1968 14 Aug 1966 7 Mar 1966 17 Aug 1967 6 Sep 2000 2 Feb 1967 26 Mar 1973 7 Jun 1966 7 Mar 8 Jun 1998 1966 12 Dec 1 Jun 1966 1967 18 Dec 1967 5 Sep 1968 21 Dec 1966 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 25 Jun 1999 a 11 May 1994 a 29 Aug 1968 14 Feb 1972 22 Sep 2006 14 Jan 1970 25 Oct 1988 d 29 Dec 2000 2 Oct 1968 23 Jun 1993 a 3 Jan 1979 30 Sep 1975 5 Jan 1976 9 May 1972 16 Aug 1996 a 4 Jun 1971 5 Aug 1975 d 27 Mar 1990 a 15 Dec 1995 a 11 Jun 1979 a 30 May 1974 a 8 Nov 1972 a 26 Aug 1998 a 8 Apr 1969 13 Sep 2001 a 15 Oct 1968 a 7 Aug 1975 5 Sep 1997 a 22 Feb 1974 a 14 Nov 2001 30 Nov 2001 14 Apr 1992 a 12 Nov 1971 a 4 Nov 1971 a 22 Sep 1970 5 Nov 1976 a 16 Jul 1993 d 3 Jul 1968 a 20 Feb 1974 a 1 Mar 2000 a 27 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1998 1 May 1978 8 Aug 1966 7 Feb 1969 11 Jun 1996 a 24 Apr 1984 a 16 Jul 1974 a 27 May 1971 13 Dec 1988 40 National Human Rights Commission, India Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland 1 Nov 1966 3 May 1966 18 Sep 1967 12 Nov 2001 24 Oct 1966 25 Oct 1966 14 Mar 1966 21 Nov 1966 19 Sep 1966 20 Sep 2011 8 Dec 1966 13 Sep 2000 22 Jul 1966 7 Mar 1966 7 Mar 1966 30 May 1972 a 20 Feb
 1975 27 Sep 1995 a 6 Aug 1969 23 Oct 2006 d 18 Dec 1970 18 Apr 1983 a 11 Nov 1982 a 30 Jan 1971 a 10 Dec 1971 22 Nov 1972 15 Feb 1978 a 27 Apr 1967 16 Oct 1967 a 6 Aug 1970 2 Jan 2003 a 21 Sep 1966 16 Aug 1967 27 Jan 1982 a 18 Aug 2003 29 Sep 1971 15 Sep 1967 5 Dec 1968 Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lao People's Democratic Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania 8 Mar 1967 18 Feb 1969 21 Mar 1968 7 Mar 1966 13 Mar 1968 14 Aug 1966 8 Jun 1998 12 Dec 1967 18 Dec 1967 5 Sep 1968 21 Dec 1966 25 Jun 1999 a 29 Aug 1968 14 Jan 1970 29 Dec 2000 3 Jan 1979 5 Jan 1976 4 Jun 1971 15 Dec 1995 a 30 May 1974 a 26 Aug 1998 a 13 Sep 2001 a 15 Oct 1968 a 5 Sep 1997 a 22 Feb 1974 a 14 Apr 1992 a 12 Nov 1971 a 4 Nov 1971 a 5 Nov 1976 a 3 Jul 1968 a 1 Mar 2000 a 10 Dec 1998 1 May 1978 7 Feb 1969 11 Jun 1996 a 24 Apr 1984 a 16 Jul 1974 a 27 May 1971 13 Dec 1988 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Mauritius Albania Mexico Algeria Andorra Monaco Mongolia Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Montenegro Armenia Morocco Australia Mozambique Austria Namibia Azerbaijan Nauru Bahamas Bahrain Nepal Bangladesh Netherlands Barbados Belarus New Zealand Belgium Nicaragua Niger Belize Benin Nigeria Bhutan Norway Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Oman Bosnia and Herzegovina Pakistan Botswana Brazil Palau Bulgaria Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland 1 Nov 9 Dec 1966 1966 5 Aug 2002 3 May 1966 13 Jul 1967 18 Sep 13 Oct 1967 1966 22 Jul 1969 12 Nov 2001 24 Oct 1966 7 Mar 25 Oct 1966 1966 17 Aug 1967 14 Mar 6 Sep 2000 1966 2 Feb 1967 26 Mar 21 Nov 1973 1966 7 Jun 1966 19 Sep 1966 7 Mar 20 Sep 1966 2011 1 Jun 1966 8 Dec 1966 13 Sep
 2000 22 Jul 1966 7 Mar 1966 7 Mar 1966 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 30 May 1972 a 11 May 1994 a 20 Feb 1975 14 Feb 1972 22 Sep 2006 27 Sep 1995 a 6 Aug 1969 25 Oct 1988 d 2 Oct 1968 23 Oct 2006 d 23 Jun 1993 a 18 Dec 1970 30 Sep 1975 18 Apr 1983 a 9 May 1972 11 Nov 1982 a 16 Aug 1996 a 5 Aug 1975 d 27 Mar 1990 a 30 Jan 1971 a 11 Jun 1979 a 10 Dec 1971 8 Nov 1972 a 8 Apr 1969 22 Nov 1972 7 Aug 1975 15 Feb 1978 a 27 Apr 1967 14 Nov 2001 30 Nov 2001 16 Oct 1967 a 6 Aug 1970 22 Sep 1970 2 Jan 2003 a 16 Jul 1993 d 21 Sep 1966 20 Feb 1974 a 27 Mar 1968 8 Aug 1966 16 Aug 1967 27 Jan 1982 a 18 Aug 2003 29 Sep 1971 15 Sep 1967 5 Dec 1968 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 41 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Portugal Albania Qatar Algeria Republic of Korea Andorra Republic of Moldova Antigua and Barbuda Romania Argentina Russian Federation Armenia Australia Rwanda San Marino Austria Azerbaijan Sao Tome and Principe Bahamas Saudi Arabia Bahrain Senegal Bangladesh Serbia Barbados Seychelles Belarus Sierra Leone Belgium Slovakia Slovenia Belize Solomon Islands Benin Somalia Bhutan South Africa Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Spain Bosnia and Herzegovina Sri Lanka Botswana St. Kitts and Nevis Brazil St. Lucia St. Vincent and the Grenadines Bulgaria Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan 9 Dec 1966 8 Aug 5 Aug 1978 2002 13 Jul 1967 7 Mar 1966 13 Oct 1966 11 Dec 22 Jul 1969 2001 6 Sep 2000 22 Jul 1968 7 Mar 17 Nov 1966 1966 17 Aug 1967 6 Sep 2000 2 Feb 1967 26 Jan 26 Mar 1967 1973 3 Oct 1994 7 Jun 1966 7 Mar 1966 1 Jun 1966 5 May 1966 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 24 Aug 1982 a 11 May 1994 a 22 Jul 1976 a 14 Feb 1972 5 Dec 1978 22 Sep 2006 26 Jan 1993 a 25 Oct 1988 d 15 Sep 1970 a 2 Oct
 1968 4 Feb 1969 23 Jun 1993 a 30 Sep 1975 16 Apr 1975 a 12 Mar 2002 9 May 1972 16 Aug 1996 a 5 Aug 1975 d 23 Sep 1997 a 27 Mar 1990 a 19 Apr 1972 11 Jun 1979 a 12 Mar 2001 d 8 Nov 1972 a 7 Mar 1978 a 8 Apr 1969 2 Aug 1967 7 Aug 1975 28 May 1993 d 6 Jul 1992 d 14 Nov 2001 17 Mar 1982 d 30 Nov 2001 26 Aug 1975 10 Dec 1998 22 Sep 1970 13 Sep 1968 a 16 Jul 1993 d 18 Feb 1982 a 20 Feb 1974 a 13 Oct 2006 a 27 Mar 1968 14 Feb 1990 d 9 Nov 1981 a 8 Aug 1966 21 Mar 1977 a 15 Mar 1984 d 7 Apr 1969 a 6 Dec 1971 29 Nov 1994 a 21 Apr 1969 a 11 Jan 1995 a 42 National Human Rights Commission, India The former Yugoslav Republic of Trinidad and Tobago 9 Jun 1967 United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain 11 Oct and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 21 Apr Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 12 Apr 1966 13 Oct 1972 7 Mar 1966 1966 28 Sep 1966 21 Feb 1967 1967 11 Oct 1968 28 Jan 2003 a 18 Jan 1994 d 16 Apr 2003 a 1 Sep 1972 a 16 Feb 1972 a 4 Oct 1973 13 Jan 1967 16 Sep 2002 29 Sep 1994 a 21 Nov 1980 a 7 Mar 1969 20 Jun 1974 a 7 Mar 1969 27 Oct 1972 a 21 Oct 1994 30 Aug 1968 28 Sep 1995 a 10 Oct 1967 9 Jun 1982 a 18 Oct 1972 a 4 Feb 1972 13 May 1991 a Portugal Qatar Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Sao Tome and Principe Rwanda San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan St. Vincent and the Grenadines 8 Aug 1978 7 Mar 1966 11 Dec 2001 6 Sep 2000 22 Jul 1968 17 Nov 1966 26 Jan 1967 3 Oct 1994 5 May 1966 24 Aug 1982 a 22 Jul 1976 a 5 Dec 1978 26 Jan 1993 a 15 Sep 1970 a 4 Feb 1969 16 Apr 1975 a 12 Mar 2002 23 Sep 1997 a 19 Apr 1972 12 Mar 2001 d 7 Mar 1978 a 2 Aug 1967 28 May 1993 d 6
 Jul 1992 d 17 Mar 1982 d 26 Aug 1975 10 Dec 1998 13 Sep 1968 a 18 Feb 1982 a 13 Oct 2006 a 14 Feb 1990 d 9 Nov 1981 a 21 Mar 1977 a 15 Mar 1984 d 7 Apr 1969 a 6 Dec 1971 29 Nov 1994 a 21 Apr 1969 a 11 Jan 1995 a International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Thailand Albania The former Yugoslav Republic of Algeria Macedonia Andorra Timor-Leste Togo Antigua and Barbuda Tonga Argentina Trinidad and Tobago Armenia Tunisia Australia Turkey Austria Azerbaijan Turkmenistan Bahamas Uganda Bahrain Ukraine Bangladesh Barbados United Arab Emirates Belarus United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Belgium United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Belize Benin Uruguay Bhutan Uzbekistan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Bosnia and Herzegovina of) Botswana Viet Nam Brazil Yemen Zambia Bulgaria Zimbabwe 9 Dec 1966 5 Aug 2002 13 Jul 1967 9 Jun 1967 12 Apr 13 Oct 1966 1966 13 Oct 22 Jul 1969 1972 7 Mar 1966 7 Mar 11 Oct 1966 1966 17 Aug 1967 28 Sep 6 Sep 2000 1966 2 Feb 1967 21 Feb 26 Mar 1967 1973 7 Jun 1966 21 Apr 1967 7 Mar 1966 11 Oct 1 Jun 1966 1968 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 6 Jul 1983 a 28 Jan 2003 a 11 May 1994 a 18 Jan 1994 d 14 Feb 1972 22 Sep 2006 16 Apr 2003 a 1 Sep 1972 a 25 Oct 1988 d 16 Feb 1972 a 2 Oct 1968 4 Oct 1973 23 Jun 1993 a 13 Jan 1967 30 Sep 1975 16 Sep 2002 9 May 1972 16 Aug 1996 a 29 Sep 1994 a 5 Aug 1975 d 21 Nov 1980 a 27 Mar 1990 a 7 Mar 1969 11 Jun 1979 a 8 Nov 1972 a 20 Jun 1974 a 8 Apr 1969 7 Mar 1969 7 Aug 1975 27 Oct 1972 a 21 Oct 1994 14 Nov 2001 30 Nov 2001 30 Aug 1968 28 Sep 1995 a 22 Sep 1970 10 Oct 1967 16 Jul 1993 d 20 Feb 1974 a 9 Jun 1982 a 27 Mar 1968 18 Oct 1972 a 4 Feb 1972 8 Aug 1966 13 May 1991 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 43 International Covenant on Civil and Political
 Rights (ICCPR) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a multilateral treaty adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 1966 and opened for signature at New York on 19 December 1966.
It commits its parties to respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the right of self- determination, right to life, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, electoral rights and rights to due process and a fair trial.

The Covenant elaborates further the civil and political rights and freedoms listed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
ICCPR It commits its member states to defend the right to life and stipulates that no individual can be subjected to torture, enslavement, forced labour and arbitrary detention or be restricted from such freedoms as movement, expression and association.

Entry into force: 23 March 1976 Signatories: 72 Parties: 167 Treaty Body: Human Rights Committee (HRC) India acceded to the ICCPR on 10 April 1979.

The Covenant is divided into six major Parts.


Part I (Article 1) recognises the right of all people to self- determination, including the right to ‘freely determine their political status, pursue their economic, social and cultural goals, and manage and dispose off their own resources.
It recognises the right of people not to be deprived of means of subsistence, and imposes an obligation on those parties still responsible for non-self governing and trust territories (colonies) to encourage and respect their self- determination.
44 National Human Rights Commission, India Key Civil and Political Rights recognized by ICCPR Right to Life Protection against Arbitrary Detention/Arrest, Slavery, Torture and Inhuman Treatment Equality before the Law and Non-discriminatory Protection of the Law Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Religion, Movement & Association Right to participate in the political process Minority Rights Part II (Articles 2 – 5) obliges parties to legislate where necessary to give effect to the rights recognised in the Covenant, and to provide an effective legal remedy for any violation of those rights.
It also requires the rights be recognised "without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status," and to ensure that they are enjoyed equally by women.
The rights can only be limited "in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation," and even then no derogation is permitted from the rights to life, freedom from torture and slavery, the freedom from retrospective law, the right to personhood, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

Part III (Articles 6 – 27), often described as the heart of the Covenant, it lists the substantive rights and fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Convention.
These provisions also stipulate the narrow confines within which the death penalty may legitimately be imposed in States parties where that penalty has not been abolished.

Specific prohibitions are set out concerning torture, unauthorized medical experimentation, slavery and forced labour.
The rights of a International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is a multilateral treaty adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 1966 and opened for signature at New York on 19 December 1966.
It commits its parties to respect the civil and political rights of individuals, including the right of self- determination, right to life, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, electoral rights and rights to due process and a fair trial.

The Covenant elaborates further the civil and political rights and freedoms listed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
ICCPR It commits its member states to defend the right to life and stipulates that no individual can be subjected to torture, enslavement, forced labour and arbitrary detention or be restricted from such freedoms as movement, expression and association.

Entry into force: 23 March 1976 Signatories: 72 Parties: 167 Treaty Body: Human Rights Committee (HRC) India acceded to the ICCPR on 10 April 1979.

The Covenant is divided into six major Parts.


Part I (Article 1) recognises the right of all people to self- determination, including the right to ‘freely determine their political status, pursue their economic, social and cultural goals, and manage and dispose off their own resources.
It recognises the right of people not to be deprived of means of subsistence, and imposes an obligation on those parties still responsible for non-self governing and trust territories (colonies) to encourage and respect their self- determination.
Key Civil and Political Rights recognized by ICCPR Right to Life Protection against Arbitrary Detention/Arrest, Slavery, Torture and Inhuman Treatment Equality before the Law and Non-discriminatory Protection of the Law Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Religion, Movement & Association Right to participate in the political process Minority Rights in recognised Part II (Articles 2 – 5) obliges parties to legislate where necessary to give effect to the the rights Covenant, and to provide an effective legal remedy for any violation of those rights.
It also requires the rights be recognised "without distinction of any kind, sex, such as language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status," and to ensure that they are enjoyed equally by women.
colour, race, The rights can only be limited "in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation," and even then no derogation is permitted from the rights to life, freedom from torture and slavery, the freedom from retrospective law, the right to personhood, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

Part III (Articles 6 – 27), often described as the heart of the Covenant, it lists the substantive rights and fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Convention.
These provisions also stipulate the narrow confines within which the death penalty may legitimately be imposed in States parties where that penalty has not been abolished.

Specific prohibitions are set out concerning torture, unauthorized medical experimentation, slavery and forced labour.

The rights of a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 45 person in the context of deprivation of liberty, commonly by arrest, and in detention are also covered.
These include: Right to physical integrity, in the form of the right to life and freedom from torture and slavery (Articles 6, 7, and 8); Liberty and security of the person, in the form of freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention and the right to habeas corpus (Articles 9 – 11); Procedural fairness in law, in the form of rights to due process, a fair and impartial trial, the presumption of innocence, and recognition as a person before the law (Articles 14, 15, and 16); Individual liberty, in the form of the freedoms of movement, thought, conscience and religion, speech, association and assembly, family rights, the right to a nationality, and the right to privacy (Articles 12, 13, 17 – 24); Prohibition of any propaganda for war as well as advocacy of national or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence by law (Article 20); Political participation, including the right to join a political party and the right to vote (Article 25); Non-discrimination, minority rights and equality before the law (Articles 26 and 27).
Part IV (Articles 28 – 45) governs the establishment and operation of the Human Rights Committee, the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by its State parties.

It also allows parties to recognise the competence of the Committee to resolve disputes between parties on the implementation of the Covenant (Articles 41 and 42).
Part V (Articles 46 – 47) clarifies that “nothing in the (present) Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and of the constitutions of the specialized agencies which define the respective responsibilities of the various organs of the United Nations and of the 46 National Human Rights Commission, India specialized agencies in regard to the matters dealt with in the present Covenant” or "the inherent right of all peoples to enjoy and utilize fully and freely their natural wealth and resources".
Part VI (Articles 48 – 53) has provisions with regard to the ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Covenant.

India’s Declarations/Reservations on the ICCPR "I.
With reference to article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the words `the right of self-determination' appearing in [this article] apply only to the peoples under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of a people or nation--which is the essence of national integrity.

"II.
"II.

With reference to article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India takes the position that the provisions of the article shall be so applied as to be in consonance with the provisions of clauses (3) to (7) of article 22 of the Constitution of India.

Further under the Indian Legal System, there is no enforceable right to compensation for persons claiming to be victims of unlawful arrest or detention against the State.

"III.
"III.

With respect to article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners.

"IV.
"IV.

With reference to articles 4 and 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and articles 12, 19 (3), 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said [article] shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 19 of the Constitution of India.
"V. With reference to article 7 (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said article shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 16(4) of the Constitution of India."

person in the context of deprivation of liberty, commonly by arrest, and in detention are also covered.
These include: Right to physical integrity, in the form of the right to life and freedom from torture and slavery (Articles 6, 7, and 8); Liberty and security of the person, in the form of freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention and the right to habeas corpus (Articles 9 – 11); Procedural fairness in law, in the form of rights to due process, a fair and impartial trial, the presumption of innocence, and recognition as a person before the law (Articles 14, 15, and 16); Individual liberty, in the form of the freedoms of movement, thought, conscience and religion, speech, association and assembly, family rights, the right to a nationality, and the right to privacy (Articles 12, 13, 17 – 24); Prohibition of any propaganda for war as well as advocacy of national or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence by law (Article 20); Political participation, including the right to join a political party and the right to vote (Article 25); Non-discrimination, minority rights and equality before the law (Articles 26 and 27).
Part IV (Articles 28 – 45) governs the establishment and operation of the Human Rights Committee, the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by its State parties.

It also allows parties to recognise the competence of the Committee to resolve disputes between parties on the implementation of the Covenant (Articles 41 and 42).
Part V (Articles 46 – 47) clarifies that “nothing in the (present) Covenant shall be interpreted as impairing the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and of the constitutions of the specialized agencies which define the respective responsibilities of the various organs of the United Nations and of the specialized agencies in regard to the matters dealt with in the present Covenant” or "the inherent right of all peoples to enjoy and utilize fully and freely their natural wealth and resources".
Part VI (Articles 48 – 53) has provisions with regard to the ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Covenant.

India’s Declarations/Reservations on the ICCPR "I.
With reference to article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the words `the right of self-determination' appearing in [this article] apply only to the peoples under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of a people or nation--which is the essence of national integrity.

"II.
"II.

With reference to article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India takes the position that the provisions of the article shall be so applied as to be in consonance with the provisions of clauses (3) to (7) of article 22 of the Constitution of India.

Further under the Indian Legal System, there is no enforceable right to compensation for persons claiming to be victims of unlawful arrest or detention against the State.

"III.
"III.

With respect to article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners.

"IV.
"IV.

With reference to articles 4 and 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and articles 12, 19 (3), 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said [article] shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 19 of the Constitution of India.
"V. With reference to article 7 (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said article shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 16(4) of the Constitution of India."
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 47 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China 10 Dec 1968 5 Aug 2002 19 Feb 1968 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 1968 17 Oct 1980 16 Sep 1969 5 Oct 1998 Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification 24 Jan 1983 a 4 Oct 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 22 Sep 2006 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 23 Jun 1993 a 13 Aug 1980 10 Sep 1978 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Dec 2008 20 Sep 2006 a 6 Sep 2000 a 5 Jan 1973 a 12 Nov 1973 21 Apr 1983 10 Jun 1996 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 1 Sep 1993 d 8 Sep 2000 24 Jan 1992 a 21 Sep 1970 4 Jan 1999 a 9 May 1990 a 26 May 1992 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 6 Aug 1993 a 8 May 1981 a 9 Jun 1995 a 10 Feb 1972 48 National Human Rights Commission, India Czech Republic Democratic People's Republic of Democratic Republic of the Congo Dominican Republic Equatorial Guinea Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Korea Denmark Djibouti Dominica Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras 21 Dec 1966 25 Sep 2008 19 Dec 1966 28 Feb 2008 19 Dec 1966 20 Mar 1968 4 Apr 1968 4 Aug 1967 21 Sep 1967 11 Oct 1967 9 Oct 1968 7 Sep 2000 28 Feb 1967 12 Sep 2000 22 Aug 1968 19 Dec 1966 29 Oct 1969 5 Oct 1983 a 29 Nov 1968 26 Mar 1992 a 12 Oct 1992 d 2 Apr 1969 22 Feb 1993 d 14 Sep 1981 a 1 Nov 1976 a 6 Jan 1972 5 Nov 2002 a 17 Jun 1993 a 4 Jan 1978 a 6 Mar 1969 14 Jan 1982 30 Nov 1979 25 Sep 1987 a 22 Jan 2002 a 21 Oct 1991 a 11
 Jun 1993 a 19 Aug 1975 4 Nov 1980 a 21 Jan 1983 a 22 Mar 1979 a 3 May 1994 a 17 Dec 1973 7 Sep 2000 5 May 1997 a 6 Sep 1991 a 5 May 1992 a 24 Jan 1978 1 Nov 2010 15 Feb 1977 6 Feb 1991 a 25 Aug 1997 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Participant COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Accession(a), Succession(d), Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad Chile China Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Central African Republic 10 Dec 1968 5 Aug 2002 19 Feb 1968 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 1968 17 Oct 1980 16 Sep 1969 5 Oct 1998 Ratification 24 Jan 1983 a 4 Oct 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 22 Sep 2006 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 23 Jun 1993 a 13 Aug 1980 10 Sep 1978 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Dec 2008 20 Sep 2006 a 6 Sep 2000 a 5 Jan 1973 a 12 Nov 1973 21 Apr 1983 10 Jun 1996 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 1 Sep 1993 d 8 Sep 2000 24 Jan 1992 a 21 Sep 1970 4 Jan 1999 a 9 May 1990 a 26 May 1992 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 6 Aug 1993 a 8 May 1981 a 9 Jun 1995 a 10 Feb 1972 Afghanistan Colombia Albania Comoros Algeria Congo Andorra Costa Rica Angola Côte d'Ivoire Argentina Croatia Armenia Cuba Australia Cyprus Austria Czech Republic Azerbaijan Democratic People's Republic of Bahamas Korea Bahrain Democratic Republic of the Congo Bangladesh Denmark Barbados Djibouti Belarus Dominica Belgium Dominican Republic Belize Ecuador Benin Egypt Bolivia (Plurinational State of) El Salvador Bosnia and Herzegovina Equatorial Guinea Botswana Eritrea Brazil Estonia Bulgaria
 Ethiopia Burkina Faso Finland Burundi France Cambodia Gabon Cameroon Gambia Canada Georgia Cape Verde Germany Central African Republic Ghana Chad Greece Chile Grenada China Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Signature 21 Dec 1966 25 Sep 2008 10 Dec 1968 5 Aug 2002 19 Dec 1966 19 Feb 1968 28 Feb 2008 18 Dec 1972 19 Dec 1966 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 20 Mar 1968 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 4 Apr 1968 4 Aug 1967 21 Sep 1967 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 1968 11 Oct 1967 17 Oct 1980 9 Oct 1968 7 Sep 2000 16 Sep 1969 5 Oct 1998 28 Feb 1967 12 Sep 2000 22 Aug 1968 19 Dec 1966 Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification 24 Jan 1983 a 29 Oct 1969 4 Oct 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 5 Oct 1983 a 22 Sep 2006 29 Nov 1968 10 Jan 1992 a 26 Mar 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 12 Oct 1992 d 23 Jun 1993 a 13 Aug 1980 2 Apr 1969 10 Sep 1978 22 Feb 1993 d 13 Aug 1992 a 14 Sep 1981 a 23 Dec 2008 20 Sep 2006 a 1 Nov 1976 a 6 Sep 2000 a 6 Jan 1972 5 Jan 1973 a 5 Nov 2002 a 12 Nov 1973 17 Jun 1993 a 21 Apr 1983 4 Jan 1978 a 10 Jun 1996 a 6 Mar 1969 12 Mar 1992 a 14 Jan 1982 12 Aug 1982 a 30 Nov 1979 1 Sep 1993 d 25 Sep 1987 a 8 Sep 2000 22 Jan 2002 a 24 Jan 1992 a 21 Oct 1991 a 21 Sep 1970 11 Jun 1993 a 4 Jan 1999 a 19 Aug 1975 9 May 1990 a 4 Nov 1980 a 26 May 1992 a 21 Jan 1983 a 27 Jun 1984 a 22 Mar 1979 a 19 May 1976 a 3 May 1994 a 6 Aug 1993 a 17 Dec 1973 8 May 1981 a 7 Sep 2000 9 Jun 1995 a 5 May 1997 a 10 Feb 1972 6 Sep 1991 a 5 May 1992 a 24 Jan 1978 1 Nov 2010 15 Feb 1977 6 Feb 1991 a 25 Aug 1997 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 49 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Afghanistan Hungary Albania Iceland Algeria India Andorra Indonesia Angola Iran (Islamic Republic of) Argentina Iraq Armenia Ireland Australia Israel Austria Italy Azerbaijan Jamaica Bahamas Japan Bahrain Jordan Bangladesh Kazakhstan Barbados Kenya Belarus Kuwait Belgium Kyrgyzstan Belize
 Lao People's Democratic Republic Benin Latvia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Lebanon Bosnia and Herzegovina Lesotho Botswana Liberia Brazil Libya Bulgaria Liechtenstein Burkina Faso Lithuania Burundi Luxembourg Cambodia Madagascar Cameroon Malawi Canada Maldives Cape Verde Mali Central African Republic Malta Chad Mauritania Chile Mauritius China Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Signature 25 Mar 1969 30 Dec 1968 10 Dec 1968 5 Aug 2002 4 Apr 1968 19 Feb 1968 18 Feb 1969 1 Oct 1973 18 Dec 1972 19 Dec 1966 10 Dec 1973 18 Jan 1967 19 Dec 1966 4 Dec 2008 30 May 1978 30 Jun 1972 2 Dec 2003 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 7 Dec 2000 8 Sep 2000 18 Apr 1967 8 Oct 1968 26 Nov 1974 17 Oct 1980 17 Sep 1969 16 Sep 1969 5 Oct 1998 26 Jun 1997 5 Jun 1968 19 Jan 1977 Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification 24 Jan 1983 a 17 Jan 1974 4 Oct 1991 a 22 Aug 1979 12 Sep 1989 10 Apr 1979 a 22 Sep 2006 23 Feb 2006 a 10 Jan 1992 a 24 Jun 1975 8 Aug 1986 25 Jan 1971 23 Jun 1993 a 8 Dec 1989 13 Aug 1980 3 Oct 1991 10 Sep 1978 15 Sep 1978 13 Aug 1992 a 3 Oct 1975 23 Dec 2008 21 Jun 1979 20 Sep 2006 a 28 May 1975 6 Sep 2000 a 24 Jan 2006 5 Jan 1973 a 1 May 1972 a 12 Nov 1973 21 May 1996 a 21 Apr 1983 7 Oct 1994 a 10 Jun 1996 a 25 Sep 2009 12 Mar 1992 a 14 Apr 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 3 Nov 1972 a 1 Sep 1993 d 9 Sep 1992 a 8 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 24 Jan 1992 a 15 May 1970 a 21 Sep 1970 10 Dec 1998 a 4 Jan 1999 a 20 Nov 1991 a 9 May 1990 a 18 Aug 1983 26 May 1992 a 21 Jun 1971 27 Jun 1984 a 22 Dec 1993 a 19 May 1976 a 19 Sep 2006 a 6 Aug 1993 a 16 Jul 1974 a 8 May 1981 a 13 Sep 1990 a 9 Jun 1995 a 17 Nov 2004 a 10 Feb 1972 12 Dec 1973 a 23 Mar 1981 a 28 Aug 1997 18 Nov 1974 23 Oct 2006 d 3 May 1979 21 Jul 1993 a 50 National Human Rights Commission, India Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Pakistan Palau Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Papua New Guinea Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Sao Tome and
 Principe Rwanda Samoa San Marino Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Lucia St. Vincent and the Grenadines 12 Nov 2001 25 Jun 1969 12 Nov 1968 20 Mar 1968 17 Apr 2008 20 Sep 2011 27 Jul 1976 11 Aug 1977 19 Dec 1966 2 Mar 1967 7 Oct 1976 27 Jun 1968 18 Mar 1968 31 Oct 1995 6 Jul 1970 3 Oct 1994 28 Sep 1976 22 Sep 2011 28 Nov 1994 a 14 May 1991 a 11 Dec 1978 28 Dec 1978 12 Mar 1980 a 7 Mar 1986 a 29 Jul 1993 a 13 Sep 1972 23 Jun 2010 8 Mar 1977 21 Jul 2008 a 10 Jun 1992 a 28 Apr 1978 23 Oct 1986 18 Mar 1977 15 Jun 1978 10 Apr 1990 a 26 Jan 1993 a 9 Dec 1974 16 Oct 1973 16 Apr 1975 a 15 Feb 2008 a 18 Oct 1985 a 13 Feb 1978 12 Mar 2001 d 5 May 1992 a 23 Aug 1996 a 28 May 1993 d 6 Jul 1992 d 24 Jan 1990 a 10 Dec 1998 27 Apr 1977 11 Jun 1980 a 9 Nov 1981 a Lao People's Democratic Republic 7 Dec 2000 Iran (Islamic Republic of) Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique 25 Mar 1969 30 Dec 1968 4 Apr 1968 18 Feb 1969 1 Oct 1973 19 Dec 1966 18 Jan 1967 19 Dec 1966 30 May 1978 30 Jun 1972 2 Dec 2003 18 Apr 1967 26 Nov 1974 17 Sep 1969 26 Jun 1997 5 Jun 1968 19 Jan 1977 17 Jan 1974 22 Aug 1979 10 Apr 1979 a 23 Feb 2006 a 24 Jun 1975 25 Jan 1971 8 Dec 1989 3 Oct 1991 15 Sep 1978 3 Oct 1975 21 Jun 1979 28 May 1975 24 Jan 2006 1 May 1972 a 21 May 1996 a 7 Oct 1994 a 25 Sep 2009 14 Apr 1992 a 3 Nov 1972 a 9 Sep 1992 a 22 Sep 2004 15 May 1970 a 10 Dec 1998 a 20 Nov 1991 a 18 Aug 1983 21 Jun 1971 22 Dec 1993 a 19 Sep 2006 a 16 Jul 1974 a 13 Sep 1990 a 17 Nov 2004 a 12 Dec 1973 a 23 Mar 1981 a 28 Aug 1997 18 Nov 1974 23 Oct 2006 d 3 May 1979 21 Jul 1993 a International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty
 Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Namibia Albania Nauru Algeria Nepal Andorra Netherlands Angola New Zealand Argentina Nicaragua Armenia Niger Australia Nigeria Austria Norway Azerbaijan Pakistan Bahamas Palau Bahrain Panama Bangladesh Papua New Guinea Barbados Paraguay Belarus Peru Belgium Philippines Belize Poland Benin Portugal Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Republic of Korea Bosnia and Herzegovina Republic of Moldova Botswana Romania Brazil Russian Federation Bulgaria Rwanda Burkina Faso Samoa Burundi San Marino Cambodia Sao Tome and Principe Cameroon Senegal Canada Serbia Cape Verde Seychelles Central African Republic Sierra Leone Chad Slovakia Chile Slovenia China Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Lucia St. Vincent and the Grenadines 12 Nov 2001 10 Dec 1968 5 Aug 2002 25 Jun 1969 12 Nov 1968 19 Feb 1968 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 20 Mar 1968 17 Apr 2008 4 Dec 2008 20 Sep 2011 27 Jul 1976 19 Mar 1968 11 Aug 1977 10 Dec 1968 19 Dec 1966 2 Mar 1967 7 Oct 1976 8 Sep 2000 27 Jun 1968 18 Mar 1968 8 Oct 1968 17 Oct 1980 31 Oct 1995 6 Jul 1970 16 Sep 1969 5 Oct 1998 3 Oct 1994 28 Sep 1976 22 Sep 2011 Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification 24 Jan 1983 a 28 Nov 1994 a 4 Oct 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 14 May 1991 a 22 Sep 2006 11 Dec 1978 10 Jan 1992 a 28 Dec 1978 8 Aug 1986 12 Mar 1980 a 23 Jun 1993 a 7 Mar 1986 a 13 Aug 1980 29 Jul 1993 a 10 Sep 1978 13 Sep 1972 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Jun 2010 23 Dec 2008 20 Sep 2006 a 8 Mar 1977 6 Sep 2000 a 21 Jul 2008 a 5 Jan 1973 a 10 Jun 1992 a 12 Nov 1973 28 Apr 1978 21 Apr 1983 23 Oct 1986 10 Jun 1996 a 18 Mar 1977 12 Mar 1992 a 15 Jun 1978 12 Aug 1982 a 10 Apr 1990 a 1 Sep 1993 d 26 Jan 1993 a 8 Sep 2000 9 Dec 1974 24 Jan 1992 a 16 Oct 1973 21 Sep 1970 16 Apr 1975 a 4 Jan 1999 a 15 Feb 2008 a 9 May 1990 a 18 Oct 1985 a 26 May 1992 a 27 Jun 1984 a 13 Feb 1978 19 May 1976 a 12 Mar 2001 d 6 Aug 1993 a 5 May 1992 a 8 May 1981 a 23 Aug 1996 a 9 Jun 1995 a 28 May 1993 d 10 Feb 1972 6 Jul 1992 d 24 Jan
 1990 a 10 Dec 1998 27 Apr 1977 11 Jun 1980 a 9 Nov 1981 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 51 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Afghanistan Sudan Albania Suriname Algeria Swaziland Andorra Sweden Angola Switzerland Argentina Syrian Arab Republic Armenia Tajikistan Australia Thailand Austria The former Yugoslav Republic of Azerbaijan Macedonia Bahamas Timor-Leste Bahrain Togo Bangladesh Trinidad and Tobago Barbados Tunisia Belarus Turkey Belgium Turkmenistan Belize Uganda Benin Ukraine Bolivia (Plurinational State of) United Kingdom of Great Britain Bosnia and Herzegovina and Northern Ireland Botswana United Republic of Tanzania Brazil United States of America Bulgaria Uruguay Burkina Faso Uzbekistan Burundi Vanuatu Cambodia Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Cameroon Viet Nam Canada Yemen Cape Verde Zambia Central African Republic Zimbabwe Chad Chile China 10 Dec 1968 5 Aug 2002 29 Sep 1967 19 Feb 1968 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 30 Apr 1968 19 Mar 1968 15 Aug 2000 10 Dec 1968 20 Mar 1968 16 Sep 1968 8 Sep 2000 5 Oct 1977 8 Oct 1968 21 Feb 1967 29 Nov 2007 17 Oct 1980 24 Jun 1969 16 Sep 1969 5 Oct 1998 Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification 24 Jan 1983 a 18 Mar 1986 a 4 Oct 1991 a 28 Dec 1976 a 12 Sep 1989 26 Mar 2004 a 22 Sep 2006 6 Dec 1971 10 Jan 1992 a 18 Jun 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 21 Apr 1969 a 23 Jun 1993 a 4 Jan 1999 a 13 Aug 1980 29 Oct 1996 a 10 Sep 1978 18 Jan 1994 d 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Dec 2008 18 Sep 2003 a 20 Sep 2006 a 24 May 1984 a 6 Sep 2000 a 21 Dec 1978 a 5 Jan 1973 a 18 Mar 1969 12 Nov 1973 23 Sep 2003 21 Apr 1983 1 May 1997 a 10 Jun 1996 a 21 Jun 1995 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Nov 1973 12 Aug 1982 a 20 May 1976 1 Sep 1993 d 8 Sep 2000 11 Jun 1976 a 24 Jan 1992 a 8 Jun 1992 21 Sep 1970 1 Apr 1970 4 Jan 1999 a 28 Sep 1995 a 9 May 1990 a 21 Nov 2008 26 May 1992 a 10 May 1978 27 Jun 1984 a
 24 Sep 1982 a 19 May 1976 a 9 Feb 1987 a 6 Aug 1993 a 10 Apr 1984 a 8 May 1981 a 13 May 1991 a 9 Jun 1995 a 10 Feb 1972 52 National Human Rights Commission, India Human Rights Committee (HRC) The Human Rights Committee is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by its State parties.
All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights are being implemented.

States must report initially one year after acceding to the Covenant and then whenever the Committee requests (usually every four years).

The Committee examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of "concluding observations”.
Human Rights Committee (HRC) The HRC is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the ICCPR by its State parties.

It was established under Article 28 of the ICCPR with In addition to the reporting procedure, Article 41 of Covenant provides for the the Committee to consider inter-state complaints.
Furthermore, the First Optional Protocol to the Covenant gives the Committee competence to examine individual complaints regard to alleged violations of the Covenant by States parties to the Protocol.

The full competence of the Committee extends to the Second Optional Protocol to the Covenant on the abolition of the death penalty with regard to States who have accepted the Protocol.

The Committee meets in Geneva or New York and normally holds three sessions per year.
The Committee also publishes its interpretation of the content of human rights provisions, known as general comments on thematic issues or its methods of work.
Syrian Arab Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan United Kingdom of Great Britain 16 Sep 1968 and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) 24 Jun 1969 Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 29 Sep 1967 30 Apr 1968 15 Aug 2000 20 Mar 1968 5 Oct 1977 21 Feb 1967 29 Nov 2007 18 Mar 1986 a 28 Dec 1976 a 26 Mar 2004 a 6 Dec 1971 18 Jun 1992 a 21 Apr 1969 a 4 Jan 1999 a 29 Oct 1996 a 18 Jan 1994 d 18 Sep 2003 a 24 May 1984 a 21 Dec 1978 a 18 Mar 1969 23 Sep 2003 1 May 1997 a 21 Jun 1995 a 12 Nov 1973 20 May 1976 11 Jun 1976 a 8 Jun 1992 1 Apr 1970 28 Sep 1995 a 21 Nov 2008 10 May 1978 24 Sep 1982 a 9 Feb 1987 a 10 Apr 1984 a 13 May 1991 a Human Rights Committee (HRC) The Human Rights Committee is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by its State parties.
All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights are being implemented.

States must report initially one year after acceding to the Covenant and then whenever the Committee requests (usually every four years).

The Committee examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of "concluding observations”.
Human Rights Committee (HRC) The HRC is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the ICCPR by its State parties.

It was established under Article 28 of the ICCPR to the reporting In addition the procedure, Article 41 of Covenant the for provides Committee to consider inter-state complaints.
Furthermore, the First Optional Protocol to the Covenant gives the Committee competence to examine individual complaints with regard to alleged violations of the Covenant by States parties to the Protocol.

The full competence of the Committee extends to the Second Optional Protocol to the Covenant on the abolition of the death penalty with regard to States who have accepted the Protocol.

The Committee meets in Geneva or New York and normally holds three sessions per year.
The Committee also publishes its interpretation of the content of human rights provisions, known as general comments on thematic issues or its methods of work.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 53 Monitoring Functions of the Committee MONITORING FUNCTIONS OF HRC The HRC’s task is to supervise and monitor the implementation of Covenant obligations by States parties.
One of the great strengths of the Committee is the moral authority it derives from the fact its membership represents all parts of the world.

 Receiving/examining reports from state parties that All States that have ratified or acceded to the Covenant undertake to submit reports to the Committee on the measures they have adopted to give effect to the rights the Covenant establishes and on the progress made in the enjoyment of those rights.
This obligation is contained in Article 40 of the Covenant.

A State party’s initial report is due within one year of the entry into force of the Covenant for the country concerned.

Subsequent reports, known as “periodic reports”, are now due at a time individually specified by the Committee for each State party.
Elaborating general comments Receiving/considering individual complaints Considering complaints made by a State party against another out carrying In its monitoring and supervisory the Committee functions, has major four responsibilities: First, the Committee receives and examines reports from the States parties on the steps they have taken to give effect to the rights spelled out in the Covenant.
Second, the Committee elaborates so-called general comments, which are designed to assist States parties to give effect to the provisions of the Covenant by providing greater detail regarding the substantive and procedural obligations of States parties.

Third, the Committee receives and considers individual complaints, also known as “communications”, under the Optional Protocol made by individuals who claim violations of their Covenant rights by a State party.
Fourth, the Committee has jurisdiction to consider certain complaints made by a State party that another State party is not abiding by the obligations assumed under the Covenant.

54 National Human Rights Commission, India Monitoring Functions of the Committee The HRC’s task is to supervise and monitor the implementation of Covenant obligations by States parties.
One of the great strengths of MONITORING FUNCTIONS OF HRC Receiving/examining reports from state parties Elaborating general comments Receiving/considering individual complaints Considering complaints made by a State party against another the Committee is the moral authority it derives from the fact that its membership represents all parts of the world.
In carrying out its monitoring and supervisory functions, the Committee has four responsibilities: major First, the Committee receives and examines reports from the States parties on the steps they have taken to give effect to the rights spelled out in the Covenant.
Second, the Committee elaborates so-called general comments, which are designed to assist States parties to give effect to the provisions of the Covenant by providing greater detail regarding the substantive and procedural obligations of States parties.

Third, the Committee receives and considers individual complaints, also known as “communications”, under the Optional Protocol made by individuals who claim violations of their Covenant rights by a State party.
Fourth, the Committee has jurisdiction to consider certain complaints made by a State party that another State party is not abiding by the obligations assumed under the Covenant.

All States that have ratified or acceded to the Covenant undertake to submit reports to the Committee on the measures they have adopted to give effect to the rights the Covenant establishes and on the progress made in the enjoyment of those rights.

This obligation is contained in Article 40 of the Covenant.
A State party’s initial report is due within one year of the entry into force of the Covenant for the country concerned.

Subsequent reports, known as “periodic reports”, are now due at a time individually specified by the Committee for each State party.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 55 First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights The First Optional Protocol is a supplementary treaty to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

It is procedural and provides a mechanism for the Human Rights Committee, set up by the ICCPR, to receive and consider individual complaints against alleged breaches of the Covenant by a state party.
First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (on individual complaints) The ICCPR Optional Protocol I is a supplementary treaty to the ICCPR and entered into force in accordance with Article 9 of the Convention.
Entry into force: 23 March 1976 Signatories: 35 Parties: 113 India has not signed the ICCPR Optional Protocol I Thus, individuals who claim that their rights and freedoms have been violated, may call the State in question to account for its actions, provided it is a party to the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.
Under Article 1 of the Optional Protocol, a State party to the Covenant that becomes a party to the Protocol “recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant.” Individuals who make such a claim, and who have exhausted all available domestic remedies, are entitled to submit a written communication to the Committee for its consideration (Article 2).
56 National Human Rights Commission, India Key Provisions of the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR Establishes an individual complaints mechanism for the ICCPR; Parties agree to recognize the competence of the UN Human Rights Committee to consider complaints In addition to Article 2, Articles 3 and 5 (2) lay down conditions for admissibility of complaints / communications by individuals.
Complaints admitted by the Committee are then brought to the attention of the State party alleged to have violated a provision of the Covenant.

The concerned from individuals or groups State is required to submit to who claim their rights the under the ICCPR have been Committee within six months, violated.

written explanations or statements clarifying the matter and indicating the remedy, if any, that it may have applied (Article 4).
Subsequently, the Human Rights Committee considers these individual complaints in the light of all the information made available to it by the individual and the State party concerned.

It then forwards its views to the concerned State party and individual(s) (Article 5).
As its name makes clear, the Protocol is not compulsory, but once a State party to the Covenant becomes a party to the Protocol, any person subject to the jurisdiction of the State party may lodge a written complaint with the Human Rights Committee (subject to permissible reservations).
Article 6 requires that the Committee report annually to the General Assembly on its activities concerning complaints, while Articles 7 through 14 largely contain technical provisions on the mechanics of First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights The First Optional Protocol is a supplementary treaty to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
It is procedural and provides a mechanism for the Human Rights Committee, set up by the ICCPR, to receive and consider individual complaints against alleged breaches of the Covenant by a state party.

First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (on individual complaints) The ICCPR Optional Protocol I is a supplementary treaty to the ICCPR and entered into force in accordance with Article 9 of the Entry into force: 23 March 1976 Convention.
Signatories: 35 Parties: 113 India has not signed the ICCPR Optional Protocol I Thus, individuals who claim that their rights and freedoms have been violated, may call the State in question to account for its actions, provided it is a party to the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.
Under Article 1 of the Optional Protocol, a State party to the Covenant that becomes a party to the Protocol “recognizes the competence of the Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant.” Individuals who make such a claim, and who have exhausted all available domestic remedies, are entitled to submit a written communication to the Committee for its consideration (Article 2).
Key Provisions of the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR Establishes an individual complaints mechanism for the ICCPR; Parties agree to recognize the competence of the UN Human Rights Committee complaints to from individuals or groups who claim rights under the ICCPR have been violated.

consider their to Article 2, In addition Articles 3 and 5 (2) lay down conditions for admissibility of complaints / communications by individuals.
Complaints admitted by the Committee are then brought to the attention of the State party alleged to have violated a provision of the Covenant.

The concerned State is required to submit to the Committee within six months, or written statements clarifying the matter and indicating the remedy, if any, that it may have applied (Article 4).
explanations the Human Rights Committee considers Subsequently, these individual complaints in the light of all the information made available to it by the individual and the State party concerned.

It then forwards its views to the concerned State party and individual(s) (Article 5).
As its name makes clear, the Protocol is not compulsory, but once a State party to the Covenant becomes a party to the Protocol, any person subject to the jurisdiction of the State party may lodge a written complaint with the Human Rights Committee (subject to permissible reservations).
Article 6 requires that the Committee report annually to the General Assembly on its activities concerning complaints, while Articles 7 through 14 largely contain technical provisions on the mechanics of A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 57 states becoming party to the Protocol, entry into force, notification, amendment, denunciation and the like.

Article 10, like the parent Covenant, provides that the Protocol extends without exception to all parts of federal States.
Article 12 provides for a State party to denounce the Optional Protocol.
First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature, Ratification, Accession(a), Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Barbados Belarus Belgium Benin Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad Chile Colombia Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Central African Republic Succession to signature(d) 5 Aug 2002 10 Dec 1973 27 Sep 2004 21 Dec 1966 19 Dec 1966 Succession(d) 4 Oct 2007 a 12 Sep 1989 a 22 Sep 2006 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 a 23 Jun 1993 a 25 Sep 1991 a 10 Dec 1987 27 Nov 2001 a 5 Jan 1973 a 30 Sep 1992 a 17 May 1994 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 1 Mar 1995 25 Sep 2009 a 26 Mar 1992 a 4 Jan 1999 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 19 May 2000 a 8 May 1981 a 9 Jun 1995 a 27 May 1992 a 29 Oct 1969 5 Oct 1983 a 29 Nov 1968 5 Mar 1997 a Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 Mar 1995 58 National Human Rights Commission, India states becoming party to the Protocol, entry into force, notification, amendment, denunciation and the like.
Article 10, like the parent Covenant, provides that the Protocol extends without exception to all parts of federal States.

Article 12 provides for a State party to denounce the Optional Protocol.
First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Barbados Belarus Belgium Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile Colombia Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Signature, Succession to signature(d) 5 Aug 2002 10 Dec 1973 1 Mar 1995 27 Sep 2004 21 Dec 1966 19 Dec 1966 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 4 Oct 2007 a 12 Sep 1989 a 22 Sep 2006 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 a 23 Jun 1993 a 25 Sep 1991 a 10 Dec 1987 27 Nov 2001 a 5 Jan 1973 a 30 Sep 1992 a 17 May 1994 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 1 Mar 1995 25 Sep 2009 a 26 Mar 1992 a 4 Jan 1999 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 19 May 2000 a 8 May 1981 a 9 Jun 1995 a 27 May 1992 a 29 Oct 1969 5 Oct 1983 a 29 Nov 1968 5 Mar 1997 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 59 First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Croatia Albania Cyprus Algeria Czech Republic Andorra Democratic Republic of the Angola Congo Argentina Denmark Armenia Djibouti Australia Dominican Republic Austria Ecuador Azerbaijan El Salvador Barbados Equatorial Guinea Belarus Estonia Belgium Finland Benin France Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Gambia Bosnia and Herzegovina Georgia Brazil Germany Bulgaria Ghana Burkina Faso Greece Cambodia Guatemala Cameroon Guinea Canada Guinea-Bissau Cape Verde Guyana Central African Republic Honduras Chad Hungary Chile Iceland Colombia Ireland Congo Italy Costa Rica Jamaica Côte d'Ivoire Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lesotho Liberia Libya Signature, Succession to signature(d) 19 Dec 1966 5 Aug 2002 20 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1973 4 Apr 1968 21 Sep 1967 11 Dec 1967 1 Mar 1995 7 Sep 2000 27 Sep 2004 19 Mar 1975 12 Sep 2000 19 Dec 1966 21 Dec 1966 30 Apr
 1976 19 Dec 1966 [19 Dec 1966 ] 25 Sep 2007 22 Sep 2004 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 12 Oct 1995 a 4 Oct 2007 a 15 Apr 1992 12 Sep 1989 a 22 Feb 1993 d 22 Sep 2006 1 Nov 1976 a 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 a 6 Jan 1972 23 Jun 1993 a 5 Nov 2002 a 25 Sep 1991 a 4 Jan 1978 a 10 Dec 1987 6 Mar 1969 27 Nov 2001 a 6 Jun 1995 5 Jan 1973 a 25 Sep 1987 a 30 Sep 1992 a 21 Oct 1991 a 17 May 1994 a 19 Aug 1975 12 Mar 1992 a 17 Feb 1984 a 12 Aug 1982 a 9 Jun 1988 a 1 Mar 1995 3 May 1994 a 25 Sep 2009 a 25 Aug 1993 a 26 Mar 1992 a 7 Sep 2000 4 Jan 1999 a 5 May 1997 a 28 Nov 2000 a 27 Jun 1984 a 17 Jun 1993 19 May 1976 a 19 May 2000 a 5 Jan 1999 a 8 May 1981 a 7 Jun 2005 9 Jun 1995 a 7 Sep 1988 a 27 May 1992 a 22 Aug 1979 a 29 Oct 1969 8 Dec 1989 a 5 Oct 1983 a 15 Sep 1978 29 Nov 1968 [ 3 Oct 1975 ] 5 Mar 1997 a 30 Jun 2009 7 Oct 1994 a 22 Jun 1994 a 6 Sep 2000 a 16 May 1989 a 60 National Human Rights Commission, India Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritius Mexico Mongolia Montenegro Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Norway Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Senegal Serbia Seychelles 17 Sep 1969 12 Nov 2001 25 Jun 1969 20 Mar 1968 27 Jul 1976 11 Aug 1977 19 Dec 1966 1 Aug 1978 16 Sep 2005 6 Sep 2000 6 Jul 1970 12 Mar 2001 d 10 Dec 1998 a 20 Nov 1991 a 18 Aug 1983 a 21 Jun 1971 11 Jun 1996 a 19 Sep 2006 a 24 Oct 2001 a 13 Sep 1990 a 12 Dec 1973 a 15 Mar 2002 a 16 Apr 1991 a 23 Oct 2006 d 28 Nov 1994 a 14 May 1991 a 11 Dec 1978 26 May 1989 a 12 Mar 1980 a 7 Mar 1986 a 13 Sep 1972 8 Mar 1977 10 Jan 1995 a 3 Oct 1980 22 Aug 1989 7 Nov 1991 a 3 May 1983 10 Apr 1990 a 23 Jan 2008 20 Jul 1993 a 1 Oct 1991 a 18 Oct 1985 a 13 Feb 1978 6 Sep 2001 5 May 1992 a First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/)
 Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Dominican Republic Ecuador El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Croatia Cyprus Congo Denmark Djibouti Estonia Finland France Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Honduras Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Jamaica Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lesotho Liberia Libya 19 Dec 1966 20 Mar 1968 4 Apr 1968 21 Sep 1967 11 Dec 1967 7 Sep 2000 19 Mar 1975 12 Sep 2000 19 Dec 1966 30 Apr 1976 [19 Dec 1966 ] 25 Sep 2007 22 Sep 2004 12 Oct 1995 a 15 Apr 1992 22 Feb 1993 d 1 Nov 1976 a 6 Jan 1972 5 Nov 2002 a 4 Jan 1978 a 6 Mar 1969 6 Jun 1995 25 Sep 1987 a 21 Oct 1991 a 19 Aug 1975 17 Feb 1984 a 9 Jun 1988 a 3 May 1994 a 25 Aug 1993 a 7 Sep 2000 5 May 1997 a 28 Nov 2000 a 17 Jun 1993 5 Jan 1999 a 7 Jun 2005 7 Sep 1988 a 22 Aug 1979 a 8 Dec 1989 a 15 Sep 1978 [ 3 Oct 1975 ] 30 Jun 2009 7 Oct 1994 a 22 Jun 1994 a 6 Sep 2000 a Participant Liechtenstein Albania Lithuania Algeria Luxembourg Andorra Madagascar Angola Malawi Argentina Maldives Armenia Mali Australia Malta Austria Mauritius Azerbaijan Mexico Barbados Mongolia Belarus Montenegro Belgium Namibia Benin Nauru Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Nepal Bosnia and Herzegovina Netherlands Brazil New Zealand Bulgaria Nicaragua Burkina Faso Niger Cambodia Norway Cameroon Panama Canada Paraguay Cape Verde Peru Central African Republic Philippines Chad Poland Chile Portugal Colombia Republic of Korea Congo Republic of Moldova Costa Rica Romania Côte d'Ivoire Russian Federation San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Senegal Serbia Signature, Succession to signature(d) 5 Aug 2002 17 Sep 1969 10 Dec 1973 12 Nov 2001 1 Mar 1995 25 Jun 1969 27 Sep 2004 20 Mar 1968 27 Jul 1976 11 Aug 1977 19 Dec 1966 1 Aug 1978 21 Dec 1966 16 Sep 2005 19 Dec 1966 6 Sep 2000 6 Jul 1970 12 Mar 2001 d 16 May 1989 a Seychelles Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 10 Dec 1998 a 4 Oct 2007 a 20 Nov 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 a 18 Aug 1983 a 22 Sep 2006 21 Jun 1971 10 Jan 1992 a 11 Jun 1996 a 8 Aug 1986 a 19 Sep
 2006 a 23 Jun 1993 a 24 Oct 2001 a 25 Sep 1991 a 13 Sep 1990 a 10 Dec 1987 12 Dec 1973 a 27 Nov 2001 a 15 Mar 2002 a 5 Jan 1973 a 16 Apr 1991 a 30 Sep 1992 a 23 Oct 2006 d 17 May 1994 a 28 Nov 1994 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 14 May 1991 a 1 Mar 1995 11 Dec 1978 25 Sep 2009 a 26 May 1989 a 26 Mar 1992 a 12 Mar 1980 a 4 Jan 1999 a 7 Mar 1986 a 13 Sep 1972 27 Jun 1984 a 8 Mar 1977 19 May 1976 a 10 Jan 1995 a 19 May 2000 a 3 Oct 1980 8 May 1981 a 22 Aug 1989 9 Jun 1995 a 7 Nov 1991 a 27 May 1992 a 3 May 1983 29 Oct 1969 10 Apr 1990 a 5 Oct 1983 a 23 Jan 2008 29 Nov 1968 20 Jul 1993 a 5 Mar 1997 a 1 Oct 1991 a 18 Oct 1985 a 13 Feb 1978 6 Sep 2001 5 May 1992 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 61 First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Sierra Leone Albania Slovakia Algeria Slovenia Andorra Somalia Angola South Africa Argentina Spain Armenia Sri Lanka Australia St. Vincent and the Grenadines Austria Suriname Azerbaijan Sweden Barbados Tajikistan Belarus The former Yugoslav Republic of Belgium Macedonia Benin Togo Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Trinidad and Tobago Bosnia and Herzegovina Tunisia Brazil Turkey Bulgaria Turkmenistan Burkina Faso Uganda Cambodia Ukraine Cameroon Uruguay Canada Uzbekistan Cape Verde Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Central African Republic of) Chad Zambia Chile Colombia Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Signature, Succession to signature(d) 5 Aug 2002 10 Dec 1973 29 Sep 1967 12 Dec 1994 d 1 Mar 1995 3 Feb 2004 27 Sep 2004 21 Feb 1967 15 Nov 1976 21 Dec 1966 19 Dec 1966 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 23 Aug 1996 a 4 Oct 2007 a 28 May 1993 d 12 Sep 1989 a 16 Jul 1993 a 22 Sep 2006 24 Jan 1990 a 10 Jan 1992 a 28 Aug 2002 a 8 Aug 1986 a 25 Jan 1985 a 23 Jun 1993 a 3 Oct 1997 a 25 Sep 1991 a 9 Nov 1981 a 10 Dec 1987 28 Dec
 1976 a 27 Nov 2001 a 6 Dec 1971 5 Jan 1973 a 4 Jan 1999 a 30 Sep 1992 a 12 Dec 1994 17 May 1994 a 12 Mar 1992 a 30 Mar 1988 a 12 Aug 1982 a [14 Nov 1980 a] 1 Mar 1995 29 Jun 2011 a 25 Sep 2009 a 24 Nov 2006 26 Mar 1992 a 1 May 1997 a 4 Jan 1999 a 14 Nov 1995 a 25 Jul 1991 a 27 Jun 1984 a 1 Apr 1970 19 May 1976 a 28 Sep 1995 a 19 May 2000 a 10 May 1978 8 May 1981 a 9 Jun 1995 a 10 Apr 1984 a 27 May 1992 a 29 Oct 1969 5 Oct 1983 a 29 Nov 1968 5 Mar 1997 a The purpose of the Second Optional Protocol is revealed by its full title, “aiming at the abolition of the death penalty”.
It was adopted by the General Assembly by its resolution 44/128 of 15 December 1989.

Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (aiming at the abolition of the death penalty) The ICCPR Optional Protocol II was adopted by Resolution 44/128 of 15 December 1989.

It entered into force in accordance with article 8(1) of the Convention.
Entry into force: 11 July 1991 Signatories: 35 Parties: 73 India has not signed the ICCPR Optional Protocol II The Preamble to the Second Optional Protocol reinforces the view that abolition of the death penalty is a desirable and progressive human rights measure that enhances human dignity and enjoyment of the right to life.
The Second Optional Protocol creates an unqualified human right – of an individual not to be executed and prohibits the execution of anyone under the domestic law of a ratifying state.

Its single substantive provision, Article 1, states that no person within a State party’s jurisdiction shall be executed, and that each State party shall take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty.
However, it 62 National Human Rights Commission, India Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Suriname Sweden Tajikistan Macedonia Togo Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan of) Zambia St. Vincent and the Grenadines The former Yugoslav Republic of 12 Dec 1994 Trinidad and Tobago 29 Sep 1967 d 3 Feb 2004 21 Feb 1967 Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 15 Nov 1976 23 Aug 1996 a 28 May 1993 d 16 Jul 1993 a 24 Jan 1990 a 28 Aug 2002 a 25 Jan 1985 a 3 Oct 1997 a 9 Nov 1981 a 28 Dec 1976 a 6 Dec 1971 4 Jan 1999 a 12 Dec 1994 30 Mar 1988 a [14 Nov 1980 a] 29 Jun 2011 a 24 Nov 2006 1 May 1997 a 14 Nov 1995 a 25 Jul 1991 a 1 Apr 1970 28 Sep 1995 a 10 May 1978 10 Apr 1984 a Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights The purpose of the Second Optional Protocol is revealed by its full title, “aiming at the abolition of the death penalty”.
It was adopted by the General Assembly by its resolution 44/128 of 15 December 1989.

Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR (aiming at the abolition of the death penalty) The ICCPR Optional Protocol II was adopted by Resolution 44/128 of 15 December 1989.

It entered into force in accordance with article 8(1) of the Convention.
Entry into force: 11 July 1991 Signatories: 35 Parties: 73 India has not signed the ICCPR Optional Protocol II The Preamble to the Second Optional Protocol reinforces the view that abolition of the death penalty is a desirable and progressive human rights measure that enhances human dignity and enjoyment of the right to life.
The Second Optional Protocol creates an unqualified human right – of an individual not to be executed and prohibits the execution of anyone under the domestic law of a ratifying state.

Its single substantive provision, Article 1, states that no person within a State party’s jurisdiction shall be executed, and that each State party shall take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty.
However, it A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 63 Article 6.2 provides that the right of the individual not to be executed cannot be revoked/suspended in case of a “public emergency which threatens the life of the nation”, as outlined in Article 4 of the ICCPR.

An exception can only be made in case a State Party has made a reservation under Article 2 of the Second Optional Protocol at the time of ratifying the Optional Protocol.
Articles 7 and 8 contain provisions regarding the Protocol’s entry into force, ratification, amendment and so on.

Article 9 places a positive obligation upon the State Party to ensure that the death penalty is abolished across all its constituent states and territories.

Thus, federal governments are responsible to ensure that the provisions of the Optional Protocol are applied by their constituent States.
Article 10 outlines the duties of the Secretary-General of the United Nations in relation to the State Parties to the Protocol, while Article 11 provides for the Protocol to be translated into the six official languages of the UN and sent to the government of every UN member state.

is subject to any reservations made by a state party under Article 2 of the Protocol.
Key Provision of the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR Commits its members to the abolition of the death penalty within their borders, though Article 2.1 allows parties to make a reservation allowing execution for grave crimes in times of war.

Article 2 permits, subject to procedural certain requirements, one only reservation, namely reserving the death penalty in times of war, pursuant to a conviction for the most serious crimes of a military nature committed during wartime.
This is the only exception to the rule of abolition of the death penalty under the Protocol.

A State Party can only make a reservation at the time of ratifying the Protocol, otherwise it is bound to total abolition with no exceptions.

Articles 2.2 & 2.3 set out the procedure for a State Party to make a reservation and to notify the UN of its exercise of the reservation.
Article 3 of the Optional Protocol places reporting obligations on the state parties (in accordance with Article 40 of the ICCPR), to inform the Human Rights Committee on the measures adopted to give effect to the Second Optional Protocol.

Article 4 provides for a State Party to make a complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee against another State Party which it believes is violating the Protocol.

Article 5 provides for individuals to make complaints to the Human Rights Committee against a State Party.
However, it only applies to nations that have ratified the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.

At the time of signing the Protocol, a State Party can opt-out of this complaints procedure.

64 National Human Rights Commission, India is subject to any reservations made by a state party under Article 2 of the Protocol.
Commits its members to the reserving the death penalty Key Provision of the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR abolition of the death penalty within their borders, though Article 2.1 allows parties to make a reservation allowing execution for grave crimes in times of war.

Article 2 permits, subject to certain procedural requirements, only one reservation, namely in times of war, pursuant to a conviction for the most serious crimes of a military nature committed during wartime.
This is the only exception to the rule of abolition of the death penalty under the Protocol.

A State Party can only make a reservation at the time of ratifying the Protocol, otherwise it is bound to total abolition with no exceptions.

Articles 2.2 & 2.3 set out the procedure for a State Party to make a reservation and to notify the UN of its exercise of the reservation.
Article 3 of the Optional Protocol places reporting obligations on the state parties (in accordance with Article 40 of the ICCPR), to inform the Human Rights Committee on the measures adopted to give effect to the Second Optional Protocol.

Article 4 provides for a State Party to make a complaint to the UN Human Rights Committee against another State Party which it believes is violating the Protocol.

Article 5 provides for individuals to make complaints to the Human Rights Committee against a State Party.
However, it only applies to nations that have ratified the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR.

At the time of signing the Protocol, a State Party can opt-out of this complaints procedure.

Article 6.2 provides that the right of the individual not to be executed cannot be revoked/suspended in case of a “public emergency which threatens the life of the nation”, as outlined in Article 4 of the ICCPR.
An exception can only be made in case a State Party has made a reservation under Article 2 of the Second Optional Protocol at the time of ratifying the Optional Protocol.

Articles 7 and 8 contain provisions regarding the Protocol’s entry into force, ratification, amendment and so on.

Article 9 places a positive obligation upon the State Party to ensure that the death penalty is abolished across all its constituent states and territories.
Thus, federal governments are responsible to ensure that the provisions of the Optional Protocol are applied by their constituent States.

Article 10 outlines the duties of the Secretary-General of the United Nations in relation to the State Parties to the Protocol, while Article 11 provides for the Protocol to be translated into the six official languages of the UN and sent to the government of every UN member state.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 65 Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Albania Andorra Argentina Australia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Canada Cape Verde Chile Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Ecuador Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Guinea-Bissau Honduras Hungary 5 Aug 2002 20 Dec 2006 8 Apr 1991 12 Jul 1990 7 Sep 2000 11 Mar 1999 15 Nov 2001 14 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 12 Sep 2000 10 May 1990 17 Oct 2007 a 22 Sep 2006 2 Sep 2008 2 Oct 1990 a 2 Mar 1993 22 Jan 1999 a 8 Dec 1998 16 Mar 2001 25 Sep 2009 a 10 Aug 1999 25 Nov 2005 a 19 May 2000 a 26 Sep 2008 5 Aug 1997 a 5 Jun 1998 12 Oct 1995 a 10 Sep 1999 a 15 Jun 2004 a 24 Feb 1994 5 Nov 2002 a 23 Feb 1993 a 30 Jan 2004 a 4 Apr 1991 2 Oct 2007 a 22 Mar 1999 a 18 Aug 1992 5 May 1997 a 1 Apr 2008 24 Feb 1994 a 66 National Human Rights Commission, India Iceland Ireland Italy Kyrgyzstan Liberia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Mozambique Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Norway Panama Paraguay Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Rwanda San Marino Serbia Seychelles Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Republic of Moldova Sao Tome and Principe 30 Jan 1991 13 Feb 1990 8 Sep 2000 13 Feb 1990 9 Aug 1990 22 Feb 1990 21 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 20 Sep 2006 21 Mar 2000 13 Feb 1990 15 Mar 1990 26 Sep 2003 6 Sep 2000 22 Sep 1998 14 Sep 1993 23 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 2 Apr 1991 18 Jun 1993 a 14 Feb 1995 6 Dec 2010 a 16 Sep 2005 a 10 Dec 1998 a 27 Mar 2002 12 Feb 1992 29 Dec 1994 a 26 Sep 2007 a 28 Mar 2000 a 13 Mar 2012 a 23 Oct 2006 d 21 Jul 1993 a 28 Nov 1994 a 4 Mar 1998 a 26 Mar 1991 22 Feb 1990 25 Feb 2009 5 Sep 1991 21 Jan 1993 a 18 Aug 2003 a 20 Nov 2007 17 Oct 1990 20 Sep 2006 a 27 Feb 1991 15 Dec 2008 a 17 Aug 2004 6 Sep
 2001 a 15 Dec 1994 a 22 Jun 1999 10 Mar 1994 28 Aug 2002 a 11 Apr 1991 11 May 1990 Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR Participant Signature COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Bosnia and Herzegovina Participant Albania Andorra Argentina Australia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Canada Cape Verde Chile Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cyprus Denmark Djibouti Ecuador Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Guinea-Bissau Honduras Hungary Czech Republic 5 Aug 2002 20 Dec 2006 8 Apr 1991 12 Jul 1990 7 Sep 2000 11 Mar 1999 15 Nov 2001 14 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 12 Sep 2000 10 May 1990 Succession(d) 17 Oct 2007 a 22 Sep 2006 2 Sep 2008 2 Oct 1990 a 2 Mar 1993 22 Jan 1999 a 8 Dec 1998 16 Mar 2001 25 Sep 2009 a 10 Aug 1999 25 Nov 2005 a 19 May 2000 a 26 Sep 2008 5 Aug 1997 a 5 Jun 1998 12 Oct 1995 a 10 Sep 1999 a 15 Jun 2004 a 24 Feb 1994 5 Nov 2002 a 23 Feb 1993 a 30 Jan 2004 a 4 Apr 1991 2 Oct 2007 a 22 Mar 1999 a 18 Aug 1992 5 May 1997 a 1 Apr 2008 24 Feb 1994 a Iceland Albania Ireland Andorra Italy Argentina Kyrgyzstan Australia Liberia Austria Liechtenstein Azerbaijan Lithuania Belgium Luxembourg Bosnia and Herzegovina Malta Brazil Mexico Bulgaria Monaco Canada Mongolia Cape Verde Montenegro Chile Mozambique Colombia Namibia Costa Rica Nepal Croatia Netherlands Cyprus New Zealand Czech Republic Nicaragua Denmark Norway Djibouti Panama Ecuador Paraguay Estonia Philippines Finland Poland France Portugal Georgia Republic of Moldova Germany Romania Greece Rwanda Guinea-Bissau San Marino Honduras Sao Tome and Principe Hungary Serbia Seychelles Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden 30 Jan 1991 5 Aug 2002 13 Feb 1990 20 Dec 2006 8 Apr 1991 8 Sep 2000 12 Jul 1990 13 Feb 1990 7 Sep 2000
 11 Mar 1999 15 Nov 2001 14 Feb 1990 9 Aug 1990 22 Feb 1990 21 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 20 Sep 2006 13 Feb 1990 21 Mar 2000 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 15 Mar 1990 12 Sep 2000 26 Sep 2003 10 May 1990 6 Sep 2000 22 Sep 1998 14 Sep 1993 23 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 2 Apr 1991 17 Oct 2007 a 18 Jun 1993 a 22 Sep 2006 14 Feb 1995 2 Sep 2008 6 Dec 2010 a 2 Oct 1990 a 16 Sep 2005 a 2 Mar 1993 10 Dec 1998 a 22 Jan 1999 a 27 Mar 2002 8 Dec 1998 12 Feb 1992 16 Mar 2001 29 Dec 1994 a 25 Sep 2009 a 26 Sep 2007 a 10 Aug 1999 28 Mar 2000 a 25 Nov 2005 a 13 Mar 2012 a 19 May 2000 a 23 Oct 2006 d 26 Sep 2008 21 Jul 1993 a 5 Aug 1997 a 28 Nov 1994 a 5 Jun 1998 4 Mar 1998 a 12 Oct 1995 a 26 Mar 1991 10 Sep 1999 a 22 Feb 1990 15 Jun 2004 a 25 Feb 2009 24 Feb 1994 5 Sep 1991 5 Nov 2002 a 21 Jan 1993 a 23 Feb 1993 a 18 Aug 2003 a 30 Jan 2004 a 20 Nov 2007 4 Apr 1991 2 Oct 2007 a 17 Oct 1990 22 Mar 1999 a 20 Sep 2006 a 18 Aug 1992 27 Feb 1991 5 May 1997 a 15 Dec 2008 a 17 Aug 2004 1 Apr 2008 24 Feb 1994 a 6 Sep 2001 a 15 Dec 1994 a 22 Jun 1999 10 Mar 1994 28 Aug 2002 a 11 Apr 1991 11 May 1990 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 67 Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Switzerland Albania The former Yugoslav Republic of Andorra Macedonia Argentina Timor-Leste Australia Turkey Austria Turkmenistan Azerbaijan Ukraine Belgium United Kingdom of Great Britain Bosnia and Herzegovina and Northern Ireland Brazil Uruguay Bulgaria Uzbekistan Canada Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Cape Verde of) Chile Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Ecuador Estonia Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Guinea-Bissau Honduras Hungary 5 Aug 2002 20 Dec 2006 6 Apr 2004 8 Apr 1991 12 Jul 1990 31 Mar 1999 7 Sep 2000 13 Feb 1990 11 Mar 1999 7 Jun 1990 15 Nov 2001 14 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb 1990 13 Feb
 1990 12 Sep 2000 10 May 1990 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 16 Jun 1994 a 17 Oct 2007 a 26 Jan 1995 a 22 Sep 2006 2 Sep 2008 18 Sep 2003 a 2 Oct 1990 a 2 Mar 2006 2 Mar 1993 11 Jan 2000 a 22 Jan 1999 a 25 Jul 2007 a 8 Dec 1998 10 Dec 1999 16 Mar 2001 25 Sep 2009 a 21 Jan 1993 10 Aug 1999 23 Dec 2008 a 25 Nov 2005 a 22 Feb 1993 19 May 2000 a 26 Sep 2008 5 Aug 1997 a 5 Jun 1998 12 Oct 1995 a 10 Sep 1999 a 15 Jun 2004 a 24 Feb 1994 5 Nov 2002 a 23 Feb 1993 a 30 Jan 2004 a 4 Apr 1991 2 Oct 2007 a 22 Mar 1999 a 18 Aug 1992 5 May 1997 a 1 Apr 2008 24 Feb 1994 a 68 National Human Rights Commission, India International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) The ICESCR is a multilateral treaty adopted opened for signature, ratification and accession by the United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 1966 and in force since 3 January 1976.
Like the ICCPR, it develops the corresponding rights in the UDHR in considerable detail, specifying the steps required for their full realization.
The Covenant contains some of the most significant international legal provisions establishing economic, social and cultural rights, including rights relating to work in just and favourable conditions, to social protection, to an adequate standard of living, to the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health, to education and to enjoyment of the benefits of cultural freedom and scientific progress.
ICESCR It was adopted and opened for signature by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of December 16, 1966.

It is designed to ensure the protection of people as full persons, wherein people can enjoy rights, freedoms and social justice simultaneously.

Entry into force: 3 January 1976 Signatories: 70 Parties: 160 Treaty Body: Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) India acceded to the ICESCR on 10 April 1979.
The Covenant follows the structure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and ICCPR, with a preamble and thirty-one articles, divided into five parts.
The former Yugoslav Republic of Switzerland Macedonia Timor-Leste Turkey Turkmenistan Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan of) 6 Apr 2004 United Kingdom of Great Britain 31 Mar 1999 and Northern Ireland 13 Feb 1990 Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 7 Jun 1990 16 Jun 1994 a 26 Jan 1995 a 18 Sep 2003 a 2 Mar 2006 11 Jan 2000 a 25 Jul 2007 a 10 Dec 1999 21 Jan 1993 23 Dec 2008 a 22 Feb 1993 International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) The ICESCR is a multilateral treaty adopted opened for signature, ratification and accession by the United Nations General Assembly on 16 December 1966 and in force since 3 January 1976.
Like the ICCPR, it develops the corresponding rights in the UDHR in considerable detail, specifying the steps required for their full realization.
The Covenant contains some of the most significant international legal provisions establishing economic, social and cultural rights, including rights relating to work in just and favourable conditions, to social protection, to an adequate standard of living, to the highest attainable standards of physical and mental health, to education and to enjoyment of the benefits of cultural freedom and scientific progress.
ICESCR It was adopted and opened for signature by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of December 16, 1966.

It is designed to ensure the protection of people as full persons, wherein people can enjoy rights, freedoms and social justice simultaneously.

Entry into force: 3 January 1976 Signatories: 70 Parties: 160 Treaty Body: Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) India acceded to the ICESCR on 10 April 1979.
The Covenant follows the structure of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and ICCPR, with a preamble and thirty-one articles, divided into five parts.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 69 Part I (Article 1) recognises the right of all peoples to self- determination, including the right to "freely determine their political status", pursue their economic, social and cultural goals, and manage and dispose of their own resources.
It recognizes a negative right of a people not to be deprived of its means of subsistence, and imposes an obligation on those parties still responsible for non-self governing and trust territories (colonies) to encourage and respect their self- determination.
Right to food conditions of work Trade union rights Right to social security Right to just & favourable Key Social, Cultural & Economic Rights recognized by ICESCR Right to non-discrimination Part II (Articles 2 - 5) establishes the principle of "progressive realisation", which acknowledges that some of the rights (for instance, the Right to Health) may be difficult in practice to achieve in a short period of time, and that states to resource may be subject constraints, but requires them to act as best they can within their means.
It also be requires recognized "without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status".

The rights can only be limited by law, in a manner compatible with the nature of the rights, and only for the purpose of "promoting the general welfare in a democratic society".
Right to participate in cultural Right to housing & adequate Right to education Right to health standard of living rights the life Part III (Articles 6 - 15) lists the rights themselves.
These include the rights to: 70 National Human Rights Commission, India Work, under "just and favourable conditions", with the right to form and join trade unions (Articles 6, 7, and 8) Social security, including social insurance (Article 9) Family life, including paid parental leave and the protection of children (Article 10) An adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and the "continuous improvement of Health, specifically "the highest attainable standard of physical living conditions" (Article 11) and mental health" (Article 12) Education, including free universal primary education, generally available secondary education and equally accessible higher education.
This should be directed to "the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity", and enable all persons to participate effectively in society (Articles 13 and 14) Participation in cultural life (Article 15) Part IV (Articles 16 - 25) requires all States parties to report regularly to the Economic and Social Council.
In 1985, the Council created the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to carry out the functions of monitoring implementation of the Covenant’s provisions (ECOSOC Res.

1985/17).

It also allows the monitoring body to make general recommendations to the UN General Assembly on appropriate measures to realise the rights (Article 21).

Part V (Articles 26 - 31) governs ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Covenant.
The fundamental obligation of States under the ICESCR is to “take steps ... with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights” [Article 2(1)].
This concept was clarified by the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights in its General Comment 3 – “the concept of progressive realization constitutes a recognition of the fact that full realization of all economic, social and cultural rights will Part I (Article 1) recognises the right of all peoples to self- determination, including the right to "freely determine their political status", pursue their economic, social and cultural goals, and manage and dispose of their own resources.
It recognizes a negative right of a people not to be deprived of its means of subsistence, and imposes an obligation on those parties still responsible for non-self governing and trust territories (colonies) to encourage and respect their self- determination.
Key Social, Cultural & Part II (Articles 2 - 5) establishes Economic Rights recognized by the principle of "progressive ICESCR Right to non-discrimination realisation", which acknowledges that some of the Right to just & favourable rights (for instance, the Right to conditions of work Right to food Trade union rights Right to social security Health) may be difficult in practice to achieve in a short period of time, and that states may be subject to resource constraints, but requires them to act as best they can within their Right to housing & adequate standard of living means.
It also Right to health Right to education Right to participate in cultural life requires the rights be recognized "without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status".

The rights can only be limited by law, in a manner compatible with the nature of the rights, and only for the purpose of "promoting the general welfare in a democratic society".
Part III (Articles 6 - 15) lists the rights themselves.
These include the rights to: Work, under "just and favourable conditions", with the right to form and join trade unions (Articles 6, 7, and 8) Social security, including social insurance (Article 9) Family life, including paid parental leave and the protection of children (Article 10) An adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and the "continuous improvement of living conditions" (Article 11) Health, specifically "the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health" (Article 12) Education, including free universal primary education, generally available secondary education and equally accessible higher education.
This should be directed to "the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity", and enable all persons to participate effectively in society (Articles 13 and 14) Participation in cultural life (Article 15) Part IV (Articles 16 - 25) requires all States parties to report regularly to the Economic and Social Council.
In 1985, the Council created the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to carry out the functions of monitoring implementation of the Covenant’s provisions (ECOSOC Res.

1985/17).

It also allows the monitoring body to make the UN General Assembly on general recommendations appropriate measures to realise the rights (Article 21).

to Part V (Articles 26 - 31) governs ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Covenant.
The fundamental obligation of States under the ICESCR is to “take steps ... with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights” [Article 2(1)].
This concept was clarified by the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights in its General Comment 3 – “the concept of progressive realization constitutes a recognition of the fact that full realization of all economic, social and cultural rights will A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 71 generally not be able to be achieved in a short period of time.

...
...

Nevertheless, the fact that realization over time, or in other words progressively, is foreseen under the Covenant should not be misinterpreted as depriving the obligation of all meaningful content ... (The Covenant) imposes an obligation to move as expeditiously and effectively as possible towards that goal.

The obligation to protect requires measures by the State to ensure that third parties (individuals, armed groups, enterprises, etc.)

do not deprive right-holders of their rights.


Under the obligation to protect, the State could be held liable for violations of the rights outlined in the ICESCR, committed by non-State actors.

Indeed, several judgments and reports issued by international human rights bodies (with regard to human rights) held States responsible “because of the lack of due diligence to prevent the violation [committed by non- State actors] or to respond to it”.
The obligation to facilitate requires States to adopt measures aimed at improving right-holders’ access to and utilization of resources and means to ensure their livelihood.
This is exemplified by article 11(2) of the ICESCR, which reads: “the States Parties to the present Covenant [...] shall take [...] the measures [...] which are needed [..] to improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources [...]”.
The obligation to facilitate also applies in natural and man- made emergency situations, for instance with regard to the facilitation of transit of humanitarian consignments.

In armed conflicts, international humanitarian law explicitly affirms that States have an obligation to grant free passage to humanitarian relief and to facilitate the work of the humanitarian agencies and the distribution of food aid.
72 National Human Rights Commission, India The obligation to provide entails that the State, as a last resort, must provide food “whenever an individual or group is unable, for reasons India’s Declarations/Reservations on the ICESCR "I.
With reference to article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the words `the right of self-determination' appearing in [this article] apply only to the peoples under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of a people or nation--which is the essence of national integrity.

"II.
"II.

With reference to article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India takes the position that the provisions of the article shall be so applied as to be in consonance with the provisions of clauses (3) to (7) of article 22 of the Constitution of India.

Further under the Indian Legal System, there is no enforceable right to compensation for persons claiming to be victims of unlawful arrest or detention against the State.

"III.
"III.

With respect to article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners.

"IV.
"IV.

With reference to articles 4 and 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and articles 12, 19 (3), 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said [article] shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 19 of the Constitution of India.
"V. With reference to article 7 (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said article shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 16(4) of the Constitution of India."

beyond their control, to enjoy the right to adequate food by the means at their disposal” (General Comment 12, Para.

15).
15).

Emergency situations, because of their very nature, often entail a shift from the obligation to facilitate to the obligation to provide.

The State may of course delegate the implementation of the obligation to provide to the local level, but it remains ultimately responsible for such provisions taking place.

generally not be able to be achieved in a short period of time.

...
...

Nevertheless, the fact that realization over time, or in other words progressively, is foreseen under the Covenant should not be misinterpreted as depriving the obligation of all meaningful content ... (The Covenant) imposes an obligation to move as expeditiously and effectively as possible towards that goal.

The obligation to protect requires measures by the State to ensure that third parties (individuals, armed groups, enterprises, etc.)

do not deprive right-holders of their rights.


Under the obligation to protect, the State could be held liable for violations of the rights outlined in the ICESCR, committed by non-State actors.

Indeed, several judgments and reports issued by international human rights bodies (with regard to human rights) held States responsible “because of the lack of due diligence to prevent the violation [committed by non- State actors] or to respond to it”.
The obligation to facilitate requires States to adopt measures aimed at improving right-holders’ access to and utilization of resources and means to ensure their livelihood.
This is exemplified by article 11(2) of the ICESCR, which reads: “the States Parties to the present Covenant [...] shall take [...] the measures [...] which are needed [..] to improve methods of production, conservation and distribution of food by making full use of technical and scientific knowledge, by disseminating knowledge of the principles of nutrition and by developing or reforming agrarian systems in such a way as to achieve the most efficient development and utilization of natural resources [...]”.
The obligation to facilitate also applies in natural and man- made emergency situations, for instance with regard to the facilitation of transit of humanitarian consignments.

In armed conflicts, international humanitarian law explicitly affirms that States have an obligation to grant free passage to humanitarian relief and to facilitate the work of the humanitarian agencies and the distribution of food aid.
The obligation to provide entails that the State, as a last resort, must provide food “whenever an individual or group is unable, for reasons India’s Declarations/Reservations on the ICESCR "I.
With reference to article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the words `the right of self-determination' appearing in [this article] apply only to the peoples under foreign domination and that these words do not apply to sovereign independent States or to a section of a people or nation--which is the essence of national integrity.

"II.
"II.

With reference to article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India takes the position that the provisions of the article shall be so applied as to be in consonance with the provisions of clauses (3) to (7) of article 22 of the Constitution of India.

Further under the Indian Legal System, there is no enforceable right to compensation for persons claiming to be victims of unlawful arrest or detention against the State.

"III.
"III.

With respect to article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Government of the Republic of India reserves its right to apply its law relating to foreigners.

"IV.
"IV.

With reference to articles 4 and 8 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and articles 12, 19 (3), 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said [article] shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 19 of the Constitution of India.
"V. With reference to article 7 (c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Government of the Republic of India declares that the provisions of the said article shall be so applied as to be in conformity with the provisions of article 16(4) of the Constitution of India."

beyond their control, to enjoy the right to adequate food by the means at their disposal” (General Comment 12, Para.

15).
15).

Emergency situations, because of their very nature, often entail a shift from the obligation to facilitate to the obligation to provide.

The State may of course delegate the implementation of the obligation to provide to the local level, but it remains ultimately responsible for such provisions taking place.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 73 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile 10 Dec 1968 19 Feb 1968 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 6 Sep 2000 8 Oct 1968 17 Oct 1980 16 Sep 1969 24 Jan 1983 a 4 Oct 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 13 Sep 1993 a 10 Dec 1975 10 Sep 1978 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Dec 2008 27 Sep 2007 a 5 Oct 1998 a 5 Jan 1973 a 12 Nov 1973 21 Apr 1983 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 1 Sep 1993 d 24 Jan 1992 a 21 Sep 1970 4 Jan 1999 a 9 May 1990 a 26 May 1992 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 6 Aug 1993 a 8 May 1981 a 9 Jun 1995 a 10 Feb 1972 74 National Human Rights Commission, India Czech Republic Democratic People's Republic of Democratic Republic of the China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Korea Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea 27 Oct 1997 21 Dec 1966 25 Sep 2008 19 Dec 1966 28 Feb 2008 9 Jan 1967 20 Mar 1968 29 Sep 1967 4 Aug 1967 21 Sep 1967 11 Oct 1967 9 Oct 1968 7 Sep 2000 28 Feb 1967 27 Mar 2001 29 Oct 1969 5 Oct 1983 a 29 Nov 1968 26 Mar 1992 a 12 Oct 1992 d 2 Apr 1969 22 Feb 1993 d 14 Sep 1981 a 1 Nov 1976 a 6 Jan 1972 5 Nov 2002 a 17 Jun 1993 a 4 Jan 1978 a 6 Mar 1969 14 Jan 1982 30 Nov 1979 25 Sep 1987 a 17 Apr 2001 a 21 Oct 1991 a 11 Jun 1993 a 19 Aug 1975 4 Nov 1980 a 21 Jan 1983 a 29 Dec 1978 a 3 May 1994 a 17 Dec 1973 7 Sep 2000 16
 May 1985 a 6 Sep 1991 a 19 May 1988 a 24 Jan 1978 2 Jul 1992 a International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Participant Signature Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad Chile Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Central African Republic 10 Dec 1968 19 Feb 1968 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 6 Sep 2000 8 Oct 1968 17 Oct 1980 16 Sep 1969 Succession(d) 24 Jan 1983 a 4 Oct 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 13 Sep 1993 a 10 Dec 1975 10 Sep 1978 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Dec 2008 27 Sep 2007 a 5 Oct 1998 a 5 Jan 1973 a 12 Nov 1973 21 Apr 1983 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Aug 1982 a 1 Sep 1993 d 24 Jan 1992 a 21 Sep 1970 4 Jan 1999 a 9 May 1990 a 26 May 1992 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 6 Aug 1993 a 8 May 1981 a 9 Jun 1995 a 10 Feb 1972 China Afghanistan Colombia Albania Comoros Algeria Congo Angola Costa Rica Argentina Côte d'Ivoire Armenia Croatia Australia Cuba Austria Cyprus Azerbaijan Czech Republic Bahamas Democratic People's Republic of Bahrain Korea Bangladesh Democratic Republic of the Barbados Congo Belarus Denmark Belgium Djibouti Belize Dominica Benin Dominican Republic Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Ecuador Bosnia and Herzegovina Egypt Brazil El Salvador Bulgaria Equatorial Guinea Burkina Faso Eritrea Burundi Estonia Cambodia Ethiopia Cameroon Finland Canada France Cape Verde Gabon Central African Republic Gambia Chad Georgia Chile Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau 27
 Oct 1997 21 Dec 1966 25 Sep 2008 10 Dec 1968 19 Dec 1966 19 Feb 1968 18 Dec 1972 28 Feb 2008 10 Dec 1973 9 Jan 1967 4 Dec 2008 19 Mar 1968 20 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 6 Sep 2000 29 Sep 1967 4 Aug 1967 21 Sep 1967 8 Oct 1968 17 Oct 1980 11 Oct 1967 16 Sep 1969 9 Oct 1968 7 Sep 2000 28 Feb 1967 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 27 Mar 2001 24 Jan 1983 a 29 Oct 1969 4 Oct 1991 a 12 Sep 1989 5 Oct 1983 a 10 Jan 1992 a 29 Nov 1968 8 Aug 1986 26 Mar 1992 a 13 Sep 1993 a 12 Oct 1992 d 10 Dec 1975 10 Sep 1978 2 Apr 1969 13 Aug 1992 a 22 Feb 1993 d 23 Dec 2008 14 Sep 1981 a 27 Sep 2007 a 5 Oct 1998 a 1 Nov 1976 a 5 Jan 1973 a 12 Nov 1973 6 Jan 1972 21 Apr 1983 5 Nov 2002 a 17 Jun 1993 a 12 Mar 1992 a 4 Jan 1978 a 12 Aug 1982 a 6 Mar 1969 1 Sep 1993 d 14 Jan 1982 24 Jan 1992 a 30 Nov 1979 21 Sep 1970 25 Sep 1987 a 4 Jan 1999 a 17 Apr 2001 a 9 May 1990 a 21 Oct 1991 a 26 May 1992 a 11 Jun 1993 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 Aug 1975 19 May 1976 a 4 Nov 1980 a 6 Aug 1993 a 21 Jan 1983 a 8 May 1981 a 29 Dec 1978 a 9 Jun 1995 a 3 May 1994 a 10 Feb 1972 17 Dec 1973 7 Sep 2000 16 May 1985 a 6 Sep 1991 a 19 May 1988 a 24 Jan 1978 2 Jul 1992 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 75 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Guyana Afghanistan Honduras Albania Hungary Algeria Iceland Angola Argentina India Indonesia Armenia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Australia Iraq Austria Ireland Azerbaijan Bahamas Israel Italy Bahrain Jamaica Bangladesh Japan Barbados Jordan Belarus Belgium Kazakhstan Belize Kenya Kuwait Benin Kyrgyzstan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Lao People's Democratic Bosnia and Herzegovina Republic Brazil Bulgaria Latvia Lebanon Burkina Faso Lesotho Burundi Liberia Cambodia Libya Cameroon Canada Liechtenstein Lithuania Cape Verde Luxembourg Central African Republic
 Madagascar Chad Malawi Chile Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Monaco 22 Aug 1968 19 Dec 1966 25 Mar 1969 10 Dec 1968 30 Dec 1968 19 Feb 1968 4 Apr 1968 18 Dec 1972 18 Feb 1969 10 Dec 1973 1 Oct 1973 4 Dec 2008 19 Dec 1966 18 Jan 1967 19 Dec 1966 30 May 1978 30 Jun 1972 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 2 Dec 2003 6 Sep 2000 7 Dec 2000 8 Oct 1968 18 Apr 1967 17 Oct 1980 26 Nov 1974 14 Apr 1970 16 Sep 1969 22 Oct 1968 26 Jun 1997 15 Feb 1977 24 Jan 1983 a 17 Feb 1981 4 Oct 1991 a 17 Jan 1974 12 Sep 1989 22 Aug 1979 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 10 Apr 1979 a 23 Feb 2006 a 13 Sep 1993 a 24 Jun 1975 10 Dec 1975 25 Jan 1971 10 Sep 1978 8 Dec 1989 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Dec 2008 3 Oct 1991 15 Sep 1978 27 Sep 2007 a 3 Oct 1975 5 Oct 1998 a 21 Jun 1979 5 Jan 1973 a 28 May 1975 12 Nov 1973 21 Apr 1983 24 Jan 2006 1 May 1972 a 21 May 1996 a 12 Mar 1992 a 7 Oct 1994 a 12 Aug 1982 a 13 Feb 2007 1 Sep 1993 d 24 Jan 1992 a 21 Sep 1970 14 Apr 1992 a 3 Nov 1972 a 4 Jan 1999 a 9 Sep 1992 a 9 May 1990 a 22 Sep 2004 26 May 1992 a 15 May 1970 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 10 Dec 1998 a 20 Nov 1991 a 6 Aug 1993 a 18 Aug 1983 8 May 1981 a 22 Sep 1971 9 Jun 1995 a 22 Dec 1993 a 10 Feb 1972 19 Sep 2006 a 16 Jul 1974 a 13 Sep 1990 17 Nov 2004 a 12 Dec 1973 a 23 Mar 1981 a 28 Aug 1997 76 National Human Rights Commission, India Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Pakistan Palau Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Papua New Guinea Sao Tome and Principe Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Rwanda San Marino Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Spain 5 Jun 1968 19 Jan 1977 25 Jun 1969 12 Nov 1968 20 Mar 1968 3 Nov 2004 20 Sep 2011 27 Jul 1976 11 Aug 1977 19 Dec 1966 2 Mar 1967 7 Oct 1976 27 Jun 1968 18 Mar 1968 31 Oct 1995 6 Jul 1970 3 Oct 1994 28 Sep 1976 18 Nov 1974 23 Oct 2006 d 3 May 1979 28 Nov 1994 a 14 May 1991 a 11 Dec 1978 28 Dec 1978
 12 Mar 1980 a 7 Mar 1986 a 29 Jul 1993 a 13 Sep 1972 17 Apr 2008 8 Mar 1977 21 Jul 2008 a 10 Jun 1992 a 28 Apr 1978 7 Jun 1974 18 Mar 1977 31 Jul 1978 10 Apr 1990 a 26 Jan 1993 a 9 Dec 1974 16 Oct 1973 16 Apr 1975 a 18 Oct 1985 a 13 Feb 1978 12 Mar 2001 d 5 May 1992 a 23 Aug 1996 a 28 May 1993 d 6 Jul 1992 d 17 Mar 1982 d 24 Jan 1990 a 27 Apr 1977 Iran (Islamic Republic of) Guyana Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Monaco 22 Aug 1968 19 Dec 1966 25 Mar 1969 30 Dec 1968 4 Apr 1968 18 Feb 1969 1 Oct 1973 19 Dec 1966 18 Jan 1967 19 Dec 1966 30 May 1978 30 Jun 1972 2 Dec 2003 18 Apr 1967 26 Nov 1974 14 Apr 1970 22 Oct 1968 26 Jun 1997 15 Feb 1977 17 Feb 1981 17 Jan 1974 22 Aug 1979 10 Apr 1979 a 23 Feb 2006 a 24 Jun 1975 25 Jan 1971 8 Dec 1989 3 Oct 1991 15 Sep 1978 3 Oct 1975 21 Jun 1979 28 May 1975 24 Jan 2006 1 May 1972 a 21 May 1996 a 7 Oct 1994 a 13 Feb 2007 14 Apr 1992 a 3 Nov 1972 a 9 Sep 1992 a 22 Sep 2004 15 May 1970 a 10 Dec 1998 a 20 Nov 1991 a 18 Aug 1983 22 Sep 1971 22 Dec 1993 a 19 Sep 2006 a 16 Jul 1974 a 13 Sep 1990 17 Nov 2004 a 12 Dec 1973 a 23 Mar 1981 a 28 Aug 1997 Lao People's Democratic 7 Dec 2000 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Mongolia Afghanistan Montenegro Albania Morocco Algeria Namibia Angola Argentina Nepal Netherlands Armenia New Zealand Australia Nicaragua Austria Niger Azerbaijan Bahamas Nigeria Norway Bahrain Pakistan Bangladesh Palau Barbados Panama Belarus Belgium Papua New Guinea Belize Paraguay Peru Benin Philippines Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Poland Bosnia and Herzegovina Portugal Brazil Bulgaria Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Burkina Faso
 Romania Burundi Russian Federation Cambodia Rwanda Cameroon Canada San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Cape Verde Senegal Central African Republic Serbia Chad Seychelles Chile Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Spain Signature 5 Jun 1968 19 Jan 1977 10 Dec 1968 19 Feb 1968 25 Jun 1969 12 Nov 1968 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 20 Mar 1968 3 Nov 2004 20 Sep 2011 27 Jul 1976 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 6 Sep 2000 11 Aug 1977 19 Dec 1966 2 Mar 1967 7 Oct 1976 8 Oct 1968 27 Jun 1968 18 Mar 1968 17 Oct 1980 31 Oct 1995 6 Jul 1970 16 Sep 1969 3 Oct 1994 28 Sep 1976 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 18 Nov 1974 24 Jan 1983 a 23 Oct 2006 d 4 Oct 1991 a 3 May 1979 12 Sep 1989 28 Nov 1994 a 10 Jan 1992 a 8 Aug 1986 14 May 1991 a 11 Dec 1978 13 Sep 1993 a 28 Dec 1978 10 Dec 1975 12 Mar 1980 a 10 Sep 1978 7 Mar 1986 a 13 Aug 1992 a 23 Dec 2008 29 Jul 1993 a 13 Sep 1972 27 Sep 2007 a 17 Apr 2008 5 Oct 1998 a 5 Jan 1973 a 8 Mar 1977 12 Nov 1973 21 Apr 1983 21 Jul 2008 a 10 Jun 1992 a 28 Apr 1978 12 Mar 1992 a 7 Jun 1974 12 Aug 1982 a 18 Mar 1977 1 Sep 1993 d 31 Jul 1978 24 Jan 1992 a 21 Sep 1970 10 Apr 1990 a 26 Jan 1993 a 4 Jan 1999 a 9 Dec 1974 9 May 1990 a 16 Oct 1973 26 May 1992 a 16 Apr 1975 a 27 Jun 1984 a 19 May 1976 a 18 Oct 1985 a 6 Aug 1993 a 13 Feb 1978 8 May 1981 a 12 Mar 2001 d 9 Jun 1995 a 5 May 1992 a 10 Feb 1972 23 Aug 1996 a 28 May 1993 d 6 Jul 1992 d 17 Mar 1982 d 24 Jan 1990 a 27 Apr 1977 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 77 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Sri Lanka Afghanistan St. Vincent and the Grenadines Albania Sudan Algeria Suriname Angola Swaziland Argentina Sweden Armenia Switzerland Australia Syrian Arab Republic Austria Tajikistan Azerbaijan Thailand Bahamas The former Yugoslav Republic of Bahrain Macedonia Bangladesh Timor-Leste Barbados Togo
 Belarus Trinidad and Tobago Belgium Tunisia Belize Turkey Benin Turkmenistan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Uganda Bosnia and Herzegovina Ukraine Brazil United Kingdom of Great Britain Bulgaria and Northern Ireland Burkina Faso United Republic of Tanzania Burundi United States of America Cambodia Uruguay Cameroon Uzbekistan Canada Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Cape Verde of) Central African Republic Viet Nam Chad Yemen Chile Zambia Zimbabwe 10 Dec 1968 19 Feb 1968 29 Sep 1967 18 Dec 1972 10 Dec 1973 4 Dec 2008 19 Mar 1968 10 Dec 1968 30 Apr 1968 6 Sep 2000 15 Aug 2000 20 Mar 1968 16 Sep 1968 8 Oct 1968 5 Oct 1977 17 Oct 1980 21 Feb 1967 24 Jun 1969 16 Sep 1969 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 11 Jun 1980 a 24 Jan 1983 a 9 Nov 1981 a 4 Oct 1991 a 18 Mar 1986 a 12 Sep 1989 28 Dec 1976 a 10 Jan 1992 a 26 Mar 2004 a 8 Aug 1986 6 Dec 1971 13 Sep 1993 a 18 Jun 1992 a 10 Dec 1975 21 Apr 1969 a 10 Sep 1978 4 Jan 1999 a 13 Aug 1992 a 5 Sep 1999 a 23 Dec 2008 18 Jan 1994 d 27 Sep 2007 a 5 Oct 1998 a 16 Apr 2003 a 5 Jan 1973 a 24 May 1984 a 12 Nov 1973 8 Dec 1978 a 21 Apr 1983 18 Mar 1969 23 Sep 2003 12 Mar 1992 a 1 May 1997 a 12 Aug 1982 a 21 Jan 1987 a 1 Sep 1993 d 12 Nov 1973 24 Jan 1992 a 20 May 1976 21 Sep 1970 4 Jan 1999 a 11 Jun 1976 a 9 May 1990 a 26 May 1992 a 1 Apr 1970 27 Jun 1984 a 28 Sep 1995 a 19 May 1976 a 10 May 1978 6 Aug 1993 a 8 May 1981 a 24 Sep 1982 a 9 Jun 1995 a 9 Feb 1987 a 10 Feb 1972 10 Apr 1984 a 13 May 1991 a 78 National Human Rights Commission, India Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is a body of human rights experts tasked with monitoring the implementation of the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
Unlike the other human rights treaty bodies, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was not established by its corresponding instrument.

Rather, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) created the Committee under ECOSOC Resolution 1985/17 to carry out the monitoring functions originally assigned to the Council under Part IV of the Covenant.
It consists of 18 members with recognized competence in the field of human rights, who are elected for Committee on Economic, four-year terms, with half the Social & Cultural Rights (CESCR) The CESCR is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation members elected every two years.

The Members are elected by ECOSOC and are eligible for re- election if re-nominated.

The Committee is thus a subsidiary of the ICESCR by its State organ of ECOSOC and derives its parties.
It was established under ECOSOC Resolution 1985/17 of 28 May 1985 formal authority from that body.

Elections take place in a secret ballot from a list of nominees proposed by States parties to the Covenant.
Under Articles 16 and 17 of the Covenant, States parties undertake to submit periodic reports to the Committee, within two years of the entry into force of the Covenant for a particular State party, and thereafter, once every five years, outlining the legislative, judicial, policy and other measures which they have taken to ensure the enjoyment of the rights contained in the Covenant, as also difficulties faced in this respect.
St. Vincent and the Grenadines Syrian Arab Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of Trinidad and Tobago Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Turkmenistan Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe United Kingdom of Great Britain 16 Sep 1968 and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 24 Jun 1969 29 Sep 1967 30 Apr 1968 15 Aug 2000 20 Mar 1968 5 Oct 1977 21 Feb 1967 11 Jun 1980 a 9 Nov 1981 a 18 Mar 1986 a 28 Dec 1976 a 26 Mar 2004 a 6 Dec 1971 18 Jun 1992 a 21 Apr 1969 a 4 Jan 1999 a 5 Sep 1999 a 18 Jan 1994 d 16 Apr 2003 a 24 May 1984 a 8 Dec 1978 a 18 Mar 1969 23 Sep 2003 1 May 1997 a 21 Jan 1987 a 12 Nov 1973 20 May 1976 11 Jun 1976 a 1 Apr 1970 28 Sep 1995 a 10 May 1978 24 Sep 1982 a 9 Feb 1987 a 10 Apr 1984 a 13 May 1991 a Committee on Economic, Social & Cultural Rights (CESCR) Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is a body of human rights experts tasked with monitoring the implementation of the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
Unlike the other human rights treaty bodies, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was not established by its corresponding instrument.

Rather, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) created the Committee under ECOSOC Resolution 1985/17 to carry out the monitoring functions originally assigned to the Council under Part IV of the Covenant.
It consists of 18 members with recognized competence in the field of human rights, who are elected for four-year terms, with half the members elected every two years.

The Members are elected by ECOSOC and are eligible for re- re-nominated.

The election Committee is thus a subsidiary organ of ECOSOC and derives its formal authority from that body.

Elections take place in a secret ballot from a list of nominees proposed by States parties to the Covenant.
Under Articles 16 and 17 of the Covenant, States parties undertake to submit periodic reports to the Committee, within two years of the entry into force of the Covenant for a particular State party, and thereafter, once every five years, outlining the legislative, judicial, policy and other measures which they have taken to ensure the enjoyment of the rights contained in the Covenant, as also difficulties faced in this respect.
The CESCR is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the ICESCR by its State parties.

 It was established under Resolution ECOSOC 1985/17 of 28 May 1985 if A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 79 with a view to assisting States parties in fulfilling their reporting obligations and to provide greater interpretative clarity as to the intent, meaning and content of the Covenant.
General comments are a crucial means of generating jurisprudence, providing a method by which members of the Committee may come to an agreement by consensus regarding the interpretation of norms embodied in the Covenant.

The Committee examines each State Party report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the concerned State in the form of “concluding observations”.

The Committee has emphasized that reporting obligations under the Covenant fulfill seven key objectives.
In its General Comment No.

1 (1989), the Committee outlined these objectives as follows: 1.

To ensure that a State party undertakes a comprehensive legislation, administrative rules and review of national procedures, and practices in order to assure the fullest possible conformity with the Covenant; 2.
To ensure that the State party regularly monitors the actual situation with respect to each of the enumerated rights in order to assess the extent to which the various rights are being enjoyed by all individuals within the country; 3.

To provide a basis for government elaboration of clearly stated and carefully targeted policies for implementing the Covenant; 4.
To facilitate public scrutiny of government policies with respect to the Covenant's implementation, and to encourage the involvement of the various sectors of society in the formulation, implementation and review of relevant policies; 5.

To provide a basis on which both the State party and the Committee can effectively evaluate progress towards the realization of the obligations contained in the Covenant; 6.
To enable the State party to develop a better understanding of impeding the realization of problems and shortcomings economic, social and cultural rights; and, 7.

To facilitate the exchange of information among States parties and to help develop a fuller appreciation of both common problems and possible solutions in the realization of each of the rights contained in the Covenant.
The Committee decided in 1988 to begin preparing "general comments" on the rights and provisions contained in the ICESCR 80 National Human Rights Commission, India The Committee has emphasized that reporting obligations under the Covenant fulfill seven key objectives.

In its General Comment No.

1 (1989), the Committee outlined these objectives as follows: 1.
To ensure that a State party undertakes a comprehensive review of national legislation, administrative rules and procedures, and practices in order to assure the fullest possible conformity with the Covenant; 2.

To ensure that the State party regularly monitors the actual situation with respect to each of the enumerated rights in order to assess the extent to which the various rights are being enjoyed by all individuals within the country; 3.
To provide a basis for government elaboration of clearly stated and carefully targeted policies for implementing the Covenant; 4.

To facilitate public scrutiny of government policies with respect to the Covenant's implementation, and to encourage the involvement of the various sectors of society in the formulation, implementation and review of relevant policies; 5.
To provide a basis on which both the State party and the Committee can effectively evaluate progress towards the realization of the obligations contained in the Covenant; 6.

To enable the State party to develop a better understanding of problems and shortcomings impeding the realization of economic, social and cultural rights; and, 7.
To facilitate the exchange of information among States parties and to help develop a fuller appreciation of both common problems and possible solutions in the realization of each of the rights contained in the Covenant.
The Committee decided in 1988 to begin preparing "general comments" on the rights and provisions contained in the ICESCR with a view to assisting States parties in fulfilling their reporting obligations and to provide greater interpretative clarity as to the intent, meaning and content of the Covenant.
General comments are a crucial means of generating jurisprudence, providing a method by which members of the Committee may come to an agreement by consensus regarding the interpretation of norms embodied in the Covenant.

The Committee examines each State Party report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the concerned State in the form of “concluding observations”.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 81 Optional Protocol to ICESCR The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted in December 2008, is an international treaty establishing complaint and inquiry mechanisms for the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

It enables victims to complain about violations of the rights enshrined in the Covenant at the international level.
Optional Protocol to the ICESCR The ICESCR Optional Protocol is an international treaty establishing complaint and inquiry mechanisms for the ICESCR.

It was adopted by the UNGA on 10 December 2008, and opened for signature on 24 September 2009.

According to Article 18, it will enter into force when ratified by 10 parties.
Entry into force: Not yet in Force Signatories: 39 Parties: 7 India has not signed the ICESCR Optional Protocol The Optional Protocol reiterates the equal importance of economic, social and cultural rights with civil and political rights.
It is designed to enable victims to seek justice for violations of their economic, social and cultural rights at the international level through the submission of communications before the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which is the Treaty Body that governs the implementation of the Covenant by State Parties.
The Optional Protocol provides for a “communications procedure” (that is, a complaints mechanism), in the same way that the Optional Protocols to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women do.
The communications procedure the Convention on 82 National Human Rights Commission, India allows victims of violations of their economic, social, and cultural rights to present complaints before the Committee, which can in turn, review individual complaints in a way similar to that of traditional human rights courts.
Optional Protocol to the ICESCR Key Provisions: The Optional Protocol establishes an individual complaints mechanism for the Covenant; It also includes an inquiry mechanism whereby Parties may permit the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.
The procedure provides for the possibility of a friendly settlement and of so-called ‘interim measures’ which the State may be requested to take to avoid possible irreparable damage to the victims of the alleged violations.

The Optional Protocol also provides for an “inquiry procedure,” allowing the Committee to initiate an investigation if it receives reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations of the ICESCR by a State Party.
The inquiry procedure only comes into operation if States make a specific declaration to be bound by it (‘opt in’ clause).

Any individual or group of individuals (including communities, NGOs, trade unions, etc.)

can lodge a complaint alleging a violation of all or any ESCR, provided their government has ratified the OP- ICESCR.
Authors of the communication (usually victims, or those acting on their behalf) must first exhaust all available domestic remedies, present the communication within a year of that exhaustion, and ensure that the same case has not been presented before a similar international mechanism.
Optional Protocol to ICESCR The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, adopted in December 2008, is an international treaty establishing complaint and inquiry mechanisms for the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

It enables victims to complain about violations of the rights enshrined in the Covenant at the international level.
Optional Protocol to the ICESCR The ICESCR Optional Protocol is an international treaty establishing complaint and inquiry mechanisms for the ICESCR.

It was adopted by the UNGA on 10 December 2008, and opened for signature on 24 September 2009.

According to Article 18, it will enter into force when ratified by 10 parties.
Entry into force: Not yet in Force Signatories: 39 Parties: 7 India has not signed the ICESCR Optional Protocol The Optional Protocol reiterates the equal importance of economic, social and cultural rights with civil and political rights.
It is designed to enable victims to seek justice for violations of their economic, social and cultural rights at the international level through the submission of communications before the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which is the Treaty Body that governs the implementation of the Covenant by State Parties.
The Optional Protocol provides for a “communications procedure” (that is, a complaints mechanism), in the same way that the Optional Protocols to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women do.
The communications procedure allows victims of violations of their economic, social, and cultural rights to present complaints before the Committee, which can in turn, review individual complaints in a way similar to that of traditional human rights courts.
Optional Protocol to the ICESCR Key Provisions: The Optional Protocol establishes an individual complaints mechanism for the Covenant; It also includes an inquiry mechanism whereby Parties may permit the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.
to take avoid The procedure provides for the possibility of a friendly settlement and of so-called ‘interim measures’ which the State may be requested to possible irreparable damage to the victims the alleged violations.

The of Optional Protocol also provides for an “inquiry procedure,” allowing initiate an the Committee investigation if it receives reliable indicating grave or information the violations systematic ICESCR by a State Party.
The inquiry procedure only comes into operation if States make a specific declaration to be bound by it (‘opt in’ clause).

of to Any individual or group of individuals (including communities, NGOs, trade unions, etc.)

can lodge a complaint alleging a violation of all or any ESCR, provided their government has ratified the OP- ICESCR.
Authors of the communication (usually victims, or those acting on their behalf) must first exhaust all available domestic remedies, present the communication within a year of that exhaustion, and ensure that the same case has not been presented before a similar international mechanism.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 83 Violations of economic, social, cultural rights can occur when States interfere unduly with their enjoyment; fail to adopt steps towards their full realization; when they provide for or deny rights in a discriminatory manner; when they fail to comply with the minimum core obligations set out by the Convention; or adopt deliberately retrogressive measures without a proper justification.
84 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Accession(a), Ratification 24 Oct 2011 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina 13 Jan 2012 18 Jan 2012 Democratic Republic of the Participant Argentina Armenia Azerbaijan Belgium Cape Verde Chile Congo Costa Rica Congo Ecuador El Salvador Finland Gabon Ghana Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Ireland Italy Kazakhstan Luxembourg Madagascar Maldives Mali Mongolia Montenegro Netherlands Paraguay 24 Sep 2009 29 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 12 Feb 2010 12 Jul 2010 26 Sep 2011 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 28 Apr 2011 23 Sep 2010 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 23 Mar 2012 28 Sep 2009 23 Sep 2010 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 21 Sep 2011 24 Sep 2009 23 Dec 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 6 Oct 2009 11 Jun 2010 20 Sep 2011 1 Jul 2010 Violations of economic, social, cultural rights can occur when States interfere unduly with their enjoyment; fail to adopt steps towards their full realization; when they provide for or deny rights in a discriminatory manner; when they fail to comply with the minimum core obligations set out by the Convention; or adopt deliberately retrogressive measures without a proper justification.
Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Accession(a), Ratification Argentina Armenia Azerbaijan Belgium Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Cape Verde Chile Congo Costa Rica Democratic Republic of the Congo Ecuador El Salvador Finland Gabon Ghana Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Ireland Italy Kazakhstan Luxembourg Madagascar Maldives Mali Mongolia Montenegro Netherlands Paraguay 24 Sep 2009 29 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 12 Feb 2010 12 Jul 2010 26 Sep 2011 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 28 Apr 2011 23 Sep 2010 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 23 Mar 2012 28 Sep 2009 23 Sep 2010 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 21 Sep 2011 24 Sep 2009 23 Dec 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 6 Oct 2009 24 Oct 2011 13 Jan 2012 18 Jan 2012 11 Jun 2010 20 Sep 2011 1 Jul 2010 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 85 Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Accession(a), Ratification Argentina Portugal Armenia Senegal Azerbaijan Slovakia Belgium Slovenia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Solomon Islands Bosnia and Herzegovina Spain Cape Verde Timor-Leste Chile Togo Congo Ukraine Costa Rica Uruguay Democratic Republic of the Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Congo of) Ecuador El Salvador Finland Gabon Ghana Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Ireland Italy Kazakhstan Luxembourg Madagascar Maldives Mali Mongolia Montenegro Netherlands Paraguay 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 29 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 12 Feb 2010 24 Sep 2009 12 Jul 2010 24 Sep 2009 26 Sep 2011 28 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 28 Apr 2011 24 Sep 2009 23 Sep 2010 4 Oct 2011 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 23 Mar 2012 28 Sep 2009 23 Sep 2010 24 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 21 Sep 2011 24 Sep 2009 23 Dec 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 6 Oct 2009 24 Oct 2011 7 Mar 2012 13 Jan 2012 18 Jan 2012 23 Sep 2010 11 Jun 2010 20 Sep 2011 1 Jul 2010 86 National Human Rights Commission, India Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) In 1979, the international community adopted a new treaty which addressed a specific phenomenon: discrimination against women on the basis of sex.
Sex discrimination, like racial discrimination, is proscribed under the two covenants (ICCPR and ICESCR) in general terms.

However, the CEDAW sets out in more detail what is meant by the prohibition of sex discrimination from the perspective of equality between men and women.

It addresses a range of programmatic and policy aspects of the specific problem.

CEDAW It sets out internationally accepted principles on the rights of women.
The basic legal norm of the Convention is the prohibition of all forms of discrimination against women.

Entry into force: 3 September 1981 Signatories: 99 Parties: 187 Treaty Body: Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) India ratified the Convention on 9 July 1993 Consisting of a Preamble and 30 articles, it defines what constitutes discrimination against women and sets up an agenda for national action to end such discrimination.
By accepting the Convention, States commit themselves to undertake a series of measures to end discrimination against women in all forms, including: Incorporating the principle of equality of men and women in their legal system, abolish all discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones prohibiting discrimination against women; Solomon Islands Portugal Senegal Slovakia Slovenia Spain Timor-Leste Togo Ukraine Uruguay of) 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 28 Sep 2009 25 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 24 Sep 2009 7 Mar 2012 23 Sep 2010 Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 4 Oct 2011 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) In 1979, the international community adopted a new treaty which addressed a specific phenomenon: discrimination against women on the basis of sex.
Sex discrimination, like racial discrimination, is proscribed under the two covenants (ICCPR and ICESCR) in general terms.

However, the CEDAW sets out in more detail what is meant by the prohibition of sex discrimination from the perspective of equality between men and women.

It addresses a range of programmatic and policy aspects of the specific problem.

CEDAW It sets out internationally accepted principles on the rights of women.
The basic legal norm of the Convention is the prohibition of all forms of discrimination against women.

Entry into force: 3 September 1981 Signatories: 99 Parties: 187 Treaty Body: Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) India ratified the Convention on 9 July 1993 Consisting of a Preamble and 30 articles, it defines what constitutes discrimination against women and sets up an agenda for national action to end such discrimination.
By accepting the Convention, States commit themselves to undertake a series of measures to end discrimination against women in all forms, including: Incorporating the principle of equality of men and women in their legal system, abolish all discriminatory laws and adopt appropriate ones prohibiting discrimination against women; A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 87 Establishing tribunals and other public institutions to ensure the effective protection of women against discrimination; and Ensuring elimination of all acts of discrimination against both to refrain from sex-based discrimination in their own dealings and take measures towards achieving factual as well as legal equality in all spheres of life, including by breaking down discriminatory women by persons, organizations or enterprises.
attitudes, customs and practices in society.

legislation How does CEDAW define discrimination against women?

The Convention provides the basis for realizing equality between women and men through ensuring women's equal access to, and equal opportunities in, political and public life – including the right to vote and to stand for election – as well as education, health and employment.
States parties agree to take all appropriate measures, and including temporary special measures, so that women can enjoy all their human rights and fundamental freedoms.
"Any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field."
Aside from civil rights issues, the Convention also devotes major attention to a most vital concern their of women, reproductive rights; it is perhaps the only human rights treaty which affirms the reproductive rights of women and the impact of culture and tradition as influential forces in the shaping of gender roles and family relations.

It affirms women's rights to acquire, change or retain their nationality and the nationality of their children.
The Convention also obligates State parties to take appropriate measures against all forms of trafficking in women and exploitation of women.

namely The Convention begins by defining discrimination on the basis of sex.

The initial articles oblige States 88 National Human Rights Commission, India Article 6 explicitly requires States to suppress all forms of trafficking Productive Rights The Preamble states that "the role of women in procreation should not be a basis for discrimination".
It advocates, in Article 5, ''a proper understanding of maternity as a social function", demanding fully shared responsibility for child-rearing by both sexes.

Accordingly, provisions for maternity protection and child-care are proclaimed as essential rights and are incorporated into all areas of the Convention, whether dealing with employment, family law, health core or education.
in women and exploitation of prostitution, even though these phenomena may implicitly fall within the prohibitions of slavery and forced labour contained in other instruments.

While Articles 7 and 8 detail obligations to ensure equal participation of women with men in public and political life, Articles 9 and 10 expand on equality in nationality and education.

Articles 11, 12, and 13 elaborate on women’s rights to employment, health and other areas of economic and social life.
Applying general principles to a particular "The Convention also affirms phenomenon, Article 14 is the only women's right to reproductive provision in the treaties to address choice.

It guarantees women's rights "to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to hove access to the information, education and means to enable the particular problems faced by women in rural areas.
Articles 15 and 16 expand upon rights to equality before the law and in the area of marriage and family them to exercise these rights" relations.

(Article 16e).

 Establishing tribunals and other public institutions to ensure the effective protection of women against discrimination; and Ensuring elimination of all acts of discrimination against women by persons, organizations or enterprises.
The Convention provides the basis for realizing equality between women and men through ensuring women's equal access to, and equal opportunities in, political and public life – including the right to vote and to stand for election – as well as education, health and How does CEDAW define discrimination against women?
"Any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of that women sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of employment.

States parties agree to take all appropriate measures, including legislation and temporary special measures, so can enjoy all their human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Aside from civil rights issues, the Convention also devotes major attention to a most vital concern equality of men and women, of of women, namely their human rights and fundamental reproductive rights; it is perhaps freedoms in the political, the only human rights treaty economic, social, cultural, civil or which affirms the reproductive any other field."

rights of women and the impact of culture and tradition as influential forces in the shaping of gender roles and family relations.
It affirms women's rights to acquire, change or retain their nationality and the nationality of their children.

The Convention also obligates State parties to take appropriate measures against all forms of trafficking in women and exploitation of women.

The Convention begins by defining discrimination on the basis of sex.
The initial articles oblige States both to refrain from sex-based discrimination in their own dealings and take measures towards achieving factual as well as legal equality in all spheres of life, including by breaking down discriminatory attitudes, customs and practices in society.

 implicitly Productive Rights The Preamble states that "the role of women in procreation for should not be a basis discrimination".
Article 6 explicitly requires States to suppress all forms of trafficking in women and exploitation of prostitution, even though these phenomena may fall within the prohibitions of slavery and forced labour contained in other instruments.

While Articles 7 and 8 detail obligations to ensure equal participation of women with men in public and political life, Articles 9 and 10 expand on equality and education.
nationality in fully understanding It advocates, in Article 5, ''a proper of maternity as a social function", demanding shared responsibility for child-rearing by both sexes.

Accordingly, maternity for provisions protection and child-care are proclaimed as essential rights and are incorporated into all the Convention, areas whether with dealing employment, family law, health core or education.

of "The Convention also affirms women's right to reproductive choice.
It guarantees women's rights "to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to hove access to the information, education and means to enable them to exercise these rights" (Article 16e).

a to Articles 11, 12, and 13 elaborate on women’s rights to employment, health and other areas of economic and social life.
Applying general particular principles phenomenon, Article 14 is the only provision in the treaties to address the particular problems faced by women in rural areas.

Articles 15 and 16 expand upon rights to equality before the law and in the family area of marriage and relations.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 89 India’s Declarations/Reservations on the CEDAW Declarations: "i) With regard to articles 5 (a) and 16 (1) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that it shall abide by and ensure these provisions in conformity with its policy of non-interference in the personal affairs of any Community without its initiative and consent.
"ii) With regard to article 16 (2) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that though in principle it fully supports the principle of compulsory registration of marriages, it is not practical in a vast country like India with its variety of customs, religions and level of literacy."
Reservation: "With regard to article 29 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of this article."

The Convention, in Part V, requires all States parties to report regularly to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, established to monitor implementation of the Treaty’s provisions.
Countries that have ratified or acceded to the Convention are legally bound to put its provisions into practice.

They are also committed to submit national reports, at least every four years, on measures they have taken to comply with their treaty obligations.
States are also required to establish Tribunals and public institutions to guarantee women effective protection against discrimination and take steps to eliminate all forms of discrimination practiced against women by individuals, organizations, and enterprises.
90 National Human Rights Commission, India Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Antigua and Barbuda Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon 14 Aug 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 24 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1990 11 Nov 1981 17 Jul 1980 31 Mar 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Oct 1980 6 Jun 1983 Succession(d) 5 Mar 2003 11 May 1994 a 22 May 1996 a 15 Jan 1997 a 17 Sep 1986 a 1 Aug 1989 a 15 Jul 1985 13 Sep 1993 a 28 Jul 1983 31 Mar 1982 10 Jul 1995 a 6 Oct 1993 a 18 Jun 2002 a 6 Nov 1984 a 16 Oct 1980 4 Feb 1981 10 Jul 1985 16 May 1990 12 Mar 1992 31 Aug 1981 8 Jun 1990 1 Sep 1993 d 13 Aug 1996 a 1 Feb 1984 24 May 2006 a 8 Feb 1982 14 Oct 1987 a 8 Jan 1992 15 Oct 1992 a 23 Aug 1994 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 30 May 1980 India’s Declarations/Reservations on the CEDAW Declarations: "i) With regard to articles 5 (a) and 16 (1) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that it shall abide by and ensure these provisions in conformity with its policy of non-interference in the personal affairs of any Community without its initiative and consent.
"ii) With regard to article 16 (2) of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that though in principle it fully supports the principle of compulsory registration of marriages, it is not practical in a vast country like India with its variety of customs, religions and level of literacy."
Reservation: "With regard to article 29 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Government of the Republic of India declares that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph 1 of this article."

The Convention, in Part V, requires all States parties to report regularly to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, established to monitor implementation of the Treaty’s provisions.
Countries that have ratified or acceded to the Convention are legally bound to put its provisions into practice.

They are also committed to submit national reports, at least every four years, on measures they have taken to comply with their treaty obligations.
States are also required to establish Tribunals and public institutions to guarantee women effective protection against discrimination and take steps to eliminate all forms of discrimination practiced against women by individuals, organizations, and enterprises.
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon 14 Aug 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 24 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1990 11 Nov 1981 17 Jul 1980 30 May 1980 31 Mar 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Oct 1980 6 Jun 1983 5 Mar 2003 11 May 1994 a 22 May 1996 a 15 Jan 1997 a 17 Sep 1986 a 1 Aug 1989 a 15 Jul 1985 13 Sep 1993 a 28 Jul 1983 31 Mar 1982 10 Jul 1995 a 6 Oct 1993 a 18 Jun 2002 a 6 Nov 1984 a 16 Oct 1980 4 Feb 1981 10 Jul 1985 16 May 1990 12 Mar 1992 31 Aug 1981 8 Jun 1990 1 Sep 1993 d 13 Aug 1996 a 1 Feb 1984 24 May 2006 a 8 Feb 1982 14 Oct 1987 a 8 Jan 1992 15 Oct 1992 a 23 Aug 1994 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 91 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Canada Albania Cape Verde Algeria Central African Republic Andorra Chad Angola Chile Antigua and Barbuda China Argentina Colombia Armenia Comoros Australia Congo Austria Cook Islands Azerbaijan Costa Rica Bahamas Côte d'Ivoire Bahrain Croatia Bangladesh Cuba Barbados Cyprus Belarus Czech Republic Belgium Democratic People's Republic of Belize Korea Benin Democratic Republic of the Bhutan Congo Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Denmark Bosnia and Herzegovina Djibouti Botswana Dominica Brazil Dominican Republic Brunei Darussalam Ecuador Bulgaria Egypt Burkina Faso El Salvador Burundi
 Equatorial Guinea Cambodia Eritrea Cameroon Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia 14 Aug 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 29 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 6 Mar 1980 24 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1990 11 Nov 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 30 May 1980 17 Jul 1980 15 Sep 1980 31 Mar 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 16 Jul 1980 14 Nov 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Oct 1980 6 Jun 1983 8 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 29 Jul 1980 5 Mar 2003 10 Dec 1981 11 May 1994 a 5 Dec 1980 a 22 May 1996 a 21 Jun 1991 a 15 Jan 1997 a 9 Jun 1995 a 17 Sep 1986 a 7 Dec 1989 1 Aug 1989 a 4 Nov 1980 15 Jul 1985 19 Jan 1982 13 Sep 1993 a 31 Oct 1994 a 28 Jul 1983 26 Jul 1982 31 Mar 1982 11 Aug 2006 a 10 Jul 1995 a 4 Apr 1986 6 Oct 1993 a 18 Dec 1995 18 Jun 2002 a 9 Sep 1992 d 6 Nov 1984 a 17 Jul 1980 16 Oct 1980 23 Jul 1985 a 4 Feb 1981 22 Feb 1993 d 10 Jul 1985 27 Feb 2001 a 16 May 1990 12 Mar 1992 17 Oct 1986 31 Aug 1981 8 Jun 1990 21 Apr 1983 1 Sep 1993 d 2 Dec 1998 a 13 Aug 1996 a 15 Sep 1980 1 Feb 1984 2 Sep 1982 24 May 2006 a 9 Nov 1981 8 Feb 1982 18 Sep 1981 14 Oct 1987 a 19 Aug 1981 8 Jan 1992 23 Oct 1984 a 15 Oct 1992 a 5 Sep 1995 a 23 Aug 1994 21 Oct 1991 a 10 Sep 1981 28 Aug 1995 a 4 Sep 1986 14 Dec 1983 21 Jan 1983 16 Apr 1993 92 National Human Rights Commission, India Guinea-Bissau Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 2 Mar 1982 17 Jul 1980 8 Jun 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 11 Jun 1980 6 Jun 1980 24 Jul 1980 30 Jul 1980 29 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 3 Dec 1980 17 Jul 1980 26 Oct 1994 a 10 Jul 1985 2 Jan 1986 7 Jun 1983 30 Aug 1990 12 Aug 1982 9 Aug 1982 23 Aug 1985 17 Jul 1980 20
 Jul 1981 3 Mar 1983 22 Dec 1980 18 Jun 1985 9 Jul 1993 13 Sep 1984 13 Aug 1986 a 23 Dec 1985 a 3 Oct 1991 10 Jun 1985 19 Oct 1984 25 Jun 1985 1 Jul 1992 26 Aug 1998 a 9 Mar 1984 a 17 Mar 2004 a 2 Sep 1994 a 10 Feb 1997 a 14 Aug 1981 14 Apr 1992 a 16 Apr 1997 a 22 Aug 1995 17 Jul 1984 a 16 May 1989 a 22 Dec 1995 a 18 Jan 1994 a Lao People's Democratic 17 Jul 1980 Czech Republic Democratic People's Republic of Democratic Republic of the 17 Jul 1980 17 Oct 1986 Central African Republic Canada Cape Verde Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Korea Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 29 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 6 Mar 1980 17 Jul 1980 15 Sep 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 16 Jul 1980 14 Nov 1980 8 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 29 Jul 1980 10 Dec 1981 5 Dec 1980 a 21 Jun 1991 a 9 Jun 1995 a 7 Dec 1989 4 Nov 1980 19 Jan 1982 31 Oct 1994 a 26 Jul 1982 11 Aug 2006 a 4 Apr 1986 18 Dec 1995 9 Sep 1992 d 17 Jul 1980 23 Jul 1985 a 22 Feb 1993 d 27 Feb 2001 a 21 Apr 1983 2 Dec 1998 a 15 Sep 1980 2 Sep 1982 9 Nov 1981 18 Sep 1981 19 Aug 1981 23 Oct 1984 a 5 Sep 1995 a 21 Oct 1991 a 10 Sep 1981 28 Aug 1995 a 4 Sep 1986 14 Dec 1983 21 Jan 1983 16 Apr 1993 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 14 Aug 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 2 Mar 1982 17 Jul 1980 8 Jun 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 11 Jun 1980 6 Jun 1980 24 Jul 1980 30 Jul 1980 24 Jul 1980 29 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1990 17 Jul 1980 11 Nov 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 30 May 1980 17 Jul 1980 3
 Dec 1980 31 Mar 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Oct 1980 6 Jun 1983 17 Jul 1980 Afghanistan Georgia Albania Germany Algeria Ghana Andorra Greece Angola Grenada Antigua and Barbuda Guatemala Argentina Guinea Armenia Guinea-Bissau Australia Guyana Austria Haiti Azerbaijan Honduras Bahamas Hungary Bahrain Iceland Bangladesh India Barbados Indonesia Belarus Iraq Belgium Ireland Belize Israel Benin Italy Bhutan Jamaica Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Japan Bosnia and Herzegovina Jordan Botswana Kazakhstan Brazil Kenya Brunei Darussalam Kiribati Bulgaria Kuwait Burkina Faso Kyrgyzstan Burundi Lao People's Democratic Cambodia Republic Cameroon Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania 5 Mar 2003 26 Oct 1994 a 11 May 1994 a 10 Jul 1985 22 May 1996 a 2 Jan 1986 15 Jan 1997 a 7 Jun 1983 17 Sep 1986 a 30 Aug 1990 1 Aug 1989 a 12 Aug 1982 15 Jul 1985 9 Aug 1982 13 Sep 1993 a 23 Aug 1985 28 Jul 1983 17 Jul 1980 31 Mar 1982 20 Jul 1981 10 Jul 1995 a 3 Mar 1983 6 Oct 1993 a 22 Dec 1980 18 Jun 2002 a 18 Jun 1985 6 Nov 1984 a 9 Jul 1993 16 Oct 1980 13 Sep 1984 4 Feb 1981 13 Aug 1986 a 10 Jul 1985 23 Dec 1985 a 16 May 1990 3 Oct 1991 12 Mar 1992 10 Jun 1985 31 Aug 1981 19 Oct 1984 8 Jun 1990 25 Jun 1985 1 Sep 1993 d 1 Jul 1992 13 Aug 1996 a 26 Aug 1998 a 1 Feb 1984 9 Mar 1984 a 24 May 2006 a 17 Mar 2004 a 8 Feb 1982 2 Sep 1994 a 14 Oct 1987 a 10 Feb 1997 a 8 Jan 1992 14 Aug 1981 15 Oct 1992 a 23 Aug 1994 14 Apr 1992 a 16 Apr 1997 a 22 Aug 1995 17 Jul 1984 a 16 May 1989 a 22 Dec 1995 a 18 Jan 1994 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 93 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Luxembourg Albania Madagascar Algeria Malawi Andorra Malaysia Angola Maldives Antigua and Barbuda Mali Argentina Malta Armenia Marshall Islands
 Australia Mauritania Austria Mauritius Azerbaijan Mexico Bahamas Micronesia (Federated States of) Bahrain Monaco Bangladesh Mongolia Barbados Montenegro Belarus Morocco Belgium Mozambique Belize Myanmar Benin Namibia Bhutan Nauru Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Nepal Bosnia and Herzegovina Netherlands Botswana New Zealand Brazil Nicaragua Brunei Darussalam Niger Bulgaria Nigeria Burkina Faso Norway Burundi Oman Cambodia Pakistan Cameroon Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland 14 Aug 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 5 Feb 1985 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 24 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1990 11 Nov 1981 17 Jul 1980 30 May 1980 5 Feb 1991 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 31 Mar 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 23 Apr 1984 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Oct 1980 6 Jun 1983 20 Sep 2011 26 Jun 1980 23 Jul 1981 15 Jul 1980 29 May 1980 5 Mar 2003 2 Feb 1989 11 May 1994 a 17 Mar 1989 22 May 1996 a 12 Mar 1987 a 15 Jan 1997 a 5 Jul 1995 a 17 Sep 1986 a 1 Jul 1993 a 1 Aug 1989 a 10 Sep 1985 15 Jul 1985 8 Mar 1991 a 13 Sep 1993 a 2 Mar 2006 a 28 Jul 1983 10 May 2001 a 31 Mar 1982 9 Jul 1984 a 10 Jul 1995 a 23 Mar 1981 6 Oct 1993 a 1 Sep 2004 a 18 Jun 2002 a 18 Mar 2005 a 6 Nov 1984 a 20 Jul 1981 16 Oct 1980 23 Oct 2006 d 4 Feb 1981 21 Jun 1993 a 10 Jul 1985 21 Apr 1997 a 16 May 1990 22 Jul 1997 a 12 Mar 1992 23 Nov 1992 a 31 Aug 1981 23 Jun 2011 a 8 Jun 1990 22 Apr 1991 1 Sep 1993 d 23 Jul 1991 13 Aug 1996 a 10 Jan 1985 1 Feb 1984 27 Oct 1981 24 May 2006 a 8 Oct 1999 a 8 Feb 1982 13 Jun 1985 14 Oct 1987 a 21 May 1981 8 Jan 1992 7 Feb 2006 a 15 Oct 1992 a 12 Mar 1996 a 23 Aug 1994 29 Oct 1981 12 Jan 1995 a 6 Apr 1987 a 13 Sep 1982 5 Aug 1981 30 Jul 1980 94 National Human Rights Commission, India 24 Apr 1980 25 May 1983 4 Sep 1980 17 Jul 1980 1 May 1980 26 Sep 2003 31 Oct 1995 7 Sep 2000 29 Jul 1980 21 Sep 1988 29 Jan 1993 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1980 23 Jan 1987 Sao Tome and Principe Portugal Qatar Republic of Korea Republic of
 Moldova Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia Syrian Arab Republic Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo St. Vincent and the Grenadines The former Yugoslav Republic of 30 Jul 1980 29 Apr 2009 a 27 Dec 1984 1 Jul 1994 a 7 Jan 1982 23 Jan 1981 2 Mar 1981 25 Sep 1992 a 10 Dec 2003 3 Jun 2003 7 Sep 2000 5 Feb 1985 12 Mar 2001 d 5 May 1992 a 11 Nov 1988 5 Oct 1995 a 28 May 1993 d 6 Jul 1992 d 6 May 2002 a 15 Dec 1995 5 Jan 1984 5 Oct 1981 25 Apr 1985 a 8 Oct 1982 a 4 Aug 1981 a 1 Mar 1993 a 26 Mar 2004 a 2 Jul 1980 27 Mar 1997 28 Mar 2003 a 26 Oct 1993 a 9 Aug 1985 a 18 Jan 1994 d 16 Apr 2003 a 26 Sep 1983 a Micronesia (Federated States of) Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Papua New Guinea 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 5 Feb 1985 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 5 Feb 1991 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 23 Apr 1984 17 Jul 1980 20 Sep 2011 26 Jun 1980 23 Jul 1981 15 Jul 1980 29 May 1980 2 Feb 1989 17 Mar 1989 12 Mar 1987 a 5 Jul 1995 a 1 Jul 1993 a 10 Sep 1985 8 Mar 1991 a 2 Mar 2006 a 10 May 2001 a 9 Jul 1984 a 23 Mar 1981 1 Sep 2004 a 18 Mar 2005 a 20 Jul 1981 23 Oct 2006 d 21 Jun 1993 a 21 Apr 1997 a 22 Jul 1997 a 23 Nov 1992 a 23 Jun 2011 a 22 Apr 1991 23 Jul 1991 10 Jan 1985 27 Oct 1981 8 Oct 1999 a 13 Jun 1985 21 May 1981 7 Feb 2006 a 12 Mar 1996 a 29 Oct 1981 12 Jan 1995 a 6 Apr 1987 a 13 Sep 1982 5 Aug 1981 30 Jul 1980 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant
 Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 14 Aug 1980 24 Apr 1980 25 May 1983 4 Sep 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 1 May 1980 17 Jul 1980 26 Sep 2003 17 Jul 1980 31 Oct 1995 7 Sep 2000 29 Jul 1980 24 Jul 1980 21 Sep 1988 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1990 11 Nov 1981 17 Jul 1980 29 Jan 1993 30 May 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 31 Mar 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1980 17 Oct 1980 23 Jan 1987 6 Jun 1983 Afghanistan Portugal Albania Qatar Algeria Republic of Korea Andorra Republic of Moldova Angola Romania Antigua and Barbuda Russian Federation Argentina Rwanda Armenia Samoa Australia San Marino Austria Sao Tome and Principe Azerbaijan Saudi Arabia Bahamas Senegal Bahrain Serbia Bangladesh Seychelles Barbados Sierra Leone Belarus Singapore Belgium Slovakia Belize Slovenia Benin Solomon Islands Bhutan South Africa Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Spain Bosnia and Herzegovina Sri Lanka Botswana St. Kitts and Nevis Brazil St. Lucia Brunei Darussalam St. Vincent and the Grenadines Bulgaria Suriname Burkina Faso Swaziland Burundi Sweden Cambodia Switzerland Cameroon Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Thailand The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo 5 Mar 2003 30 Jul 1980 11 May 1994 a 29 Apr 2009 a 22 May 1996 a 27 Dec 1984 15 Jan 1997 a 1 Jul 1994 a 17 Sep 1986 a 7 Jan 1982 1 Aug 1989 a 23 Jan 1981 15 Jul 1985 2 Mar 1981 13 Sep 1993 a 25 Sep 1992 a 28 Jul 1983 10 Dec 2003 31 Mar 1982 3 Jun 2003 10 Jul 1995 a 7 Sep 2000 6 Oct 1993 a 5 Feb 1985 18 Jun 2002 a 12 Mar 2001 d 6 Nov 1984 a 5 May 1992 a 16 Oct 1980 11 Nov 1988 4 Feb 1981 5 Oct 1995 a 10 Jul 1985 28 May 1993 d 16 May 1990 6 Jul 1992 d 12 Mar 1992 6 May 2002 a 31 Aug 1981 15 Dec 1995 8 Jun 1990 5 Jan 1984 1 Sep 1993 d 5 Oct 1981 13 Aug 1996 a 25 Apr 1985 a 1 Feb 1984 8 Oct 1982 a 24 May 2006 a 4 Aug 1981 a 8 Feb 1982 1 Mar 1993 a 14 Oct 1987 a 26 Mar 2004 a 8 Jan 1992 2 Jul 1980 15 Oct 1992 a 27 Mar 1997 23 Aug 1994 28 Mar 2003 a 26 Oct 1993 a 9 Aug 1985 a 18 Jan 1994 d 16 Apr 2003 a 26
 Sep 1983 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 95 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Trinidad and Tobago Albania Tunisia Algeria Turkey Andorra Turkmenistan Angola Tuvalu Antigua and Barbuda Uganda Argentina Ukraine Armenia United Arab Emirates Australia United Kingdom of Great Britain Austria and Northern Ireland Azerbaijan United Republic of Tanzania Bahamas United States of America Bahrain Uruguay Bangladesh Uzbekistan Barbados Vanuatu Belarus Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Belgium of) Belize Viet Nam Benin Yemen Bhutan Zambia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Zimbabwe Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon 14 Aug 1980 27 Jun 1985 24 Jul 1980 30 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 22 Jul 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 30 Mar 1981 24 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 7 Mar 1990 29 Jul 1980 11 Nov 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 30 May 1980 31 Mar 1981 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Oct 1980 6 Jun 1983 5 Mar 2003 12 Jan 1990 11 May 1994 a 20 Sep 1985 22 May 1996 a 20 Dec 1985 a 15 Jan 1997 a 1 May 1997 a 17 Sep 1986 a 6 Oct 1999 a 1 Aug 1989 a 22 Jul 1985 15 Jul 1985 12 Mar 1981 13 Sep 1993 a 6 Oct 2004 a 28 Jul 1983 7 Apr 1986 31 Mar 1982 10 Jul 1995 a 20 Aug 1985 6 Oct 1993 a 18 Jun 2002 a 9 Oct 1981 6 Nov 1984 a 19 Jul 1995 a 16 Oct 1980 8 Sep 1995 a 4 Feb 1981 2 May 1983 10 Jul 1985 16 May 1990 17 Feb 1982 12 Mar 1992 30 May 1984 a 31 Aug 1981 21 Jun 1985 8 Jun 1990 13 May 1991 a 1 Sep 1993 d 13 Aug 1996 a 1 Feb 1984 24 May 2006 a 8 Feb 1982 14 Oct 1987 a 8 Jan 1992 15 Oct 1992 a 23 Aug 1994 96 National Human Rights Commission, India Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women The United Nations Committee on the Elimination
 of Discrimination Against Women, an expert body established in 1982, is composed of 23 experts on women's issues from around the world.
The Committee's mandate is very specific: it watches over the progress for women made in those countries that are states parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and monitors the implementation of national measures to fulfill this obligation.
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) The Committee has certain responsibilities as the body of experts charged with the consideration of periodic reports The CEDAW is the body of submitted to it.

The Committee, in independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination its examination of States' reports, enters into constructive dialogue with the State party and makes against Women by State parties.
concluding comments, routinely expressing concern at the entry of reservations, in particular to Articles 2 and 16, or the failure of States parties to withdraw or modify them.

Countries which have become party to the treaty (States Parties) are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights of the Convention are being implemented.
During its sessions the Committee considers each State party report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of concluding observations.
The Committee also makes recommendations on any issue affecting women to which it believes the states parties should devote more Trinidad and Tobago Turkmenistan Tunisia Turkey Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine 27 Jun 1985 24 Jul 1980 30 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 30 Mar 1981 29 Jul 1980 17 Jul 1980 United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain 22 Jul 1981 and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 17 Jul 1980 Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 12 Jan 1990 20 Sep 1985 20 Dec 1985 a 1 May 1997 a 6 Oct 1999 a 22 Jul 1985 12 Mar 1981 6 Oct 2004 a 7 Apr 1986 20 Aug 1985 9 Oct 1981 19 Jul 1995 a 8 Sep 1995 a 2 May 1983 17 Feb 1982 30 May 1984 a 21 Jun 1985 13 May 1991 a Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, an expert body established in 1982, is composed of 23 experts on women's issues from around the world.
The Committee's mandate is very specific: it watches over the progress for women made in those countries that are states parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and monitors the implementation of national measures to fulfill this obligation.

has charged with Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) The Committee certain responsibilities as the body of the experts consideration of periodic reports submitted to it.
The Committee, in its examination of States' reports, enters into constructive dialogue with the State party and makes concluding comments, routinely expressing concern at the entry of reservations, in particular to Articles 2 and 16, or the failure of States parties to withdraw or modify them.

The CEDAW is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women by State parties.
Countries which have become party to the treaty (States Parties) are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights of the Convention are being implemented.

During its sessions the Committee considers each State party report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of concluding observations.
The Committee also makes recommendations on any issue affecting women to which it believes the states parties should devote more A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 97 attention.

For example, at the 1989 session, the Committee discussed incidence of violence against women, requesting the high information on this problem from all countries.
In 1992, the Committee adopted general recommendation 19, which required the national reports to the Committee to include statistical data on the incidence of violence against women, information on the provision of services for victims, and legislative and other measures taken to protect women against violence in their everyday lives, such as harassment at the workplace, abuse in the family and sexual violence.
The 23 members of CEDAW, acknowledged as experts "of high moral standing and competence in the field covered by the Convention", are elected by the States parties.

These elections have to meet the Convention's demands for equitable geographical distribution in membership and the requirement that CEDAW members represent "different forms of civilization as well as principal legal systems".

Their terms last four years, with only half of the Committee members replaced each time elections take place.
The meeting of States parties is convened every other year by the Secretary-General at UN Headquarters in New York.

In accordance with the Optional Protocol to the Convention, the is mandated to: (1) receive communications from Committee individuals or groups of individuals submitting claims of violations of rights protected under the Convention to the Committee and (2) initiate inquiries into situations of grave or systematic violations of women’s rights.
These procedures are optional and are only available where the State concerned has accepted them.

The Committee also formulates general recommendations and suggestions.

General recommendations are directed to States and concern articles or themes in the Convention.

98 National Human Rights Commission, India Reporting guidelines The Committee has adopted guidelines to help states prepare their reports.
According to these guidelines, the initial report is intended to be a detailed and comprehensive description of the position of women in that country at the time of submission; it is meant to provide a benchmark against which subsequent progress can be measured.

The subsequent national reports are intended to update the previous report, detailing significant developments that have occurred over the last four years, noting key trends, and identifying obstacles to the full achievement of the Convention.
General Recommendations Article 21 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women empowers the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women to make suggestions and general recommendations based on the examination of reports and information received from States parties.

These, as well as comments from States parties, are included in the session reports of the Committee.
Suggestions are usually directed at United Nations entities, while general recommendations are addressed to States parties and usually elaborate the Committee's view of the obligations assumed under the Convention.

Country Reports Countries that have ratified or acceded to the Convention are legally bound to put its provisions into practice.

They are also committed to submit national reports, at least every four years, on measures they have taken to comply with their treaty obligations.

attention.
attention.

For example, at the 1989 session, the Committee discussed Reporting guidelines the high incidence of violence against women, requesting information on this problem from all countries.
In 1992, the Committee adopted general recommendation 19, which required the national reports to the Committee to include statistical data on the incidence of violence against women, information on the provision of services for victims, and legislative and other measures taken to protect women against violence in their everyday lives, such as harassment at the workplace, abuse in the family and sexual violence.
The 23 members of CEDAW, acknowledged as experts "of high moral standing and competence in the field covered by the Convention", are elected by the States parties.

These elections have to meet the Convention's demands for equitable geographical distribution in membership and the requirement that CEDAW members represent "different forms of civilization as well as principal legal systems".

Their terms last four years, with only half of the Committee members replaced each time elections take place.
The meeting of States parties is convened every other year by the Secretary-General at UN Headquarters in New York.

In accordance with the Optional Protocol to the Convention, the Committee is mandated to: (1) receive communications from individuals or groups of individuals submitting claims of violations of rights protected under the Convention to the Committee and (2) initiate inquiries into situations of grave or systematic violations of women’s rights.
These procedures are optional and are only available where the State concerned has accepted them.

The Committee also formulates general recommendations and suggestions.

General recommendations are directed to States and concern articles or themes in the Convention.

The Committee has adopted guidelines to help states prepare their reports.
According to these guidelines, the initial report is intended to be a detailed and comprehensive description of the position of women in that country at the time of submission; it is meant to provide a benchmark against which subsequent progress can be measured.

The subsequent national reports are intended to update the previous report, detailing significant developments that have occurred over the last four years, noting key trends, and identifying obstacles to the full achievement of the Convention.
General Recommendations Article 21 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women empowers the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women to make suggestions and general recommendations based on the examination of reports and information received from States parties.

These, as well as comments from States parties, are included in the session reports of the Committee.
Suggestions are usually directed at United Nations entities, while general recommendations are addressed to States parties and usually elaborate the Committee's view of the obligations assumed under the Convention.

Country Reports Countries that have ratified or acceded to the Convention are legally bound to put its provisions into practice.

They are also committed to submit national reports, at least every four years, on measures they have taken to comply with their treaty obligations.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 99 to the Convention on Optional Protocol the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women outlaws discrimination on the basis of gender, and obliges its parties to repeal discriminatory laws and guarantee equality in the fields of health, employment, and education.
The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women is a subsidiary agreement to the Convention.

It does not establish any new rights, but allows the rights guaranteed in the Convention to be enforced.
By ratifying the Optional Protocol, a State recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women – the body that monitors States parties' compliance with the Convention – to receive and consider complaints from individuals or groups within its jurisdiction.

The Protocol contains two procedures: (1) A communications procedure which allows individual women, or groups of women, to submit claims of violations of rights protected under the Convention to the Committee.
The Protocol establishes that in order for individual communications to be admitted for consideration by the Committee, a number of criteria must be met, including that domestic remedies must have been exhausted before approaching the Committee.

(2) The Protocol also creates an inquiry procedure enabling the Committee to initiate inquiries into situations of grave or systematic violations of women’s rights.

In either case, States must be party to the Convention and the Protocol.
The Protocol includes an "opt-out clause", allowing States, upon ratification or accession, to declare that they do not accept the inquiry procedure.

Article 17 of the Protocol explicitly provides that no reservations may be entered to its terms.
100 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Entry into force: 22 December 2000 Women Signatories: 79 Parties: 104 India has not signed the Optional Protocol The Optional Protocol entered into force on 22 December 2000, following the ratification of the tenth State party to the Convention.
The entry into force of the Optional Protocol puts the CEDAW on an equal footing with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the Convention against Torture and other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which all have communications procedures.

The inquiry procedure is the equivalent of that under the Convention against Torture.
Articles 1 - 7 create an individual complaints mechanism similar to those of the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Article 14 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Parties agree to recognise the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to consider complaints "by or on behalf of" individuals or groups who claim their rights under the Convention have been violated.

If a complaint is submitted on behalf of a victim, then this requires their consent, unless the submitter can justify acting without it.

What constitutes "justification" in such a case is up to the Committee.
The ability for complaints to be submitted on behalf of victims is seen as Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women outlaws discrimination on the basis of gender, and obliges its parties to repeal discriminatory laws and guarantee equality in the fields of health, employment, and education.
The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women is a subsidiary agreement to the Convention.

It does not establish any new rights, but allows the rights guaranteed in the Convention to be enforced.
By ratifying the Optional Protocol, a State recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women – the body that monitors States parties' compliance with the Convention – to receive and consider complaints from individuals or groups within its jurisdiction.

The Protocol contains two procedures: (1) A communications procedure which allows individual women, or groups of women, to submit claims of violations of rights protected under the Convention to the Committee.
The Protocol establishes that in order for individual communications to be admitted for consideration by the Committee, a number of criteria must be met, including that domestic remedies must have been exhausted before approaching the Committee.

(2) The Protocol also creates an inquiry procedure enabling the Committee to initiate inquiries into situations of grave or systematic violations of women’s rights.

In either case, States must be party to the Convention and the Protocol.
The Protocol includes an "opt-out clause", allowing States, upon ratification or accession, to declare that they do not accept the inquiry procedure.

Article 17 of the Protocol explicitly provides that no reservations may be entered to its terms.
Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women Entry into force: 22 December 2000 Signatories: 79 Parties: 104 India has not signed the Optional Protocol The Optional Protocol entered into force on 22 December 2000, following the ratification of the tenth State party to the Convention.
The entry into force of the Optional Protocol puts the CEDAW on an equal footing with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and the Convention against Torture and other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which all have communications procedures.

The inquiry procedure is the equivalent of that under the Convention against Torture.
Articles 1 - 7 create an individual complaints mechanism similar to those of the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Article 14 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Parties agree to recognise the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to consider complaints "by or on behalf of" individuals or groups who claim their rights under the Convention have been violated.

If a complaint is submitted on behalf of a victim, then this requires their consent, unless the submitter can justify acting without it.

What constitutes "justification" in such a case is up to the Committee.
The ability for complaints to be submitted on behalf of victims is seen as A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 101 vital in allowing NGOs such as women's organizations and human rights groups to use the Protocol to enforce the Convention.

Complainants must have exhausted all domestic remedies.

Further, anonymous complaints and complaints referring to events which occurred before the country concerned joined the Optional Protocol are not permitted.
The Committee can request information from and make recommendations to a party, though these are not binding.

Articles 8 - 10 create an inquiry mechanism.

Parties may permit the Committee to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.

The Committee may invite the relevant party to respond and inform it of any measures taken as a result of such an inquiry, either directly or through the normal reporting process under the Convention.
Parties may opt out of this obligation on signature or ratification.

So far, Bangladesh, Belize and Colombia have exercised this option.

Article 11 requires parties to ensure that those submitting complaints under the Optional Protocol are not subjected to ill-treatment or intimidation.

Article 13 requires parties to inform their citizens about the Convention, the Optional Protocol, and the rulings of the Committee, so as to facilitate complaints.
Articles 12 and 14 govern the procedure and reporting of the Committee in handling complaints.

Articles 15 - 21 govern ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Optional Protocol.
102 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Antigua and Barbuda Albania Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chile Colombia Congo Succession(d) 23 Jun 2003 a 14 Oct 2002 1 Nov 2007 a 5 Jun 2006 a 20 Mar 2007 14 Sep 2006 a 4 Dec 2008 a 6 Sep 2000 1 Jun 2001 6 Sep 2000 3 Feb 2004 17 Jun 2004 9 Dec 2002 a 27 Sep 2000 4 Sep 2002 21 Feb 2007 a 28 Jun 2002 20 Sep 2006 10 Oct 2005 13 Oct 2010 7 Jan 2005 a 18 Oct 2002 a 10 Oct 2011 a 23 Jan 2007 9 Jul 2001 28 Feb 2000 10 Dec 1999 6 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 29 Apr 2002 10 Dec 1999 25 May 2000 13 Mar 2001 6 Jun 2000 16 Nov 2001 13 Nov 2001 11 Nov 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 29 Sep 2008 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 10 Dec 1999 Bosnia and Herzegovina 7 Sep 2000 vital in allowing NGOs such as women's organizations and human rights groups to use the Protocol to enforce the Convention.
Complainants must have exhausted all domestic remedies.

Further, anonymous complaints and complaints referring to events which occurred before the country concerned joined the Optional Protocol are not permitted.

The Committee can request information from and make recommendations to a party, though these are not binding.

Articles 8 - 10 create an inquiry mechanism.

Parties may permit the Committee to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.
The Committee may invite the relevant party to respond and inform it of any measures taken as a result of such an inquiry, either directly or through the normal reporting process under the Convention.

Parties may opt out of this obligation on signature or ratification.

So far, Bangladesh, Belize and Colombia have exercised this option.

Article 11 requires parties to ensure that those submitting complaints under the Optional Protocol are not subjected to ill-treatment or intimidation.
Article 13 requires parties to inform their citizens about the Convention, the Optional Protocol, and the rulings of the Committee, so as to facilitate complaints.

Articles 12 and 14 govern the procedure and reporting of the Committee in handling complaints.

of the Optional Protocol.
Articles 15 - 21 govern ratification, entry into force, and amendment Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Albania Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chile Colombia Congo 9 Jul 2001 28 Feb 2000 10 Dec 1999 6 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 29 Apr 2002 10 Dec 1999 25 May 2000 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 13 Mar 2001 6 Jun 2000 16 Nov 2001 13 Nov 2001 11 Nov 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 29 Sep 2008 23 Jun 2003 a 14 Oct 2002 1 Nov 2007 a 5 Jun 2006 a 20 Mar 2007 14 Sep 2006 a 4 Dec 2008 a 6 Sep 2000 1 Jun 2001 6 Sep 2000 3 Feb 2004 17 Jun 2004 9 Dec 2002 a 27 Sep 2000 4 Sep 2002 21 Feb 2007 a 28 Jun 2002 20 Sep 2006 10 Oct 2005 13 Oct 2010 7 Jan 2005 a 18 Oct 2002 a 10 Oct 2011 a 23 Jan 2007 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 103 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Albania Cook Islands Andorra Costa Rica Angola Côte d'Ivoire Antigua and Barbuda Croatia Argentina Cuba Armenia Cyprus Australia Czech Republic Austria Denmark Azerbaijan Dominican Republic Bangladesh Ecuador Belarus El Salvador Belgium Equatorial Guinea Belize Finland Benin France Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Gabon Bosnia and Herzegovina Georgia Botswana Germany Brazil Ghana Bulgaria Greece Burkina Faso Guatemala Burundi Guinea-Bissau Cambodia Hungary Cameroon Iceland Canada Indonesia Cape Verde Ireland Chile Italy Colombia Kazakhstan Congo Kyrgyzstan Lesotho Liberia
 Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi 9 Jul 2001 10 Dec 1999 5 Jun 2000 28 Feb 2000 17 Mar 2000 8 Feb 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 6 Jun 2000 14 Mar 2000 6 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 29 Apr 2002 4 Apr 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 25 May 2000 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 13 Mar 2001 24 Feb 2000 6 Jun 2000 10 Dec 1999 16 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 13 Nov 2001 12 Sep 2000 11 Nov 2001 10 Dec 1999 28 Feb 2000 7 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 6 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 6 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 10 Dec 1999 8 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 23 Jun 2003 a 27 Nov 2007 a 14 Oct 2002 20 Sep 2001 1 Nov 2007 a 20 Jan 2012 a 5 Jun 2006 a 7 Mar 2001 20 Mar 2007 14 Sep 2006 a 26 Apr 2002 4 Dec 2008 a 26 Feb 2001 6 Sep 2000 31 May 2000 1 Jun 2001 10 Aug 2001 6 Sep 2000 5 Feb 2002 3 Feb 2004 17 Jun 2004 16 Oct 2009 a 9 Dec 2002 a 29 Dec 2000 9 Jun 2000 27 Sep 2000 5 Nov 2004 a 4 Sep 2002 1 Aug 2002 a 21 Feb 2007 a 15 Jan 2002 28 Jun 2002 3 Feb 2011 20 Sep 2006 24 Jan 2002 10 Oct 2005 9 May 2002 5 Aug 2009 13 Oct 2010 22 Dec 2000 a 7 Jan 2005 a 6 Mar 2001 18 Oct 2002 a 10 Oct 2011 a 7 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2000 23 Jan 2007 24 Aug 2001 22 Jul 2002 a 24 Sep 2004 18 Jun 2004 a 24 Oct 2001 5 Aug 2004 1 Jul 2003 104 National Human Rights Commission, India Maldives Mali Mauritius Mexico Mongolia Montenegro Mozambique Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Niger Nigeria Norway Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Sao Tome and Principe Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Rwanda San Marino Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain 11 Nov 2001 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 19 May 2000 18 Dec 2001 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 9 Jun 2000 28 Dec 1999 22 Dec 2000 21 Mar 2000 16 Feb 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 May 2001 6 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 22 Jul 2002 8 Sep 2000 5 Jun 2000 10 Dec 1999 14 Mar 2000 13 Mar 2006 a 5 Dec 2000 a 31 Oct 2008 15 Mar 2002 28 Mar 2002 23
 Oct 2006 d 4 Nov 2008 a 26 May 2000 15 Jun 2007 22 May 2002 7 Sep 2000 30 Sep 2004 a 22 Nov 2004 5 Mar 2002 9 May 2001 14 May 2001 9 Apr 2001 12 Nov 2003 22 Dec 2003 a 26 Apr 2002 18 Oct 2006 a 28 Feb 2006 a 25 Aug 2003 28 Jul 2004 15 Dec 2008 a 15 Sep 2005 a 26 May 2000 31 Jul 2003 a 1 Mar 2011 17 Nov 2000 23 Sep 2004 6 May 2002 a 18 Oct 2005 a 6 Jul 2001 Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Finland France Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Hungary Iceland Indonesia Ireland Italy Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi 27 Nov 2007 a 20 Sep 2001 20 Jan 2012 a 7 Mar 2001 26 Apr 2002 26 Feb 2001 31 May 2000 10 Aug 2001 5 Feb 2002 16 Oct 2009 a 29 Dec 2000 9 Jun 2000 5 Nov 2004 a 1 Aug 2002 a 15 Jan 2002 3 Feb 2011 24 Jan 2002 9 May 2002 5 Aug 2009 22 Dec 2000 a 6 Mar 2001 7 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2000 24 Aug 2001 22 Jul 2002 a 24 Sep 2004 18 Jun 2004 a 24 Oct 2001 5 Aug 2004 1 Jul 2003 10 Dec 1999 5 Jun 2000 17 Mar 2000 8 Feb 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 14 Mar 2000 10 Dec 1999 4 Apr 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 24 Feb 2000 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 12 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 28 Feb 2000 7 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 10 Dec 1999 8 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Albania Maldives Andorra Mali Angola Mauritius Antigua and Barbuda Mexico Argentina Mongolia Armenia Montenegro Australia Mozambique Austria Namibia Azerbaijan Nepal Bangladesh Netherlands Belarus New Zealand Belgium Niger Belize Nigeria Benin Norway Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Panama Bosnia and Herzegovina Paraguay
 Botswana Peru Brazil Philippines Bulgaria Poland Burkina Faso Portugal Burundi Republic of Korea Cambodia Republic of Moldova Cameroon Romania Canada Russian Federation Cape Verde Rwanda Chile San Marino Colombia Sao Tome and Principe Congo Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain 9 Jul 2001 11 Nov 2001 10 Dec 1999 28 Feb 2000 7 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 19 May 2000 6 Jun 2000 18 Dec 2001 6 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 29 Apr 2002 7 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 8 Sep 2000 25 May 2000 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 9 Jun 2000 7 Sep 2000 28 Dec 1999 22 Dec 2000 13 Mar 2001 21 Mar 2000 6 Jun 2000 16 Nov 2001 16 Feb 2000 13 Nov 2001 11 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 8 May 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 6 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 10 Dec 1999 22 Jul 2002 8 Sep 2000 5 Jun 2000 10 Dec 1999 14 Mar 2000 23 Jun 2003 a 13 Mar 2006 a 14 Oct 2002 5 Dec 2000 a 1 Nov 2007 a 31 Oct 2008 5 Jun 2006 a 15 Mar 2002 20 Mar 2007 28 Mar 2002 14 Sep 2006 a 23 Oct 2006 d 4 Dec 2008 a 4 Nov 2008 a 6 Sep 2000 26 May 2000 1 Jun 2001 15 Jun 2007 6 Sep 2000 22 May 2002 3 Feb 2004 7 Sep 2000 17 Jun 2004 30 Sep 2004 a 9 Dec 2002 a 22 Nov 2004 5 Mar 2002 27 Sep 2000 9 May 2001 4 Sep 2002 14 May 2001 21 Feb 2007 a 9 Apr 2001 28 Jun 2002 12 Nov 2003 20 Sep 2006 22 Dec 2003 a 10 Oct 2005 26 Apr 2002 18 Oct 2006 a 13 Oct 2010 28 Feb 2006 a 7 Jan 2005 a 25 Aug 2003 18 Oct 2002 a 28 Jul 2004 10 Oct 2011 a 15 Dec 2008 a 15 Sep 2005 a 23 Jan 2007 26 May 2000 31 Jul 2003 a 1 Mar 2011 17 Nov 2000 23 Sep 2004 6 May 2002 a 18 Oct 2005 a 6 Jul 2001 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 105 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Albania Sri Lanka Andorra St. Kitts and Nevis Angola Sweden Antigua and Barbuda Switzerland Argentina Tajikistan Armenia Thailand
 Australia The former Yugoslav Republic of Austria Macedonia Azerbaijan Timor-Leste Bangladesh Tunisia Belarus Turkey Belgium Turkmenistan Belize Ukraine Benin United Kingdom of Great Britain Bolivia (Plurinational State of) and Northern Ireland Bosnia and Herzegovina United Republic of Tanzania Botswana Uruguay Brazil Vanuatu Bulgaria Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Burkina Faso of) Burundi Zambia Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chile Colombia Congo 9 Jul 2001 10 Dec 1999 15 Feb 2007 28 Feb 2000 7 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2000 3 Apr 2000 10 Dec 1999 6 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 29 Apr 2002 8 Sep 2000 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 25 May 2000 10 Dec 1999 7 Sep 2000 9 May 2000 13 Mar 2001 6 Jun 2000 17 Mar 2000 16 Nov 2001 13 Nov 2001 29 Sep 2008 11 Nov 2001 10 Dec 1999 10 Dec 1999 29 Sep 2008 23 Jun 2003 a 15 Oct 2002 a 14 Oct 2002 20 Jan 2006 a 1 Nov 2007 a 24 Apr 2003 5 Jun 2006 a 29 Sep 2008 20 Mar 2007 14 Sep 2006 a 14 Jun 2000 4 Dec 2008 a 17 Oct 2003 6 Sep 2000 1 Jun 2001 16 Apr 2003 a 6 Sep 2000 23 Sep 2008 a 3 Feb 2004 29 Oct 2002 17 Jun 2004 20 May 2009 a 9 Dec 2002 a 26 Sep 2003 17 Dec 2004 a 27 Sep 2000 4 Sep 2002 12 Jan 2006 a 21 Feb 2007 a 26 Jul 2001 28 Jun 2002 17 May 2007 a 20 Sep 2006 13 May 2002 10 Oct 2005 13 Oct 2010 7 Jan 2005 a 18 Oct 2002 a 10 Oct 2011 a 23 Jan 2007 106 National Human Rights Commission, India Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) The Convention provides for each State to take effective measures to prevent torture and other similar treatment or punishment from being practised within its jurisdiction; criminalize all acts of torture or those which constitute participation, complicity, incitement or an attempt to commit torture; recognize rights of persons who allege that they have been subjected to torture or similar treatment to complain to, and to have their cases impartially examined by the competent authorities of the State concerned; redress and compensate victims of torture; and
 prohibition of using as evidence any statement made as a result of torture or of other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
CAT It was adopted by resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984.

The Convention requires states to take effective measures to prevent torture within their borders, and forbids states to return people to their home country if there is reason to believe they will be tortured.

Entry into force: 26 June 1987 Signatories: 78; Parties: 149 Treaty Body: Committee against Torture (CAT) India signed the CAT on 14 Oct 1997.
It is yet to ratify the Convention The CAT contains a range of obligations for States Parties aimed at prohibiting and preventing torture.

It is important first and foremost because it contains an internationally recognized definition of torture and requires States Parties to ensure that acts of torture are made a criminal offence under their national law.
Sri Lanka St. Kitts and Nevis Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Ukraine Uruguay Vanuatu of) Zambia The former Yugoslav Republic of 3 Apr 2000 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 17 Mar 2000 15 Oct 2002 a 20 Jan 2006 a 24 Apr 2003 29 Sep 2008 14 Jun 2000 17 Oct 2003 16 Apr 2003 a 23 Sep 2008 a 29 Oct 2002 20 May 2009 a 26 Sep 2003 17 Dec 2004 a 12 Jan 2006 a 26 Jul 2001 17 May 2007 a 13 May 2002 10 Dec 1999 15 Feb 2007 7 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 9 May 2000 29 Sep 2008 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) The Convention provides for each State to take effective measures to prevent torture and other similar treatment or punishment from being practised within its jurisdiction; criminalize all acts of torture or those which constitute participation, complicity, incitement or an attempt to commit torture; recognize rights of persons who allege that they have been subjected to torture or similar treatment to complain to, and to have their cases impartially examined by the competent authorities of the State concerned; redress and compensate victims of torture; and prohibition of using as evidence any statement made as a result of torture or of other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
CAT It was adopted by resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984.

The Convention requires states to take effective measures to prevent torture within their borders, and forbids states to return people to their home country if there is reason to believe they will be tortured.

Entry into force: 26 June 1987 Signatories: 78; Parties: 149 Treaty Body: Committee against Torture (CAT) India signed the CAT on 14 Oct 1997.
It is yet to ratify the Convention The CAT contains a range of obligations for States Parties aimed at prohibiting and preventing torture.

It is important first and foremost because it contains an internationally recognized definition of torture and requires States Parties to ensure that acts of torture are made a criminal offence under their national law.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 107 Key Provisions of the Convention Definition of torture (Article 1) Parties are also obliged to prevent other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and to investigate any allegation of such treatment within their jurisdiction (Article Ban on torture and cruel and degrading treatment 16).
(Article 2) Ban on refoulement, returning, or extraditing any person to a state "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture" (Article 3) Part II (Articles 17 – 24) governs reporting and monitoring of the Convention and the steps taken by the parties to implement it.

It establishes the Committee Against Torture (Article 17), and empowers it to investigate allegations of systematic torture (Article 20).
It also establishes an optional dispute-resolution mechanism between parties (Articles 21) and allows parties to recognize the competence of the Committee to hear complaints from individuals about violations of the Convention by a party (Article 22).

Part III (Articles 25 – 33) governs ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Convention.

It also includes an optional arbitration mechanism for disputes between parties (Article 30).

What is ‘Torture’?
Article 1.1 of the Convention Against Torture defines ‘torture’ as under: “Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.” (Article (Article Part I (Articles 1–16) defines torture (Article 1), and commits parties to taking to effective measures prevent any act of torture in any territory under their 2).
jurisdiction These include ensuring that torture is made a criminal 4), offense jurisdiction establishing over torture acts committed by or against a party's citizens (Article 5), ensuring that torture is an extraditable offense (Article establishing 8), [universal to try cases of torture where an alleged torturer extradited cannot (Article jurisdiction] and of be 5).
Parties must promptly investigate any allegation of torture (Articles 12 and 13), and victims of torture must have an enforceable right to compensation (Article 14).

Parties must also ban the use of evidence produced by torture in their courts (Article 15), and are barred from deporting, extraditing or refouling people where there are substantial grounds for believing they will be tortured (Article 3).

108 National Human Rights Commission, India What is ‘Torture’?
Article 1.1 of the Convention Against Torture defines ‘torture’ as under: Part I (Articles 1–16) defines torture (Article 1), and commits parties to taking effective measures to “Any act by which severe pain or prevent any act of torture in suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a any territory under their jurisdiction (Article 2).
These include ensuring that confession, punishing him for an act torture is made a criminal he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on offense (Article 4), establishing jurisdiction over acts of torture discrimination of any kind, when such committed by or against a pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.” party's citizens (Article 5), ensuring that torture is an extraditable offense (Article 8), and establishing [universal jurisdiction] to try cases of torture where an alleged torturer cannot extradited (Article be 5).
Parties must also ban the use of evidence produced by torture in their courts (Article 15), and are barred from deporting, extraditing or refouling people where there are substantial grounds for believing they will be tortured (Article 3).
Key Provisions of the Convention Definition of torture (Article 1) Ban on torture and cruel and degrading treatment (Article 2) Ban on refoulement, returning, or extraditing any person to a state "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture" (Article 3) Parties are also obliged to prevent other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and to investigate any allegation of such treatment within their jurisdiction (Article 16).
Part II (Articles 17 – 24) governs reporting and monitoring of the Convention and the steps taken by the parties to implement it.

It establishes the Committee Against Torture (Article 17), and empowers investigate allegations of systematic torture (Article 20).

to it Parties must promptly investigate any allegation of torture (Articles 12 and 13), and victims of torture must have an enforceable right to compensation (Article 14).
Part III (Articles 25 – 33) governs ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Convention.

It also includes an optional arbitration mechanism for disputes between parties (Article 30).

It also establishes an optional dispute-resolution mechanism between parties (Articles 21) and allows parties to recognize the competence of the Committee to hear complaints from individuals about violations of the Convention by a party (Article 22).
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 109 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad Signature 4 Feb 1985 26 Nov 1985 5 Aug 2002 4 Feb 1985 10 Dec 1985 14 Mar 1985 16 Dec 2008 19 Dec 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 8 Sep 2000 23 Sep 1985 10 Jun 1986 23 Aug 1985 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 1 Apr 1987 11 May 1994 a 12 Sep 1989 22 Sep 2006 19 Jul 1993 a 24 Sep 1986 13 Sep 1993 a 8 Aug 1989 29 Jul 1987 16 Aug 1996 a 6 Mar 1998 a 5 Oct 1998 a 13 Mar 1987 25 Jun 1999 17 Mar 1986 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Apr 1999 1 Sep 1993 d 8 Sep 2000 28 Sep 1989 16 Dec 1986 4 Jan 1999 a 18 Feb 1993 a 15 Oct 1992 a 19 Dec 1986 a 24 Jun 1987 4 Jun 1992 a 9 Jun 1995 a 110 National Human Rights Commission, India Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Dominican Republic Equatorial Guinea Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Congo Denmark Djibouti Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Estonia Ethiopia Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Holy See Honduras 23 Sep 1987 12 Dec 1986 10 Apr 1985 22 Sep 2000 4 Feb 1985 27 Jan 1986 9 Oct 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 21 Jan 1986 23 Oct 1985 13 Oct 1986 7 Sep 2000 4 Feb 1985 30 May 1986 12 Sep 2000 25 Jan 1988 30 Sep 1988 4 Oct 1988 8 Dec 1987 30 Jul 2003 a 11 Nov 1993 18 Dec 1995 a 12 Oct 1992 d 17 May 1995 18 Jul 1991 22 Feb 1993 d 18 Mar 1996 a 27 May 1987 5 Nov 2002 a 24 Jan 2012 30 Mar 1988 25 Jun 1986 a 17 Jun 1996 a 8 Oct 2002 a 21 Oct 1991 a 14 Mar 1994 a 30 Aug 1989 18 Feb 1986 8 Sep 2000 26
 Oct 1994 a 1 Oct 1990 7 Sep 2000 6 Oct 1988 5 Jan 1990 a 10 Oct 1989 19 May 1988 26 Jun 2002 a 5 Dec 1996 a Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Antigua and Barbuda Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad 4 Feb 1985 26 Nov 1985 5 Aug 2002 4 Feb 1985 10 Dec 1985 14 Mar 1985 16 Dec 2008 19 Dec 1985 4 Feb 1985 8 Sep 2000 23 Sep 1985 10 Jun 1986 23 Aug 1985 Succession(d) 1 Apr 1987 11 May 1994 a 12 Sep 1989 22 Sep 2006 19 Jul 1993 a 24 Sep 1986 13 Sep 1993 a 8 Aug 1989 29 Jul 1987 16 Aug 1996 a 6 Mar 1998 a 5 Oct 1998 a 13 Mar 1987 25 Jun 1999 17 Mar 1986 a 12 Mar 1992 a 12 Apr 1999 1 Sep 1993 d 8 Sep 2000 28 Sep 1989 16 Dec 1986 4 Jan 1999 a 18 Feb 1993 a 15 Oct 1992 a 19 Dec 1986 a 24 Jun 1987 4 Jun 1992 a 9 Jun 1995 a Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 4 Feb 1985 Bosnia and Herzegovina Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Chile Albania China Algeria Colombia Andorra Comoros Antigua and Barbuda Congo Argentina Costa Rica Armenia Côte d'Ivoire Australia Croatia Austria Cuba Azerbaijan Cyprus Bahamas Czech Republic Bahrain Democratic Republic of the Bangladesh Congo Belarus Denmark Belgium Djibouti Belize Dominican Republic Benin Ecuador Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Egypt Bosnia and Herzegovina El Salvador Botswana Equatorial Guinea Brazil Estonia Bulgaria Ethiopia Burkina Faso Finland Burundi France Cambodia Gabon Cameroon Gambia Canada Georgia
 Cape Verde Germany Chad Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Holy See Honduras 4 Feb 1985 23 Sep 1987 12 Dec 1986 26 Nov 1985 10 Apr 1985 5 Aug 2002 22 Sep 2000 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 10 Dec 1985 14 Mar 1985 27 Jan 1986 9 Oct 1985 16 Dec 2008 19 Dec 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 8 Sep 2000 23 Sep 1985 10 Jun 1986 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 21 Jan 1986 23 Oct 1985 23 Aug 1985 13 Oct 1986 7 Sep 2000 4 Feb 1985 30 May 1986 12 Sep 2000 25 Jan 1988 1 Apr 1987 30 Sep 1988 11 May 1994 a 4 Oct 1988 12 Sep 1989 8 Dec 1987 22 Sep 2006 19 Jul 1993 a 30 Jul 2003 a 24 Sep 1986 11 Nov 1993 13 Sep 1993 a 18 Dec 1995 a 8 Aug 1989 12 Oct 1992 d 29 Jul 1987 17 May 1995 16 Aug 1996 a 18 Jul 1991 22 Feb 1993 d 6 Mar 1998 a 18 Mar 1996 a 5 Oct 1998 a 13 Mar 1987 27 May 1987 25 Jun 1999 5 Nov 2002 a 17 Mar 1986 a 24 Jan 2012 12 Mar 1992 a 30 Mar 1988 12 Apr 1999 25 Jun 1986 a 1 Sep 1993 d 17 Jun 1996 a 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 2002 a 28 Sep 1989 21 Oct 1991 a 16 Dec 1986 14 Mar 1994 a 4 Jan 1999 a 30 Aug 1989 18 Feb 1993 a 18 Feb 1986 15 Oct 1992 a 8 Sep 2000 19 Dec 1986 a 24 Jun 1987 26 Oct 1994 a 4 Jun 1992 a 1 Oct 1990 9 Jun 1995 a 7 Sep 2000 6 Oct 1988 5 Jan 1990 a 10 Oct 1989 19 May 1988 26 Jun 2002 a 5 Dec 1996 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 111 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Hungary Albania Iceland Algeria India Andorra Indonesia Antigua and Barbuda Iraq Argentina Ireland Armenia Israel Australia Italy Austria Japan Azerbaijan Jordan Bahamas Kazakhstan Bahrain Kenya Bangladesh Kuwait Belarus Kyrgyzstan Belgium Lao People's Democratic Belize Republic Benin Latvia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Lebanon Bosnia and Herzegovina Lesotho Botswana Liberia Brazil Libya Bulgaria Liechtenstein Burkina
 Faso Lithuania Burundi Luxembourg Cambodia Madagascar Cameroon Malawi Canada Maldives Cape Verde Mali Chad Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco 4 Feb 1985 28 Nov 1986 4 Feb 1985 26 Nov 1985 14 Oct 1997 5 Aug 2002 23 Oct 1985 4 Feb 1985 28 Sep 1992 22 Oct 1986 10 Dec 1985 4 Feb 1985 14 Mar 1985 16 Dec 2008 19 Dec 1985 4 Feb 1985 21 Sep 2010 4 Feb 1985 8 Sep 2000 23 Sep 1985 10 Jun 1986 27 Jun 1985 22 Feb 1985 1 Oct 2001 23 Aug 1985 18 Mar 1985 8 Jan 1986 1 Apr 1987 15 Apr 1987 11 May 1994 a 23 Oct 1996 12 Sep 1989 22 Sep 2006 28 Oct 1998 19 Jul 1993 a 7 Jul 2011 a 24 Sep 1986 11 Apr 2002 13 Sep 1993 a 3 Oct 1991 8 Aug 1989 12 Jan 1989 29 Jul 1987 29 Jun 1999 a 16 Aug 1996 a 13 Nov 1991 a 26 Aug 1998 a 6 Mar 1998 a 21 Feb 1997 a 5 Oct 1998 a 8 Mar 1996 a 13 Mar 1987 5 Sep 1997 a 25 Jun 1999 17 Mar 1986 a 12 Mar 1992 a 14 Apr 1992 a 12 Apr 1999 5 Oct 2000 a 1 Sep 1993 d 12 Nov 2001 a 8 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 a 28 Sep 1989 16 May 1989 a 16 Dec 1986 2 Nov 1990 4 Jan 1999 a 1 Feb 1996 a 18 Feb 1993 a 29 Sep 1987 15 Oct 1992 a 13 Dec 2005 19 Dec 1986 a 11 Jun 1996 a 24 Jun 1987 20 Apr 2004 a 4 Jun 1992 a 26 Feb 1999 a 9 Jun 1995 a 13 Sep 1990 a 17 Nov 2004 a 9 Dec 1992 a 23 Jan 1986 6 Dec 1991 a 24 Jan 2002 a 23 Oct 2006 d 21 Jun 1993 112 National Human Rights Commission, India Mozambique Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Pakistan Palau Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Rwanda San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain 12 Nov 2001 4 Feb 1985 14 Jan 1986 15 Apr 1985 28 Jul 1988 4 Feb 1985 17 Apr 2008 20 Sep 2011 22 Feb 1985 23 Oct 1989 29 May 1985 13 Jan 1986 4 Feb 1985 18 Sep 2002 6 Sep 2000 4 Feb 1985 18 Mar 1985 29 Jan 1993 4 Feb 1985 14 Sep 1999 a 28 Nov 1994 a 14 May 1991 a 21 Dec 1988 10 Dec 1989 5 Jul 2005 5 Oct 1998 a 28 Jun 2001 9 Jul 1986 23 Jun 2010 24 Aug 1987 12 Mar 1990 7 Jul 1988 18 Jun 1986 a 26 Jul 1989 9
 Feb 1989 11 Jan 2000 a 9 Jan 1995 a 28 Nov 1995 a 18 Dec 1990 a 3 Mar 1987 15 Dec 2008 a 27 Nov 2006 23 Sep 1997 a 21 Aug 1986 12 Mar 2001 d 5 May 1992 a 25 Apr 2001 28 May 1993 d 16 Jul 1993 a 24 Jan 1990 a 10 Dec 1998 21 Oct 1987 Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Sao Tome and Principe Russian Federation 10 Dec 1985 Lao People's Democratic 21 Sep 2010 Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jordan Kenya Kuwait Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco 28 Nov 1986 4 Feb 1985 14 Oct 1997 23 Oct 1985 28 Sep 1992 22 Oct 1986 4 Feb 1985 27 Jun 1985 22 Feb 1985 1 Oct 2001 18 Mar 1985 8 Jan 1986 15 Apr 1987 23 Oct 1996 28 Oct 1998 7 Jul 2011 a 11 Apr 2002 3 Oct 1991 12 Jan 1989 29 Jun 1999 a 13 Nov 1991 a 26 Aug 1998 a 21 Feb 1997 a 8 Mar 1996 a 5 Sep 1997 a 14 Apr 1992 a 5 Oct 2000 a 12 Nov 2001 a 22 Sep 2004 a 16 May 1989 a 2 Nov 1990 1 Feb 1996 a 29 Sep 1987 13 Dec 2005 11 Jun 1996 a 20 Apr 2004 a 26 Feb 1999 a 13 Sep 1990 a 17 Nov 2004 a 9 Dec 1992 a 23 Jan 1986 6 Dec 1991 a 24 Jan 2002 a 23 Oct 2006 d 21 Jun 1993 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Afghanistan Mozambique Albania Namibia Algeria Nauru Andorra Nepal Antigua and Barbuda Netherlands Argentina New Zealand Armenia Nicaragua Australia Niger Austria Nigeria Azerbaijan Norway Bahamas Pakistan Bahrain Palau Bangladesh Panama Belarus Paraguay Belgium Peru Belize Philippines Benin Poland Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Portugal Bosnia and Herzegovina Qatar Botswana Republic of Korea Brazil Republic of Moldova Bulgaria Romania Burkina Faso Russian Federation Burundi Rwanda Cambodia San Marino Cameroon Sao Tome and Principe Canada Saudi Arabia Cape
 Verde Senegal Chad Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Signature 4 Feb 1985 26 Nov 1985 12 Nov 2001 5 Aug 2002 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 14 Jan 1986 15 Apr 1985 10 Dec 1985 14 Mar 1985 28 Jul 1988 4 Feb 1985 16 Dec 2008 17 Apr 2008 20 Sep 2011 22 Feb 1985 19 Dec 1985 23 Oct 1989 4 Feb 1985 29 May 1985 13 Jan 1986 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 8 Sep 2000 23 Sep 1985 10 Jun 1986 10 Dec 1985 18 Sep 2002 6 Sep 2000 23 Aug 1985 4 Feb 1985 18 Mar 1985 29 Jan 1993 4 Feb 1985 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 1 Apr 1987 14 Sep 1999 a 11 May 1994 a 28 Nov 1994 a 12 Sep 1989 22 Sep 2006 14 May 1991 a 19 Jul 1993 a 21 Dec 1988 24 Sep 1986 10 Dec 1989 13 Sep 1993 a 5 Jul 2005 8 Aug 1989 5 Oct 1998 a 29 Jul 1987 28 Jun 2001 16 Aug 1996 a 9 Jul 1986 23 Jun 2010 6 Mar 1998 a 5 Oct 1998 a 24 Aug 1987 13 Mar 1987 12 Mar 1990 25 Jun 1999 7 Jul 1988 17 Mar 1986 a 18 Jun 1986 a 12 Mar 1992 a 26 Jul 1989 12 Apr 1999 9 Feb 1989 1 Sep 1993 d 11 Jan 2000 a 8 Sep 2000 9 Jan 1995 a 28 Sep 1989 28 Nov 1995 a 16 Dec 1986 18 Dec 1990 a 4 Jan 1999 a 3 Mar 1987 18 Feb 1993 a 15 Dec 2008 a 15 Oct 1992 a 27 Nov 2006 19 Dec 1986 a 24 Jun 1987 23 Sep 1997 a 4 Jun 1992 a 21 Aug 1986 9 Jun 1995 a 12 Mar 2001 d 5 May 1992 a 25 Apr 2001 28 May 1993 d 16 Jul 1993 a 24 Jan 1990 a 10 Dec 1998 21 Oct 1987 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 113 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Afghanistan Sri Lanka Albania St. Vincent and the Grenadines Algeria Sudan Andorra Swaziland Antigua and Barbuda Sweden Argentina Switzerland Armenia Syrian Arab Republic Australia Tajikistan Austria Thailand Azerbaijan The former Yugoslav Republic of Bahamas Macedonia Bahrain Timor-Leste Bangladesh Togo Belarus Tunisia Belgium Turkey Belize Turkmenistan Benin Uganda Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Ukraine
 Bosnia and Herzegovina United Kingdom of Great Britain Botswana and Northern Ireland Brazil United States of America Bulgaria Uruguay Burkina Faso Uzbekistan Burundi Vanuatu Cambodia Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Cameroon of) Canada Yemen Cape Verde Zambia Chad Signature 4 Feb 1985 26 Nov 1985 4 Jun 1986 5 Aug 2002 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 10 Dec 1985 14 Mar 1985 16 Dec 2008 25 Mar 1987 19 Dec 1985 26 Aug 1987 4 Feb 1985 25 Jan 1988 4 Feb 1985 27 Feb 1986 15 Mar 1985 8 Sep 2000 23 Sep 1985 18 Apr 1988 10 Jun 1986 4 Feb 1985 15 Feb 1985 23 Aug 1985 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Committee against Torture 1 Apr 1987 3 Jan 1994 a 11 May 1994 a 1 Aug 2001 a 12 Sep 1989 22 Sep 2006 26 Mar 2004 a 19 Jul 1993 a 8 Jan 1986 24 Sep 1986 2 Dec 1986 13 Sep 1993 a 19 Aug 2004 a 8 Aug 1989 11 Jan 1995 a 29 Jul 1987 2 Oct 2007 a 16 Aug 1996 a 12 Dec 1994 d 6 Mar 1998 a 16 Apr 2003 a 5 Oct 1998 a 18 Nov 1987 13 Mar 1987 23 Sep 1988 25 Jun 1999 2 Aug 1988 17 Mar 1986 a 25 Jun 1999 a 12 Mar 1992 a 3 Nov 1986 a 12 Apr 1999 24 Feb 1987 1 Sep 1993 d 8 Dec 1988 8 Sep 2000 28 Sep 1989 21 Oct 1994 16 Dec 1986 24 Oct 1986 4 Jan 1999 a 28 Sep 1995 a 18 Feb 1993 a 12 Jul 2011 a 15 Oct 1992 a 29 Jul 1991 19 Dec 1986 a 24 Jun 1987 5 Nov 1991 a 4 Jun 1992 a 7 Oct 1998 a 9 Jun 1995 a The UN Committee against Torture (hereafter “the CAT” or “the Committee”) is the body created by the UN Convention against Torture to monitor the observance of the specific obligations established under the Convention.
The Committee was established pursuant to Article 17 of the Convention and began to function on 1 January 1988.

The Committee consists of 10 experts of “high moral standing” and recognized competence in the field of human rights.

The experts, who must be nationals of States Parties, are elected by those States by means of a secret ballot.

They are elected for a term of four years and are eligible for re-election.
The Committee is entrusted with the specific supervision of a multilateral instrument for protection against torture and other forms of inhuman treatment.

The Convention sets out a number of obligations designed to strengthen the sphere of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, while conferring upon the Committee Against Torture broad powers of examination and investigation to ensure its effectiveness in practice.
At their initial meeting held at Geneva in April 1988, the members of the Committee against Torture adopted rules of procedure and defined the Committee's working methods, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

All state parties are obliged under the Convention to submit regular reports to the CAT on how rights are being implemented.

Upon ratifying the Convention, states must submit a report within one year, after which they are obliged to report every four years.
The Committee examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of "concluding observations."

Under certain circumstances, the CAT may consider complaints or communications from individuals claiming that their rights under the Convention have been violated.
114 National Human Rights Commission, India 4 Jun 1986 4 Feb 1985 4 Feb 1985 25 Mar 1987 26 Aug 1987 25 Jan 1988 27 Feb 1986 18 Apr 1988 4 Feb 1985 St. Vincent and the Grenadines Syrian Arab Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu of) Yemen Zambia United Kingdom of Great Britain 15 Mar 1985 and Northern Ireland United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 15 Feb 1985 3 Jan 1994 a 1 Aug 2001 a 26 Mar 2004 a 8 Jan 1986 2 Dec 1986 19 Aug 2004 a 11 Jan 1995 a 2 Oct 2007 a 12 Dec 1994 d 16 Apr 2003 a 18 Nov 1987 23 Sep 1988 2 Aug 1988 25 Jun 1999 a 3 Nov 1986 a 24 Feb 1987 8 Dec 1988 21 Oct 1994 24 Oct 1986 28 Sep 1995 a 12 Jul 2011 a 29 Jul 1991 5 Nov 1991 a 7 Oct 1998 a Committee against Torture The UN Committee against Torture (hereafter “the CAT” or “the Committee”) is the body created by the UN Convention against Torture to monitor the observance of the specific obligations established under the Convention.
The Committee was established pursuant to Article 17 of the Convention and began to function on 1 January 1988.

The Committee consists of 10 experts of “high moral standing” and recognized competence in the field of human rights.

The experts, who must be nationals of States Parties, are elected by those States by means of a secret ballot.

They are elected for a term of four years and are eligible for re-election.
The Committee is entrusted with the specific supervision of a multilateral instrument for protection against torture and other forms of inhuman treatment.

The Convention sets out a number of obligations designed to strengthen the sphere of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, while conferring upon the Committee Against Torture broad powers of examination and investigation to ensure its effectiveness in practice.
At their initial meeting held at Geneva in April 1988, the members of the Committee against Torture adopted rules of procedure and defined the Committee's working methods, in conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

All state parties are obliged under the Convention to submit regular reports to the CAT on how rights are being implemented.

Upon ratifying the Convention, states must submit a report within one year, after which they are obliged to report every four years.
The Committee examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of "concluding observations."

Under certain circumstances, the CAT may consider complaints or communications from individuals claiming that their rights under the Convention have been violated.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 115 The Committee normally holds two regular sessions each year.
Special sessions, however, may be convened by decision of the Committee itself at the request of a majority of its members or of a Committee against Torture (CAT) The CAT is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment by its State parties.

State Party to the Convention.

The Committee elects from among its members, a Chairman, three Vice- Chairmen and a Rapporteur.
These officers are elected for a term of two years and are eligible for re-election.

The Committee may invite specialized agencies, United Nations bodies concerned, regional intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council information, to written documentation statements, as appropriate, relevant to the Committee's activities under the Convention.
It submits an annual report on its activities to the States Parties and to the General Assembly of the United Nations.

 CAT was established pursuant to Article 17 of the Convention.

it and submit to information and to By virtue of Article 20 of the Convention, the Committee is inquiries empowered to receive concerning allegations of systematic practice of torture in the States Parties.
The procedure set out in Article 20 of the Convention, is marked by two features: its confidential character, and the pursuit of cooperation with the States Parties concerned.

institute The competence conferred upon the Committee by this Article is optional, which means that, at the time of ratifying or acceding to the Convention, a State may declare that it does not recognize it.
In that case, and so long as that reservation has not been withdrawn, the Committee may not exercise the powers conferred upon it under Article 20 in respect of that State Party.

116 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment The Optional Protocol is an addition to the Convention against Torture.
It was drafted to strengthen the “protection of people deprived of their liberty” on the background “that further measures are necessary to achieve the purposes of the Convention against Torture”.

Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment The Optional Protocol is an international treaty establishing preventive mechanisms for the Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).
The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture entered into force in accordance with Article 28(1) when the critical number of 20 ratifications was reached.

Entry into force: 22 June 2006 Signatories: 71 Parties: 62 India has not signed the OPCAT Like the CAT itself, it is only binding for States that accede to it.
The UN Convention against Torture provides a legal framework to combat the practice of torture, while the UN Committee against Torture is a competent body to oversee that States Parties respect their obligations to prohibit, prevent and punish torture.

In addition, various norms and mechanisms against torture and ill-treatment also exist at a regional level.

Nonetheless, these practices still persist and The Committee normally holds two regular sessions each year.
Special sessions, however, may be convened by decision of the Committee itself at the request of a majority of its members or of a Committee against Torture (CAT) State Party to the Convention.

The Committee elects from among its members, a Chairman, three Vice- The CAT is the body of Chairmen and a Rapporteur.
These independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading officers are elected for a term of two years and are eligible for re-election.

The Committee may invite specialized agencies, United Nations bodies Treatment or Punishment concerned, regional intergovernmental by its State parties.

 CAT was established pursuant to Article 17 of the Convention.
organizations and non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council to submit to it information, documentation and written statements, as appropriate, relevant to the Committee's activities under the Convention.

It submits an annual report on its activities to the States Parties and to the General Assembly of the United Nations.
By virtue of Article 20 of the Convention, the Committee is empowered to receive information and to institute inquiries concerning allegations of systematic practice of torture in the States Parties.

The procedure set out in Article 20 of the Convention, is marked by two features: its confidential character, and the pursuit of cooperation with the States Parties concerned.
The competence conferred upon the Committee by this Article is optional, which means that, at the time of ratifying or acceding to the Convention, a State may declare that it does not recognize it.

In that case, and so long as that reservation has not been withdrawn, the Committee may not exercise the powers conferred upon it under Article 20 in respect of that State Party.
Optional Protocol the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to The Optional Protocol is an addition to the Convention against Torture.

It was drafted to strengthen the “protection of people deprived of their liberty” on the background “that further measures are necessary to achieve the purposes of the Convention against Torture”.
Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment The Optional Protocol is an international treaty establishing preventive mechanisms for the Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).

The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture entered into force in accordance with Article 28(1) when the critical number of 20 ratifications was reached.
Entry into force: 22 June 2006 Signatories: 71 Parties: 62 India has not signed the OPCAT Like the CAT itself, it is only binding for States that accede to it.

The UN Convention against Torture provides a legal framework to combat the practice of torture, while the UN Committee against Torture is a competent body to oversee that States Parties respect their obligations to prohibit, prevent and punish torture.
In addition, various norms and mechanisms against torture and ill-treatment also exist at a regional level.

Nonetheless, these practices still persist and A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 117 are widespread throughout the world.

For this reason, an entirely new approach was needed to effectively prevent these violations.

Committee Against Torture, monitor the situation a posteriori, once they receive allegations of abuse.
The other novelty of the Optional Protocol is that it is based on a premise of collaboration with the States Parties to prevent violations, rather than on public condemnation of States Parties for violations already committed.

While existing human rights mechanisms, including the CAT, also seek constructive dialogue, they are based on the public examination of States’ compliance to its obligations through the reporting or individual communications system described above.
The system foreseen in the Protocol is based more on a process of long-term sustained cooperation and dialogue in order to assist States Parties to implement any necessary changes to prevent torture and ill-treatment in the long term.
It obliges the State Party to set up at the domestic level one or several National Preventive Mechanisms (NPM), under which the inspection of “any place under its [the State Party’s] jurisdiction and control where persons are or may be deprived of their liberty,” can be undertaken.
The underlying thought of the whole exercise is that national and international monitoring – in form of visits of places of detention – are the most effective instruments for the prevention of torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

This new approach, enshrined in the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture, is based on the premise that the more open and transparent places of detention are, the less abuse will take place.
Since places of detention are by definition closed to the outside world, persons deprived of their liberty are vulnerable and particularly at risk of torture and other forms of ill-treatment as well as other human rights violations.

Furthermore, respect for their fundamental rights depends exclusively upon the authorities in charge of the place of detention and they are dependent upon others for the satisfaction of their most basic needs.
Violations of the rights of people deprived of liberty can arise from a policy of repression as well as inadequate systems of oversight.

Opening up places of detention to external control mechanisms, as the Optional Protocol does, is therefore, one of the most effective means to prevent abusive practices and to improve conditions of detention.

The novelty of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture, compared to existing human rights mechanisms, lies in two factors.
Firstly, the system to be established by the Optional Protocol places emphasis on preventing violations rather than reacting to them once they have already occurred.

The preventive approach foreseen in the Optional Protocol is based on the regular and periodic monitoring of places of detention through visits to these facilities conducted by expert bodies in order to prevent abuses.
In contrast, the UN most existing human rights mechanisms, including 118 National Human Rights Commission, India are widespread throughout the world.

For this reason, an entirely new approach was needed to effectively prevent these violations.

Committee Against Torture, monitor the situation a posteriori, once they receive allegations of abuse.
This new approach, enshrined in the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture, is based on the premise that the more open and transparent places of detention are, the less abuse will take place.

Since places of detention are by definition closed to the outside world, persons deprived of their liberty are vulnerable and particularly at risk of torture and other forms of ill-treatment as well as other human rights violations.
Furthermore, respect for their fundamental rights depends exclusively upon the authorities in charge of the place of detention and they are dependent upon others for the satisfaction of their most basic needs.

Violations of the rights of people deprived of liberty can arise from a policy of repression as well as inadequate systems of oversight.
Opening up places of detention to external control mechanisms, as the Optional Protocol does, is therefore, one of the most effective means to prevent abusive practices and to improve conditions of detention.

The novelty of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture, compared to existing human rights mechanisms, lies in two factors.
Firstly, the system to be established by the Optional Protocol places emphasis on preventing violations rather than reacting to them once they have already occurred.

The preventive approach foreseen in the Optional Protocol is based on the regular and periodic monitoring of places of detention through visits to these facilities conducted by expert bodies in order to prevent abuses.
In contrast, most existing human rights mechanisms, including the UN The other novelty of the Optional Protocol is that it is based on a premise of collaboration with the States Parties to prevent violations, rather than on public condemnation of States Parties for violations already committed.
While existing human rights mechanisms, including the CAT, also seek constructive dialogue, they are based on the public examination of States’ compliance to its obligations through individual communications system described above.

The system foreseen in the Protocol is based more on a process of long-term sustained cooperation and dialogue in order to assist States Parties to implement any necessary changes to prevent torture and ill-treatment in the long term.
the reporting or It obliges the State Party to set up at the domestic level one or several National Preventive Mechanisms (NPM), under which the inspection of “any place under its [the State Party’s] jurisdiction and control where persons are or may be deprived of their liberty,” can be undertaken.
The underlying thought of the whole exercise is that national and international monitoring – in form of visits of places of detention – are the most effective instruments for the prevention of torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 119 Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Albania Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Chile Congo Costa Rica Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Ecuador Estonia Signature, Succession to signature(d) Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification 30 Apr 2003 19 May 2009 25 Sep 2003 15 Sep 2005 24 Oct 2005 24 Feb 2005 22 May 2006 7 Dec 2007 13 Oct 2003 22 Sep 2010 21 Sep 2005 14 Sep 2005 15 Dec 2009 26 Sep 2011 6 Jun 2005 29 Sep 2008 4 Feb 2003 23 Sep 2003 26 Jul 2004 13 Sep 2004 26 Jun 2003 24 May 2007 21 Sep 2004 1 Oct 2003 a 15 Nov 2004 14 Sep 2006 a 28 Jan 2009 20 Sep 2006 23 May 2006 24 Oct 2008 12 Jan 2007 1 Jun 2011 7 Jul 2010 30 Mar 2007 12 Dec 2008 1 Dec 2005 25 Apr 2005 29 Apr 2009 10 Jul 2006 23 Sep 2010 a 25 Jun 2004 20 Jul 2010 18 Dec 2006 120 National Human Rights Commission, India Finland France Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Honduras Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Lebanon Liberia Liechtenstein Luxembourg Madagascar Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Montenegro Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Panama Paraguay 23 Sep 2003 16 Sep 2005 15 Dec 2004 20 Sep 2006 6 Nov 2006 3 Mar 2011 25 Sep 2003 16 Sep 2005 8 Dec 2004 24 Sep 2003 2 Oct 2007 20 Aug 2003 25 Sep 2007 24 Jun 2005 13 Jan 2005 24 Sep 2003 14 Sep 2005 19 Jan 2004 24 Sep 2003 27 Sep 2011 23 Sep 2003 23 Oct 2006 d 3 Jun 2005 23 Sep 2003 14 Mar 2007 24 Sep 2003 22 Sep 2010 22 Sep 2004 11 Nov 2008 22 Sep 2010 9 Aug 2005 a 4 Dec 2008 9 Jun 2008 23 May 2006 12 Jan 2012 a 22 Oct 2008 29 Dec 2008 a 22 Dec 2008 a 22 Sep 2004 a 3 Nov 2006 19 May 2010 15 Feb 2006 12 May 2005 24
 Sep 2003 21 Jun 2005 a 11 Apr 2005 6 Mar 2009 28 Sep 2010 14 Mar 2007 25 Feb 2009 27 Jul 2009 a 2 Jun 2011 2 Dec 2005 Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment Participant or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature, Accession(a), Succession(d), Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 22 May 2006 Bosnia and Herzegovina Albania Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Benin Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Chile Congo Costa Rica Croatia Cyprus Congo Denmark Ecuador Estonia Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Succession to signature(d) 30 Apr 2003 19 May 2009 25 Sep 2003 15 Sep 2005 24 Oct 2005 24 Feb 2005 7 Dec 2007 13 Oct 2003 22 Sep 2010 21 Sep 2005 14 Sep 2005 15 Dec 2009 26 Sep 2011 6 Jun 2005 29 Sep 2008 4 Feb 2003 23 Sep 2003 26 Jul 2004 13 Sep 2004 26 Jun 2003 24 May 2007 21 Sep 2004 Ratification 1 Oct 2003 a 15 Nov 2004 14 Sep 2006 a 28 Jan 2009 20 Sep 2006 23 May 2006 24 Oct 2008 12 Jan 2007 1 Jun 2011 7 Jul 2010 30 Mar 2007 12 Dec 2008 1 Dec 2005 25 Apr 2005 29 Apr 2009 10 Jul 2006 23 Sep 2010 a 25 Jun 2004 20 Jul 2010 18 Dec 2006 Albania Finland Argentina France Armenia Gabon Australia Georgia Austria Germany Azerbaijan Ghana Belgium Greece Benin Guatemala Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Guinea Bosnia and Herzegovina Honduras Brazil Hungary Bulgaria Iceland Burkina Faso Ireland Cambodia Italy Cameroon Kazakhstan Cape Verde Kyrgyzstan Chile Lebanon Congo Liberia Costa Rica Liechtenstein Croatia Luxembourg Cyprus Madagascar Czech Republic Maldives Democratic Republic of the Mali Congo Malta Denmark Mauritania Ecuador Mauritius Estonia Mexico
 Montenegro Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Panama Paraguay Signature, Succession to signature(d) 23 Sep 2003 30 Apr 2003 16 Sep 2005 15 Dec 2004 19 May 2009 25 Sep 2003 20 Sep 2006 15 Sep 2005 6 Nov 2006 24 Oct 2005 3 Mar 2011 24 Feb 2005 25 Sep 2003 22 May 2006 16 Sep 2005 7 Dec 2007 8 Dec 2004 13 Oct 2003 22 Sep 2010 24 Sep 2003 21 Sep 2005 2 Oct 2007 14 Sep 2005 20 Aug 2003 15 Dec 2009 25 Sep 2007 26 Sep 2011 6 Jun 2005 29 Sep 2008 4 Feb 2003 24 Jun 2005 23 Sep 2003 13 Jan 2005 26 Jul 2004 24 Sep 2003 13 Sep 2004 14 Sep 2005 19 Jan 2004 24 Sep 2003 26 Jun 2003 27 Sep 2011 24 May 2007 21 Sep 2004 23 Sep 2003 23 Oct 2006 d 3 Jun 2005 23 Sep 2003 14 Mar 2007 24 Sep 2003 22 Sep 2010 22 Sep 2004 Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification 1 Oct 2003 a 15 Nov 2004 11 Nov 2008 14 Sep 2006 a 22 Sep 2010 9 Aug 2005 a 4 Dec 2008 28 Jan 2009 20 Sep 2006 9 Jun 2008 23 May 2006 24 Oct 2008 23 May 2006 12 Jan 2007 12 Jan 2012 a 1 Jun 2011 7 Jul 2010 30 Mar 2007 22 Oct 2008 29 Dec 2008 a 12 Dec 2008 22 Dec 2008 a 22 Sep 2004 a 1 Dec 2005 3 Nov 2006 25 Apr 2005 19 May 2010 29 Apr 2009 10 Jul 2006 15 Feb 2006 23 Sep 2010 a 12 May 2005 24 Sep 2003 25 Jun 2004 20 Jul 2010 21 Jun 2005 a 18 Dec 2006 11 Apr 2005 6 Mar 2009 28 Sep 2010 14 Mar 2007 25 Feb 2009 27 Jul 2009 a 2 Jun 2011 2 Dec 2005 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 121 Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature, Succession to signature(d) Accession(a), Succession(d), Ratification Albania Peru Argentina Poland Armenia Portugal Australia Republic of Moldova Austria Romania Azerbaijan Senegal Belgium Serbia Benin Sierra Leone Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Slovenia Bosnia and Herzegovina South Africa Brazil Spain Bulgaria Sweden Burkina Faso Switzerland Cambodia The former Yugoslav Republic of
 Cameroon Macedonia Cape Verde Timor-Leste Chile Togo Congo Tunisia Costa Rica Turkey Croatia Ukraine Cyprus United Kingdom of Great Britain Czech Republic and Northern Ireland Democratic Republic of the Uruguay Congo Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Denmark of) Ecuador Zambia Estonia 30 Apr 2003 5 Apr 2004 15 Feb 2006 19 May 2009 16 Sep 2005 25 Sep 2003 24 Sep 2003 15 Sep 2005 4 Feb 2003 24 Oct 2005 25 Sep 2003 24 Feb 2005 26 Sep 2003 22 May 2006 7 Dec 2007 20 Sep 2006 13 Oct 2003 13 Apr 2005 22 Sep 2010 26 Jun 2003 21 Sep 2005 25 Jun 2004 14 Sep 2005 1 Sep 2006 15 Dec 2009 26 Sep 2011 16 Sep 2005 6 Jun 2005 15 Sep 2005 29 Sep 2008 4 Feb 2003 14 Sep 2005 23 Sep 2003 23 Sep 2005 26 Jul 2004 26 Jun 2003 13 Sep 2004 12 Jan 2004 1 Jul 2011 26 Jun 2003 24 May 2007 27 Sep 2010 21 Sep 2004 1 Oct 2003 a 14 Sep 2006 a 15 Nov 2004 14 Sep 2005 14 Sep 2006 a 24 Jul 2006 2 Jul 2009 28 Jan 2009 18 Oct 2006 26 Sep 2006 20 Sep 2006 23 May 2006 23 Jan 2007 a 24 Oct 2008 12 Jan 2007 4 Apr 2006 1 Jun 2011 14 Sep 2005 7 Jul 2010 24 Sep 2009 30 Mar 2007 13 Feb 2009 12 Dec 2008 20 Jul 2010 29 Jun 2011 a 1 Dec 2005 27 Sep 2011 25 Apr 2005 19 Sep 2006 29 Apr 2009 10 Dec 2003 10 Jul 2006 23 Sep 2010 a 8 Dec 2005 25 Jun 2004 20 Jul 2010 18 Dec 2006 122 National Human Rights Commission, India Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is a human rights treaty setting out the civil, political, economic, social, health and cultural rights of children.
The Convention generally defines a child as any human being under the age of eighteen, unless an earlier age of majority is recognized by a country's law.

CRC It was adopted by resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989.

The Convention is the principal children’s treaty encompassing a full range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.
Entry into force: 2 September 1990 Signatories: 140 Parties: 193 Treaty Body: Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) India acceded to the CRC on 11 Dec 1992 The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the main international instrument for the protection of children’s rights, including from all forms of abuse, violence, neglect and exploitation.
Definition of the Child Article 1 of the Convention defines a 'child' as a person below the age of 18, unless the laws of a particular country set the legal age for adulthood younger.

The Articles of the Convention may be grouped into three categories of rights and a set of guiding principles.
Additional provisions of the Convention (articles 43 to 54) discuss implementation measures for Republic of Moldova Peru Poland Portugal Romania Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Tunisia Turkey Ukraine Uruguay of) Zambia 14 Sep 2006 a 14 Sep 2005 24 Jul 2006 2 Jul 2009 18 Oct 2006 26 Sep 2006 23 Jan 2007 a 4 Apr 2006 14 Sep 2005 24 Sep 2009 13 Feb 2009 20 Jul 2010 29 Jun 2011 a 27 Sep 2011 19 Sep 2006 10 Dec 2003 5 Apr 2004 15 Feb 2006 16 Sep 2005 24 Sep 2003 4 Feb 2003 25 Sep 2003 26 Sep 2003 20 Sep 2006 13 Apr 2005 26 Jun 2003 25 Jun 2004 16 Sep 2005 15 Sep 2005 14 Sep 2005 23 Sep 2005 27 Sep 2010 United Kingdom of Great Britain 26 Jun 2003 and Northern Ireland Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 1 Jul 2011 12 Jan 2004 8 Dec 2005 The former Yugoslav Republic of 1 Sep 2006 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is a human rights treaty setting out the civil, political, economic, social, health and cultural rights of children.
The Convention generally defines a child as any human being under the age of eighteen, unless an earlier age of majority is recognized by a country's law.

CRC It was adopted by resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989.

The Convention is the principal children’s treaty encompassing a full range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.
Entry into force: 2 September 1990 Signatories: 140 Parties: 193 Treaty Body: Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) India acceded to the CRC on 11 Dec 1992 The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the main international instrument for the protection of children’s rights, including from all forms of abuse, violence, neglect and exploitation.
Definition of the Child Article 1 of the Convention defines a 'child' as a person below the age of 18, unless the laws of a particular country set the legal age for adulthood younger.

The Articles of the Convention may be grouped into three categories of rights and a set of guiding principles.
Additional provisions of the Convention (articles 43 to 54) discuss implementation measures for A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 123 the Convention, explaining how governments and international organizations like UNICEF will work to ensure children are protected in their rights.

Guiding Principles: The guiding principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child represent the underlying requirements for any the rights outlined in all and Convention to be realized.
Guiding Principles Non- discrimination (Article 2) Best interests of the child (Article 3) Right to life, survival and development (Article 6) Respect for the views of the child (Article 12) Survival and Development Rights: These are rights to the resources, skills and contributions necessary for the survival and full development of the child.
They include rights to adequate food, formal shelter, clean water, education, primary health care, leisure and recreation, and information about their rights.

These rights require not only the existence of the means to fulfil the rights but also access to them.

Specific articles address the needs of child refugees, children activities cultural with disabilities and children of minority or indigenous groups.
The basic rights to life, survival and development of one’s full potential under this category include Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 14); Social security (Article 26); Right to Education (Article 28); Leisure, Play and Culture (Article 31); Adequate Standard of Living (Article 27); Health and Health Services (Article 24); Rights of Children with Disabilities (Article 23), Refugee Children (Article 22), and Children Deprived of Family Environment (Article 20); Preservation of Identity (Article 8); and the Right to Survival and Development (Article 6), among others.
124 National Human Rights Commission, India Protection Rights: These rights include protection from all forms of child abuse, neglect, exploitation and cruelty, including the right to special protection in times of war and protection from abuse in the criminal justice system.

The CRC is the first international treaty to place a comprehensive legal obligation on States Parties to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse.
This obligation is an important landmark because it implicitly recognizes that sexual exploitation of children is likely to occur in every country in the world.
The rights under this category include protection against Kidnapping (Article 11); Protection from all forms of violence (Article 19); Child labour (Article 32); Drug abuse (Article 33); Sexual exploitation (Article 34); Abduction, sale and trafficking (Article 35); Detention and punishment (Article 37); and War and armed conflicts (Article 38), among others.
India’s Declaration on the CRC Declaration: "While fully subscribing to the objectives and purposes of the Convention, realising that certain of the rights of child, namely those pertaining to the economic, social and cultural rights can only be progressively implemented in the developing countries, subject to the extent of available resources and within the framework of international co-operation; recognising that the child has to be protected from exploitation of all forms including economic exploitation; noting that for several reasons children of different ages do work in India; having prescribed minimum ages for employment in hazardous occupations and in certain other areas; having made regulatory provisions regarding hours and conditions of employment; and being aware that it is not practical immediately to prescribe minimum ages for admission to each and every area of employment in India - the Government of India undertakes to take measures to progressively implement the provisions of article 32, particularly paragraph 2 (a), in accordance with its national legislation and relevant international instruments to which it is a State Party."
the Convention, explaining how governments and international organizations like UNICEF will work to ensure children are protected in their rights.

Guiding Principles: The guiding principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child represent the underlying requirements for any and all rights outlined in the Guiding Principles Convention to be realized.
Non- discrimination (Article 2) Survival and Development Rights: These are rights to the resources, skills and contributions necessary for the survival and full development of the Best interests of child.

They include rights to adequate the child (Article 3) food, shelter, clean water, formal education, primary health care, leisure Right to life, survival and development (Article 6) and recreation, cultural activities and information about their rights.
These rights require not only the existence of Respect for the the means to fulfil the rights but also views of the child (Article 12) access to them.

Specific articles address the needs of child refugees, children with disabilities and children of minority or indigenous groups.
The basic rights to life, survival and development of one’s full potential under this category include Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 14); Social security (Article 26); Right to Education (Article 28); Leisure, Play and Culture (Article 31); Adequate Standard of Living (Article 27); Health and Health Services (Article 24); Rights of Children with Disabilities (Article 23), Refugee Children (Article 22), and Children Deprived of Family Environment (Article 20); Preservation of Identity (Article 8); and the Right to Survival and Development (Article 6), among others.
Protection Rights: These rights include protection from all forms of child abuse, neglect, exploitation and cruelty, including the right to special protection in times of war and protection from abuse in the criminal justice system.

The CRC is the first international treaty to place a comprehensive legal obligation on States Parties to protect children from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse.
This obligation is an important landmark because it implicitly recognizes that sexual exploitation of children is likely to occur in every country in the world.
The rights under this category include protection against Kidnapping (Article 11); Protection from all forms of violence (Article 19); Child labour (Article 32); Drug abuse (Article 33); Sexual exploitation (Article 34); Abduction, sale and trafficking (Article 35); Detention and punishment (Article 37); and War and armed conflicts (Article 38), among others.
India’s Declaration on the CRC Declaration: the "While fully subscribing to the objectives and purposes of the Convention, realising that certain of the rights of child, namely those pertaining to the economic, social and cultural rights can only be progressively implemented in the developing countries, subject to the framework of extent of available resources and within international co-operation; recognising that the child has to be protected from exploitation of all forms including economic exploitation; noting that for several reasons children of different ages do work in India; having prescribed minimum ages for employment in hazardous occupations and in certain other areas; having made regulatory provisions conditions of regarding hours employment; and being aware that it is not practical immediately to prescribe minimum ages for admission to each and every area of employment in India - the Government of India undertakes to take measures to progressively implement the provisions of article 32, its national particularly paragraph 2 (a), legislation and relevant international instruments to which it is a State Party."
in accordance with and A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 125 Participation Rights: Children are entitled to the freedom to express opinions and to have a say in matters affecting their social, economic, religious, cultural and political life.

Participation rights include the right to express opinions and be heard, the right to information and freedom of association.
Engaging these rights as they mature helps children bring about the realization of all their rights and prepares them for an active role in society.

The rights under this category include Respect for the views of the child or the Right to be heard (Article 12); Freedom of expression (Article 13); Freedom of association (Article 15); Right to privacy (Article 16); Access to information and mass media (Article 17); and Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 14), among others.
The equality and interconnection of rights are stressed in the Convention.

In addition to governments’ obligations, children and parents are responsible for respecting the rights of others— particularly each other.

Children’s understanding of rights will vary depending on age and parents in particular should tailor the issues they discuss, the way in which they answer questions and discipline methods to the age and maturity of the individual child.
126 National Human Rights Commission, India Convention on the Rights of the Child COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Acceptance(A), Accession(a), Succession(d) Antigua and Barbuda Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon 27 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Oct 1995 14 Feb 1990 12 Mar 1991 29 Jun 1990 22 Aug 1990 26 Aug 1990 30 Oct 1990 26 Jan 1990 19 Apr 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Mar 1990 25 Apr 1990 4 Jun 1990 8 Mar 1990 26 Jan 1990 31 May 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 May 1990 25 Sep 1990 28 Mar 1994 27 Feb 1992 16 Apr 1993 2 Jan 1996 5 Dec 1990 5 Oct 1993 4 Dec 1990 23 Jun 1993 a 17 Dec 1990 6 Aug 1992 13 Aug 1992 a 20 Feb 1991 13 Feb 1992 a 3 Aug 1990 9 Oct 1990 1 Oct 1990 16 Dec 1991 2 May 1990 3 Aug 1990 1 Aug 1990 26 Jun 1990 1 Sep 1993 d 14 Mar 1995 a 24 Sep 1990 27 Dec 1995 a 3 Jun 1991 31 Aug 1990 19 Oct 1990 15 Oct 1992 a 11 Jan 1993 Participation Rights: Children are entitled to the freedom to express opinions and to have a say in matters affecting their social, economic, religious, cultural and political life.
Participation rights include the right to express opinions and be heard, the right to information and freedom of association.

Engaging these rights as they mature helps children bring about the realization of all their rights and prepares them for an active role in society.
The rights under this category include Respect for the views of the child or the Right to be heard (Article 12); Freedom of expression (Article 13); Freedom of association (Article 15); Right to privacy (Article 16); Access to information and mass media (Article 17); and Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 14), among others.

The equality and interconnection of rights are stressed in the Convention.
In addition to governments’ obligations, children and parents are responsible for respecting the rights of others— particularly each other.

Children’s understanding of rights will vary depending on age and parents in particular should tailor the issues they discuss, the way in which they answer questions and discipline methods to the age and maturity of the individual child.
Convention on the Rights of the Child COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Signature Ratification, Acceptance(A), Accession(a), Succession(d) 27 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Oct 1995 14 Feb 1990 12 Mar 1991 29 Jun 1990 22 Aug 1990 26 Aug 1990 30 Oct 1990 26 Jan 1990 19 Apr 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Mar 1990 25 Apr 1990 4 Jun 1990 8 Mar 1990 26 Jan 1990 31 May 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 May 1990 25 Sep 1990 28 Mar 1994 27 Feb 1992 16 Apr 1993 2 Jan 1996 5 Dec 1990 5 Oct 1993 4 Dec 1990 23 Jun 1993 a 17 Dec 1990 6 Aug 1992 13 Aug 1992 a 20 Feb 1991 13 Feb 1992 a 3 Aug 1990 9 Oct 1990 1 Oct 1990 16 Dec 1991 2 May 1990 3 Aug 1990 1 Aug 1990 26 Jun 1990 1 Sep 1993 d 14 Mar 1995 a 24 Sep 1990 27 Dec 1995 a 3 Jun 1991 31 Aug 1990 19 Oct 1990 15 Oct 1992 a 11 Jan 1993 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 127 Convention on the Rights of the Child COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Acceptance(A), Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Canada Albania Cape Verde Algeria Central African Republic Andorra Chad Angola Chile Antigua and Barbuda China Argentina Colombia Armenia Comoros Australia Congo Austria Cook Islands Azerbaijan Costa Rica Bahamas Côte d'Ivoire Bahrain Croatia Bangladesh Cuba Barbados Cyprus Belarus Czech Republic Belgium Democratic People's Republic of Belize Korea Benin Democratic Republic of the Bhutan Congo Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Denmark Bosnia and Herzegovina Djibouti Botswana Dominica Brazil Dominican Republic Brunei Darussalam Ecuador Bulgaria Egypt Burkina Faso El
 Salvador Burundi Equatorial Guinea Cambodia Eritrea Cameroon Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia 27 Sep 1990 28 May 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Jul 1990 2 Oct 1995 30 Sep 1990 14 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 12 Mar 1991 29 Aug 1990 29 Jun 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 22 Aug 1990 26 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Oct 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 19 Apr 1990 5 Oct 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 23 Aug 1990 2 Mar 1990 25 Apr 1990 20 Mar 1990 4 Jun 1990 8 Mar 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 31 May 1990 5 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 May 1990 20 Dec 1993 25 Sep 1990 2 Jul 1993 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 5 Feb 1990 28 Mar 1994 13 Dec 1991 27 Feb 1992 4 Jun 1992 a 16 Apr 1993 23 Apr 1992 2 Jan 1996 2 Oct 1990 5 Dec 1990 13 Aug 1990 5 Oct 1993 2 Mar 1992 4 Dec 1990 28 Jan 1991 23 Jun 1993 a 22 Jun 1993 17 Dec 1990 14 Oct 1993 a 6 Aug 1992 6 Jun 1997 a 13 Aug 1992 a 21 Aug 1990 20 Feb 1991 4 Feb 1991 13 Feb 1992 a 12 Oct 1992 d 3 Aug 1990 21 Aug 1991 9 Oct 1990 7 Feb 1991 1 Oct 1990 22 Feb 1993 d 16 Dec 1991 21 Sep 1990 2 May 1990 3 Aug 1990 27 Sep 1990 1 Aug 1990 26 Jun 1990 19 Jul 1991 1 Sep 1993 d 6 Dec 1990 14 Mar 1995 a 13 Mar 1991 24 Sep 1990 11 Jun 1991 27 Dec 1995 a 23 Mar 1990 3 Jun 1991 6 Jul 1990 31 Aug 1990 10 Jul 1990 19 Oct 1990 15 Jun 1992 a 15 Oct 1992 a 3 Aug 1994 11 Jan 1993 21 Oct 1991 a 14 May 1991 a 13 Aug 1993 20 Jun 1991 7 Aug 1990 9 Feb 1994 8 Aug 1990 128 National Human Rights Commission, India Guinea-Bissau Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Holy See Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kazakhstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Iran (Islamic Republic of) Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic 26 Jan 1990 29 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 21 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 20 Apr 1990 31 May 1990 14 Mar 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 5 Sep 1991 30
 Sep 1990 3 Jul 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 21 Sep 1990 29 Aug 1990 16 Feb 1994 26 Jan 1990 7 Jun 1990 26 Jan 1990 21 Aug 1990 26 Apr 1990 2 Jun 1994 a 6 Mar 1992 5 Feb 1990 11 May 1993 5 Nov 1990 6 Jun 1990 13 Jul 1990 a 20 Aug 1990 14 Jan 1991 8 Jun 1995 20 Apr 1990 10 Aug 1990 7 Oct 1991 28 Oct 1992 11 Dec 1992 a 5 Sep 1990 13 Jul 1994 15 Jun 1994 a 28 Sep 1992 3 Oct 1991 5 Sep 1991 14 May 1991 22 Apr 1994 24 May 1991 12 Aug 1994 30 Jul 1990 11 Dec 1995 a 21 Oct 1991 7 Oct 1994 a 8 May 1991 a 14 Apr 1992 a 14 May 1991 10 Mar 1992 4 Jun 1993 15 Apr 1993 a Democratic People's Republic of 23 Aug 1990 Democratic Republic of the 20 Mar 1990 27 Sep 1990 Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Korea Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia 28 May 1990 30 Jul 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 29 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 5 Oct 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 5 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 20 Dec 1993 2 Jul 1993 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 5 Feb 1990 13 Dec 1991 4 Jun 1992 a 23 Apr 1992 2 Oct 1990 13 Aug 1990 2 Mar 1992 28 Jan 1991 22 Jun 1993 14 Oct 1993 a 6 Jun 1997 a 21 Aug 1990 4 Feb 1991 12 Oct 1992 d 21 Aug 1991 7 Feb 1991 22 Feb 1993 d 21 Sep 1990 19 Jul 1991 6 Dec 1990 13 Mar 1991 11 Jun 1991 23 Mar 1990 6 Jul 1990 10 Jul 1990 15 Jun 1992 a 3 Aug 1994 21 Oct 1991 a 14 May 1991 a 13 Aug 1993 20 Jun 1991 7 Aug 1990 9 Feb 1994 8 Aug 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Afghanistan Georgia Albania Germany Algeria Ghana Andorra Greece Angola Grenada Antigua and Barbuda Guatemala Argentina Guinea Armenia Guinea-Bissau Australia Guyana Austria Haiti
 Azerbaijan Holy See Bahamas Honduras Bahrain Hungary Bangladesh Iceland Barbados India Belarus Indonesia Belgium Iran (Islamic Republic of) Belize Iraq Benin Ireland Bhutan Israel Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Italy Bosnia and Herzegovina Jamaica Botswana Japan Brazil Jordan Brunei Darussalam Kazakhstan Bulgaria Kenya Burkina Faso Kiribati Burundi Kuwait Cambodia Kyrgyzstan Cameroon Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Signature Ratification, Acceptance(A), Accession(a), Succession(d) 27 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 29 Jan 1990 2 Oct 1995 26 Jan 1990 14 Feb 1990 21 Feb 1990 12 Mar 1991 26 Jan 1990 29 Jun 1990 26 Jan 1990 22 Aug 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 20 Apr 1990 30 Oct 1990 31 May 1990 14 Mar 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 19 Apr 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 5 Sep 1991 2 Mar 1990 25 Apr 1990 30 Sep 1990 4 Jun 1990 3 Jul 1990 8 Mar 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 21 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 29 Aug 1990 16 Feb 1994 31 May 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 May 1990 7 Jun 1990 25 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 21 Aug 1990 26 Apr 1990 28 Mar 1994 2 Jun 1994 a 27 Feb 1992 6 Mar 1992 16 Apr 1993 5 Feb 1990 2 Jan 1996 11 May 1993 5 Dec 1990 5 Nov 1990 5 Oct 1993 6 Jun 1990 4 Dec 1990 13 Jul 1990 a 23 Jun 1993 a 20 Aug 1990 17 Dec 1990 14 Jan 1991 6 Aug 1992 8 Jun 1995 13 Aug 1992 a 20 Apr 1990 20 Feb 1991 10 Aug 1990 13 Feb 1992 a 7 Oct 1991 3 Aug 1990 28 Oct 1992 9 Oct 1990 11 Dec 1992 a 1 Oct 1990 5 Sep 1990 16 Dec 1991 13 Jul 1994 2 May 1990 15 Jun 1994 a 3 Aug 1990 28 Sep 1992 1 Aug 1990 3 Oct 1991 26 Jun 1990 5 Sep 1991 1 Sep 1993 d 14 May 1991 14 Mar 1995 a 22 Apr 1994 24 Sep 1990 24 May 1991 27 Dec 1995 a 12 Aug 1994 3 Jun 1991 30 Jul 1990 31 Aug 1990 11 Dec 1995 a 19 Oct 1990 21 Oct 1991 15 Oct 1992 a 7 Oct 1994 a 11 Jan 1993 8 May 1991 a 14 Apr 1992 a 14 May 1991 10 Mar 1992 4 Jun 1993 15 Apr 1993 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 129 Convention on the Rights of the Child COUNTRY-WISE
 RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Acceptance(A), Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Liechtenstein Albania Lithuania Algeria Luxembourg Andorra Madagascar Angola Malawi Antigua and Barbuda Malaysia Argentina Maldives Armenia Mali Australia Malta Austria Marshall Islands Azerbaijan Mauritania Bahamas Mauritius Bahrain Mexico Bangladesh Micronesia (Federated States of) Barbados Monaco Belarus Mongolia Belgium Montenegro Belize Morocco Benin Mozambique Bhutan Myanmar Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Namibia Bosnia and Herzegovina Nauru Botswana Nepal Brazil Netherlands Brunei Darussalam New Zealand Bulgaria Nicaragua Burkina Faso Niger Burundi Nigeria Cambodia Niue Cameroon Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay 27 Sep 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 21 Mar 1990 2 Oct 1995 19 Apr 1990 14 Feb 1990 12 Mar 1991 29 Jun 1990 21 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 22 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Aug 1990 14 Apr 1993 26 Jan 1990 30 Oct 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 19 Apr 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Mar 1990 26 Jan 1990 25 Apr 1990 30 Sep 1990 4 Jun 1990 8 Mar 1990 26 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 1 Oct 1990 31 May 1990 6 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 May 1990 26 Jan 1990 25 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 20 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 4 Apr 1990 28 Mar 1994 22 Dec 1995 27 Feb 1992 31 Jan 1992 a 16 Apr 1993 7 Mar 1994 2 Jan 1996 19 Mar 1991 5 Dec 1990 2 Jan 1991 a 5 Oct 1993 17 Feb 1995 a 4 Dec 1990 11 Feb 1991 23 Jun 1993 a 20 Sep 1990 17 Dec 1990 30 Sep 1990 6 Aug 1992 4 Oct 1993 13 Aug 1992 a 16 May 1991 20 Feb 1991 26 Jul 1990 a 13 Feb 1992 a 21 Sep 1990 3 Aug 1990 5 May 1993 a 9 Oct 1990 21 Jun 1993 a 1 Oct 1990 5 Jul 1990 16 Dec 1991 23 Oct 2006 d 2 May 1990 21 Jun 1993 3 Aug 1990 26 Apr 1994 1 Aug 1990 15 Jul 1991 a 26 Jun 1990 30 Sep 1990 1 Sep 1993 d 27 Jul 1994 a 14 Mar 1995 a 14 Sep 1990 24 Sep 1990 6 Feb 1995 A 27 Dec 1995 a 6 Apr
 1993 3 Jun 1991 5 Oct 1990 31 Aug 1990 30 Sep 1990 19 Oct 1990 19 Apr 1991 15 Oct 1992 a 20 Dec 1995 a 11 Jan 1993 8 Jan 1991 9 Dec 1996 a 12 Nov 1990 4 Aug 1995 a 12 Dec 1990 2 Mar 1993 25 Sep 1990 130 National Human Rights Commission, India Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Sao Tome and Principe Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Solomon Islands St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 Dec 1992 25 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 13 Feb 1990 9 May 2002 29 Jan 1993 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 24 Jul 1990 26 Jan 1990 22 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 1 May 1991 18 Sep 1990 4 Sep 1990 21 Aug 1990 7 Jun 1991 21 Sep 1990 3 Apr 1995 20 Nov 1991 26 Jan 1993 a 28 Sep 1990 16 Aug 1990 24 Jan 1991 29 Nov 1994 25 Nov 1991 a 14 May 1991 a 26 Jan 1996 a 31 Jul 1990 12 Mar 2001 d 7 Sep 1990 a 18 Jun 1990 5 Oct 1995 a 28 May 1993 d 6 Jul 1992 d 10 Apr 1995 a 16 Jun 1995 6 Dec 1990 12 Jul 1991 24 Jul 1990 16 Jun 1993 26 Oct 1993 3 Aug 1990 1 Mar 1993 7 Sep 1995 29 Jun 1990 24 Feb 1997 15 Jul 1993 26 Oct 1993 a St. Vincent and the Grenadines 20 Sep 1993 Micronesia (Federated States of) Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay 30 Sep 1990 21 Mar 1990 19 Apr 1990 21 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 14 Apr 1993 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 1 Oct 1990 6 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 20 Sep 1990 26 Jan
 1990 30 Sep 1990 4 Apr 1990 22 Dec 1995 31 Jan 1992 a 7 Mar 1994 19 Mar 1991 2 Jan 1991 a 17 Feb 1995 a 11 Feb 1991 20 Sep 1990 30 Sep 1990 4 Oct 1993 16 May 1991 26 Jul 1990 a 21 Sep 1990 5 May 1993 a 21 Jun 1993 a 5 Jul 1990 23 Oct 2006 d 21 Jun 1993 26 Apr 1994 15 Jul 1991 a 30 Sep 1990 27 Jul 1994 a 14 Sep 1990 6 Feb 1995 A 6 Apr 1993 5 Oct 1990 30 Sep 1990 19 Apr 1991 20 Dec 1995 a 8 Jan 1991 9 Dec 1996 a 12 Nov 1990 4 Aug 1995 a 12 Dec 1990 2 Mar 1993 25 Sep 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Acceptance(A), Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Peru Albania Philippines Algeria Poland Andorra Portugal Angola Qatar Antigua and Barbuda Republic of Korea Argentina Republic of Moldova Armenia Romania Australia Russian Federation Austria Rwanda Azerbaijan Samoa Bahamas San Marino Bahrain Sao Tome and Principe Bangladesh Saudi Arabia Barbados Senegal Belarus Serbia Belgium Seychelles Belize Sierra Leone Benin Singapore Bhutan Slovakia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Slovenia Bosnia and Herzegovina Solomon Islands Botswana Somalia Brazil South Africa Brunei Darussalam Spain Bulgaria Sri Lanka Burkina Faso St. Kitts and Nevis Burundi St. Lucia Cambodia St. Vincent and the Grenadines Cameroon Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan 27 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Oct 1995 26 Jan 1990 14 Feb 1990 8 Dec 1992 12 Mar 1991 25 Sep 1990 29 Jun 1990 26 Jan 1990 22 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 30 Oct 1990 26 Jan 1990 19 Apr 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Mar 1990 13 Feb 1990 25 Apr 1990 4 Jun 1990 8 Mar 1990 9 May 2002 26 Jan 1990 29 Jan 1993 26 Jan 1990 31 May 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 May 1990 30 Sep 1990 20 Sep 1993 25 Sep 1990 24 Jul 1990 26 Jan 1990 22 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1990 1 May 1991 18
 Sep 1990 28 Mar 1994 4 Sep 1990 27 Feb 1992 21 Aug 1990 16 Apr 1993 7 Jun 1991 2 Jan 1996 21 Sep 1990 5 Dec 1990 3 Apr 1995 5 Oct 1993 20 Nov 1991 4 Dec 1990 26 Jan 1993 a 23 Jun 1993 a 28 Sep 1990 17 Dec 1990 16 Aug 1990 6 Aug 1992 24 Jan 1991 13 Aug 1992 a 29 Nov 1994 20 Feb 1991 25 Nov 1991 a 13 Feb 1992 a 14 May 1991 a 3 Aug 1990 26 Jan 1996 a 9 Oct 1990 31 Jul 1990 1 Oct 1990 12 Mar 2001 d 16 Dec 1991 7 Sep 1990 a 2 May 1990 18 Jun 1990 3 Aug 1990 5 Oct 1995 a 1 Aug 1990 28 May 1993 d 26 Jun 1990 6 Jul 1992 d 1 Sep 1993 d 10 Apr 1995 a 14 Mar 1995 a 24 Sep 1990 16 Jun 1995 27 Dec 1995 a 6 Dec 1990 3 Jun 1991 12 Jul 1991 31 Aug 1990 24 Jul 1990 19 Oct 1990 16 Jun 1993 15 Oct 1992 a 26 Oct 1993 11 Jan 1993 3 Aug 1990 1 Mar 1993 7 Sep 1995 29 Jun 1990 24 Feb 1997 15 Jul 1993 26 Oct 1993 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 131 Convention on the Rights of the Child COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Acceptance(A), Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Thailand Albania The former Yugoslav Republic of Algeria Macedonia Andorra Timor-Leste Angola Togo Antigua and Barbuda Tonga Argentina Trinidad and Tobago Armenia Tunisia Australia Turkey Austria Turkmenistan Azerbaijan Tuvalu Bahamas Uganda Bahrain Ukraine Bangladesh United Arab Emirates Barbados United Kingdom of Great Britain Belarus and Northern Ireland Belgium United Republic of Tanzania Belize United States of America Benin Uruguay Bhutan Uzbekistan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Vanuatu Bosnia and Herzegovina Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic Botswana of) Brazil Viet Nam Brunei Darussalam Yemen Bulgaria Zambia Burkina Faso Zimbabwe Burundi Cambodia Cameroon 27 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 2 Oct 1995 14 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 12 Mar 1991 29 Jun 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Feb 1990 22 Aug 1990 14 Sep 1990 26 Aug 1990 30 Oct 1990 17 Aug 1990 21 Feb 1990 26 Jan 1990 19 Apr 1990 19 Apr 1990 26
 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 1 Jun 1990 2 Mar 1990 16 Feb 1995 25 Apr 1990 26 Jan 1990 4 Jun 1990 8 Mar 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 26 Jan 1990 13 Feb 1990 31 May 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 8 Mar 1990 8 May 1990 25 Sep 1990 28 Mar 1994 27 Mar 1992 a 27 Feb 1992 2 Dec 1993 d 16 Apr 1993 2 Jan 1996 16 Apr 2003 a 5 Dec 1990 1 Aug 1990 5 Oct 1993 6 Nov 1995 a 4 Dec 1990 5 Dec 1991 23 Jun 1993 a 30 Jan 1992 17 Dec 1990 4 Apr 1995 6 Aug 1992 20 Sep 1993 a 13 Aug 1992 a 22 Sep 1995 a 20 Feb 1991 17 Aug 1990 13 Feb 1992 a 28 Aug 1991 3 Aug 1990 3 Jan 1997 a 9 Oct 1990 16 Dec 1991 1 Oct 1990 16 Dec 1991 10 Jun 1991 2 May 1990 3 Aug 1990 20 Nov 1990 1 Aug 1990 29 Jun 1994 a 26 Jun 1990 7 Jul 1993 1 Sep 1993 d 13 Sep 1990 14 Mar 1995 a 24 Sep 1990 28 Feb 1990 27 Dec 1995 a 1 May 1991 3 Jun 1991 6 Dec 1991 31 Aug 1990 11 Sep 1990 19 Oct 1990 15 Oct 1992 a 11 Jan 1993 132 National Human Rights Commission, India Committee on the Rights of the Child The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is a body of independent experts that monitors and reports on implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child by governments that ratify the Convention.
The Committee also monitors implementation of the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict and the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) The CRC is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child by State parties.

It was established pursuant to Article 43 of the Convention.
States that have ratified the Convention are required to submit initial and periodic reports on the national situation of children's rights to the Committee for examination.

The Committee examines each report and raises concerns or makes recommendations to the State party.

It also issues occasional ‘General Comments’ on the interpretation of particular CRC obligations.
The Committee cannot consider individual complaints, although child rights may be raised before other committees with competence to consider individual complaints.

The Committee is made up of 18 members from different countries who are experts in the field of human rights.

Although members are nominated and elected by state parties to the Convention, Committee members act in a personal capacity.

They do not represent their countries' governments or any other organization to which they might belong.
Members are elected to a four-year term and can be re- elected if nominated.
In fulfilling its role, the Committee examines reports submitted by the States Parties, also taking into account information from other The former Yugoslav Republic of Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Turkmenistan Tunisia Turkey Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine Trinidad and Tobago 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Feb 1990 14 Sep 1990 17 Aug 1990 21 Feb 1990 1 Jun 1990 16 Feb 1995 26 Jan 1990 30 Sep 1990 26 Jan 1990 13 Feb 1990 30 Sep 1990 8 Mar 1990 United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain 19 Apr 1990 and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 26 Jan 1990 Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 27 Mar 1992 a 2 Dec 1993 d 16 Apr 2003 a 1 Aug 1990 6 Nov 1995 a 5 Dec 1991 30 Jan 1992 4 Apr 1995 20 Sep 1993 a 22 Sep 1995 a 17 Aug 1990 28 Aug 1991 3 Jan 1997 a 16 Dec 1991 10 Jun 1991 20 Nov 1990 29 Jun 1994 a 7 Jul 1993 13 Sep 1990 28 Feb 1990 1 May 1991 6 Dec 1991 11 Sep 1990 Committee on the Rights of the Child The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is a body of independent experts that monitors and reports on implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child by governments that ratify the Convention.
The Committee also monitors the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict and the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.

the Optional Protocol on implementation of to States ratified that have the Committee Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) The CRC is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child by State parties.
the Convention are required to submit initial and periodic reports on the children's national situation of for rights examination.

Committee The examines each report and raises makes concerns recommendations to the State party.

It also issues occasional ‘General Comments’ on the interpretation of particular CRC obligations.

The Committee cannot consider individual complaints, although child rights may be raised before other committees with competence to consider individual complaints.
It was established pursuant to Article 43 of the Convention.

or The Committee is made up of 18 members from different countries who are experts in the field of human rights.

Although members are nominated and elected by state parties to the Convention, Committee members act in a personal capacity.

They do not represent their countries' governments or any other organization to which they might belong.

Members are elected to a four-year term and can be re- elected if nominated.
In fulfilling its role, the Committee examines reports submitted by the States Parties, also taking into account information from other A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 133 sources, including information provided by the United Nations (UN) agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs, which sometimes submit alternative reports) and occasionally by ombudsmen, human rights commissions and other competent bodies.
Governments of countries that have ratified the Convention are required to report to, and appear before, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child periodically to be examined on the their progress with implementation of the Convention and the status of child rights in their country.
the advancement of regards to 134 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict According to UNICEF, worldwide, an estimated 300,000 children are engaged in armed conflicts.

They are often forcibly recruited or abducted to join armies, some under the age of 10.

Many of them have witnessed or taken part in acts of unbelievable violence, often against their own families or communities.
With a view to strengthen implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and increase the protection of children during armed conflicts, the Who is a ‘child soldier’?

A child soldier is defined as “any person under 18 years of age who is part of any kind of regular or irregular armed force or armed group in any capacity, including but not limited to cooks, porters, messengers, and anyone accompanying such groups, other than family members.
The definition includes girls recruited for sexual purposes and forced marriage.” Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict was adopted by Resolution A/RES/54/263 of 25 May 2000 at the fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
The Protocol requires governments to ensure that children under the age of eighteen are not recruited compulsorily into their armed forces, and calls on governments to do everything feasible to ensure that members of their armed forces who are under eighteen years of age do not take part in hostilities.
The protocol requires that ratifying governments ensure that while their armed forces can accept volunteers below the age of 18, they can not be conscripted and “State Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure that members of their armed forces who have not attained the age of 18 years do not take a direct part in hostilities".

Non-state actors and guerrilla forces are also forbidden from recruiting anyone under the age of 18 for any purpose.
Accordingly, States parties are also required to take legal measures to prohibit independent armed sources, including information provided by the United Nations (UN) agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs, which sometimes submit alternative reports) and occasionally by ombudsmen, human rights commissions and other competent bodies.
Governments of countries that have ratified the Convention are required to report to, and appear before, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child periodically to be examined on their progress with regards to the advancement of the implementation of the Convention and the status of child rights in their country.

Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict According to UNICEF, worldwide, an estimated 300,000 children are engaged in armed conflicts.
They are often forcibly recruited or abducted to join armies, some under the age of 10.

Many of them have witnessed or taken part in acts of unbelievable violence, often against their own families or communities.
With a view to strengthen implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and increase the protection of children during armed conflicts, the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of in Armed Conflict was Children adopted Resolution A/RES/54/263 of 25 May 2000 at the the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Who is a ‘child soldier’?


session of fifty-fourth by A child soldier is defined as “any person under 18 years of age who is part of any kind of regular or irregular armed force or armed group in any including but not capacity, cooks, porters, to limited messengers, anyone accompanying such groups, other than family members.
The definition includes girls recruited for sexual purposes and forced marriage.” and The Protocol requires governments to ensure that children under the age of eighteen are not recruited compulsorily armed into forces, and calls on governments to do everything feasible to ensure that members of their armed forces who are under eighteen years of age do not take part in hostilities.
their The protocol requires that ratifying governments ensure that while their armed forces can accept volunteers below the age of 18, they can not be conscripted and “State Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure that members of their armed forces who have not attained the age of 18 years do not take a direct part in hostilities".

Non-state actors and guerrilla forces are also forbidden from recruiting anyone under the age of 18 for any purpose.
Accordingly, States parties are also required to take legal measures to prohibit independent armed A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 135 groups from recruiting and using children under the age of 18 in conflicts.

conflict.

into the armed forces, but only for direct participation in armed "take to all prevent The Optional Protocol obligates feasible to states measures such recruitment and use, including the legal measures adoption necessary and criminalize such practices" (Article 4).
prohibit of to states Likewise, the Optional Protocol requires to demobilize children within their jurisdiction who have been recruited or used in hostilities, and to provide assistance for their physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration (Article 6(3)).
India’s Declaration on the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict Declarations: "Pursuant to Article 3 (2) of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, the Government of the Republic of India declare that: (i) The minimum age for recruitment of prospective recruits into Armed Forces of India (Army, Air Force and Navy) is 16 years.
After enrollment and requisite training period, the attested Armed Forces personnel is sent to the operational area only after he attains 18 years of age; (ii) The recruitment into the Armed Forces of India is purely voluntary and conducted through open rally system/open competitive examinations.

There is no forced or coerced recruitment into the Armed Forces."
Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict Entry into force: 12 February 2002 Signatories: 129; Parties: 143 India ratified the Optional Protocol on 30 Nov 2005 Key Provisions Article 1 raises the minimum age of direct participation in hostilities from 15 years (as set by Protocols I & II to the Geneva Conventions, 1949) to 18 years.
It raises the standard for voluntary recruitment by government forces beyond the age of 15 and outlaws recruitment below 18 years for non-state groups.

thus, The Optional Protocol forward in leap represents a international to protect law children from the harmful effects of in hostilities.
the Protocol, When States are required to make a declaration regarding the age at which national armed forces permit voluntary recruitment, as well as the steps that States will take to ensure that such recruitment is never forced or coerced.
This requirement is particularly important because the Optional Protocol does not establish age 18 as a minimum for voluntary recruitment recruitment and use ratifying 136 National Human Rights Commission, India groups from recruiting and using children under the age of 18 in conflicts.

into the armed forces, but only for direct participation in armed conflict.

Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict Entry into force: 12 February 2002 Signatories: 129; Parties: 143 4).
India ratified the Optional Protocol on 30 Nov 2005 Key Provisions Article 1 raises the minimum age of direct participation in hostilities from 15 years (as set by Protocols I & II to the Geneva Conventions, 1949) to 18 years.

 It raises the standard for voluntary recruitment by government forces beyond the age of 15 and outlaws recruitment below 18 years for non-state groups.
The Optional Protocol obligates states to "take all feasible measures to prevent such recruitment and use, including the adoption of legal measures necessary to prohibit and criminalize such practices" (Article Likewise, the Optional Protocol requires states to demobilize children within their jurisdiction who have been recruited or used in hostilities, and to provide assistance for their physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration (Article 6(3)).
The Optional Protocol thus, represents a leap forward in international law to protect children from the harmful effects of recruitment and use in hostilities.

When ratifying the Protocol, States are required to make a declaration regarding the age at which national armed forces permit voluntary recruitment, as well as the steps that States will take to ensure that such recruitment is never forced or coerced.
This requirement is particularly important because the Optional Protocol does not establish age 18 as a minimum for voluntary recruitment India’s Declaration on the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict Declarations: "Pursuant to Article 3 (2) of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, the Government of the Republic of India declare that: (i) The minimum age for recruitment of prospective recruits into Armed Forces of India (Army, Air Force and Navy) is 16 years.
After enrollment and requisite training period, the attested Armed Forces personnel is sent to the operational area only after he attains 18 years of age; (ii) The recruitment into the Armed Forces of India is purely voluntary and conducted through open rally system/open competitive examinations.

There is no forced or coerced recruitment into the Armed Forces."
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 137 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic 7 Sep 2000 15 Jun 2000 24 Sep 2003 21 Oct 2002 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 15 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 6 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 16 Nov 2001 13 Nov 2001 27 Jun 2000 5 Oct 2001 5 Jun 2000 27 Sep 2010 24 Sep 2003 a 9 Dec 2008 a 6 May 2009 a 30 Apr 2001 11 Oct 2007 a 10 Sep 2002 30 Sep 2005 26 Sep 2006 1 Feb 2002 3 Jul 2002 21 Sep 2004 a 6 Sep 2000 25 Jan 2006 a 6 May 2002 1 Dec 2003 31 Jan 2005 9 Dec 2009 22 Dec 2004 a 10 Oct 2003 4 Oct 2004 27 Jan 2004 12 Feb 2002 6 Jul 2007 24 Jun 2008 16 Jul 2004 7 Jul 2000 10 May 2002 a 138 National Human Rights Commission, India Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Dominican Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guyana 3 May 2002 15 Nov 2001 15 Mar 2001 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 May 2002 13 Oct 2000 1 Jul 2008 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2006 9 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 18 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 28 Sep 2010 16 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 21 Dec 2000 6 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 28 Aug 2002 31 Jul 2003 20 Feb 2008 25 May 2005 24 Sep 2010 a 24 Jan 2003 12 Mar 2012 a 1 Nov 2002 9 Feb 2007 2 Jul 2010 30 Nov 2001 11 Nov 2001 27 Aug 2002
 27 Apr 2011 20 Sep 2002 a 7 Jun 2004 6 Feb 2007 a 18 Apr 2002 16 Feb 2005 a 10 Apr 2002 5 Feb 2003 21 Sep 2010 3 Aug 2010 a 13 Dec 2004 22 Oct 2003 6 Feb 2012 a 9 May 2002 11 Aug 2010 a Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Succession(d) 24 Sep 2003 a 9 Dec 2008 a 6 May 2009 a 30 Apr 2001 11 Oct 2007 a 10 Sep 2002 30 Sep 2005 26 Sep 2006 1 Feb 2002 3 Jul 2002 21 Sep 2004 a 6 Sep 2000 25 Jan 2006 a 6 May 2002 1 Dec 2003 31 Jan 2005 9 Dec 2009 22 Dec 2004 a 10 Oct 2003 4 Oct 2004 27 Jan 2004 12 Feb 2002 6 Jul 2007 24 Jun 2008 16 Jul 2004 7 Jul 2000 10 May 2002 a 7 Sep 2000 15 Jun 2000 24 Sep 2003 21 Oct 2002 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 15 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 6 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 16 Nov 2001 13 Nov 2001 27 Jun 2000 5 Oct 2001 5 Jun 2000 Central African Republic 27 Sep 2010 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Chad Afghanistan Chile Albania China Algeria Colombia Andorra Congo Angola Costa Rica Argentina Côte d'Ivoire Armenia Croatia Australia Cuba Austria Cyprus Azerbaijan Czech Republic Bahrain Democratic Republic of the Bangladesh Congo Belarus Denmark Belgium Djibouti Belize Dominica Benin Dominican Republic Bhutan Ecuador Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Egypt Bosnia and Herzegovina El Salvador Botswana Eritrea Brazil
 Estonia Bulgaria Ethiopia Burkina Faso Fiji Burundi Finland Cambodia France Cameroon Gabon Canada Gambia Cape Verde Georgia Central African Republic Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guyana Signature 3 May 2002 15 Nov 2001 15 Mar 2001 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 15 Jun 2000 24 Sep 2003 8 May 2002 21 Oct 2002 13 Oct 2000 6 Sep 2000 1 Jul 2008 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2006 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 9 May 2002 15 Sep 2005 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 18 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 6 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 8 Jun 2001 28 Sep 2010 16 Nov 2001 16 Sep 2005 13 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 27 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 5 Oct 2001 8 Sep 2000 5 Jun 2000 21 Dec 2000 27 Sep 2010 6 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 28 Aug 2002 24 Sep 2003 a 31 Jul 2003 9 Dec 2008 a 20 Feb 2008 6 May 2009 a 25 May 2005 30 Apr 2001 24 Sep 2010 a 11 Oct 2007 a 24 Jan 2003 10 Sep 2002 12 Mar 2012 a 30 Sep 2005 1 Nov 2002 26 Sep 2006 9 Feb 2007 1 Feb 2002 2 Jul 2010 3 Jul 2002 30 Nov 2001 21 Sep 2004 a 11 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 25 Jan 2006 a 27 Aug 2002 6 May 2002 27 Apr 2011 1 Dec 2003 20 Sep 2002 a 31 Jan 2005 9 Dec 2009 7 Jun 2004 22 Dec 2004 a 6 Feb 2007 a 10 Oct 2003 18 Apr 2002 4 Oct 2004 16 Feb 2005 a 27 Jan 2004 12 Feb 2002 6 Jul 2007 24 Jun 2008 10 Apr 2002 16 Jul 2004 5 Feb 2003 21 Sep 2010 7 Jul 2000 10 May 2002 a 3 Aug 2010 a 13 Dec 2004 22 Oct 2003 6 Feb 2012 a 9 May 2002 11 Aug 2010 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 139 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Haiti Afghanistan Holy See Albania Honduras Algeria Hungary Andorra Iceland Angola India Argentina Indonesia Armenia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Australia Iraq Austria Ireland
 Azerbaijan Israel Bahrain Italy Bangladesh Jamaica Belarus Japan Belgium Jordan Belize Kazakhstan Benin Kenya Bhutan Kuwait Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Kyrgyzstan Bosnia and Herzegovina Lao People's Democratic Botswana Republic Brazil Latvia Bulgaria Lebanon Burkina Faso Lesotho Burundi Liberia Cambodia Libya Cameroon Liechtenstein Canada Lithuania Cape Verde Luxembourg Central African Republic Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritius Mexico Micronesia (Federated States of) 15 Aug 2002 10 Oct 2000 11 Mar 2002 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 15 Nov 2004 15 Jun 2000 24 Sep 2001 24 Sep 2003 21 Sep 2010 21 Oct 2002 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 14 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 8 Sep 2000 15 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 6 Sep 2000 1 Feb 2002 8 Jun 2001 11 Feb 2002 16 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 13 Nov 2001 22 Sep 2004 27 Jun 2000 5 Oct 2001 8 Sep 2000 5 Jun 2000 13 Feb 2002 8 Sep 2000 27 Sep 2010 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 11 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 8 May 2002 24 Sep 2003 a 24 Oct 2001 9 Dec 2008 a 14 Aug 2002 a 6 May 2009 a 24 Feb 2010 30 Apr 2001 1 Oct 2001 11 Oct 2007 a 30 Nov 2005 10 Sep 2002 30 Sep 2005 26 Sep 2006 24 Jun 2008 a 1 Feb 2002 18 Nov 2002 3 Jul 2002 18 Jul 2005 21 Sep 2004 a 9 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 9 May 2002 25 Jan 2006 a 2 Aug 2004 6 May 2002 23 May 2007 1 Dec 2003 10 Apr 2003 31 Jan 2005 28 Jan 2002 9 Dec 2009 26 Aug 2004 a 22 Dec 2004 a 13 Aug 2003 a 10 Oct 2003 20 Sep 2006 a 4 Oct 2004 27 Jan 2004 19 Dec 2005 12 Feb 2002 6 Jul 2007 24 Sep 2003 24 Jun 2008 16 Jul 2004 29 Oct 2004 a 4 Feb 2005 7 Jul 2000 20 Feb 2003 10 May 2002 a 4 Aug 2004 22 Sep 2004 21 Sep 2010 29 Dec 2004 16 May 2002 9 May 2002 12 Feb 2009 15 Mar 2002 140 National Human Rights Commission, India Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar
 Rwanda San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation 26 Jun 2000 12 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 13 Jun 2000 26 Sep 2001 31 Oct 2000 13 Sep 2000 1 Nov 2000 8 Sep 2000 13 Feb 2002 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Feb 2002 6 Sep 2000 15 Feb 2001 5 Jun 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 2001 23 Jan 2001 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 30 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 13 Nov 2001 6 Oct 2004 2 May 2007 d 22 May 2002 19 Oct 2004 a 16 Apr 2002 3 Jan 2007 24 Sep 2009 12 Nov 2001 17 Mar 2005 a 13 Mar 2012 a 23 Sep 2003 17 Sep 2004 a 8 Aug 2001 27 Sep 2002 8 May 2002 26 Aug 2003 7 Apr 2005 19 Aug 2003 25 Jul 2002 a 24 Sep 2004 7 Apr 2004 10 Nov 2001 24 Sep 2008 23 Apr 2002 a 26 Sep 2011 10 Jun 2011 a 3 Mar 2004 31 Jan 2003 10 Aug 2010 15 May 2002 11 Dec 2008 7 Jul 2006 23 Sep 2004 Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lao People's Democratic Haiti Holy See Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritius Mexico 15 Aug 2002 10 Oct 2000 11 Mar 2002 7 Sep 2000 15 Nov 2004 24 Sep 2001 21 Sep 2010 7 Sep 2000 14 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 1 Feb 2002 11 Feb 2002 6 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 8 Sep 2000 13 Feb 2002 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 11 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 Micronesia (Federated States of) 8 May 2002 24 Oct 2001 14 Aug 2002 a 24 Feb 2010 1 Oct 2001 30 Nov 2005 24 Jun 2008 a 18 Nov 2002 18 Jul 2005 9 May 2002 9 May 2002 2 Aug 2004 23 May 2007 10 Apr 2003 28 Jan 2002 26 Aug 2004 a 13 Aug 2003 a 20 Sep 2006 a 19 Dec 2005 24 Sep 2003 29 Oct 2004 a 4 Feb 2005 20 Feb 2003 4 Aug 2004 22 Sep 2004 21 Sep 2010 29 Dec 2004 16 May 2002 9 May 2002 12 Feb 2009 15 Mar 2002 Optional Protocol to the
 Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Monaco Afghanistan Mongolia Albania Montenegro Algeria Morocco Andorra Mozambique Angola Namibia Argentina Nauru Armenia Nepal Australia Netherlands Austria New Zealand Azerbaijan Nicaragua Bahrain Niger Bangladesh Nigeria Belarus Norway Belgium Oman Belize Pakistan Benin Panama Bhutan Paraguay Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Peru Bosnia and Herzegovina Philippines Botswana Poland Brazil Portugal Bulgaria Qatar Burkina Faso Republic of Korea Burundi Republic of Moldova Cambodia Romania Cameroon Russian Federation Canada Rwanda Cape Verde San Marino Central African Republic Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia 26 Jun 2000 12 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 15 Jun 2000 8 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 8 Sep 2000 21 Oct 2002 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 13 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 26 Sep 2001 22 Feb 2001 31 Oct 2000 15 Sep 2005 13 Sep 2000 1 Nov 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 13 Feb 2002 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 16 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 13 Nov 2001 8 Feb 2002 27 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 5 Oct 2001 15 Feb 2001 5 Jun 2000 5 Jun 2000 27 Sep 2010 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 2001 23 Jan 2001 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 30 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 13 Nov 2001 24 Sep 2003 a 6 Oct 2004 9 Dec 2008 a 2 May 2007 d 6 May 2009 a 22 May 2002 30 Apr 2001 19 Oct 2004 a 11 Oct 2007 a 16 Apr 2002 10 Sep 2002 30 Sep 2005 3 Jan 2007 26 Sep 2006 24 Sep 2009 1 Feb 2002 12 Nov 2001 3 Jul 2002 17 Mar 2005 a 21 Sep 2004 a 13 Mar 2012 a 6 Sep 2000 25 Jan 2006 a 23 Sep 2003 6 May 2002 17 Sep 2004 a 1 Dec 2003 31 Jan 2005 8 Aug 2001 9 Dec 2009 27 Sep 2002 22 Dec 2004 a 8 May 2002 10 Oct 2003 26 Aug 2003 4 Oct 2004 7 Apr 2005 27 Jan 2004 19 Aug 2003 12 Feb 2002 25 Jul
 2002 a 6 Jul 2007 24 Sep 2004 24 Jun 2008 7 Apr 2004 16 Jul 2004 10 Nov 2001 24 Sep 2008 7 Jul 2000 23 Apr 2002 a 10 May 2002 a 26 Sep 2011 10 Jun 2011 a 3 Mar 2004 31 Jan 2003 10 Aug 2010 15 May 2002 11 Dec 2008 7 Jul 2006 23 Sep 2004 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 141 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Solomon Islands Albania Somalia Algeria South Africa Andorra Spain Angola Sri Lanka St. Lucia Argentina Armenia St. Vincent and the Grenadines Australia Sudan Austria Suriname Azerbaijan Sweden Switzerland Bahrain Bangladesh Syrian Arab Republic Belarus Tajikistan Belgium Thailand Belize The former Yugoslav Republic of Benin Macedonia Timor-Leste Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Togo Bosnia and Herzegovina Tunisia Botswana Turkey Brazil Turkmenistan Uganda Bulgaria Burkina Faso Ukraine Burundi United Kingdom of Great Britain Cambodia and Northern Ireland Cameroon United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Canada Cape Verde Uruguay Central African Republic Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia 24 Sep 2009 16 Sep 2005 8 Feb 2002 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 21 Aug 2000 22 Sep 2011 15 Jun 2000 24 Sep 2003 21 Oct 2002 9 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 8 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2000 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 17 Jul 2001 22 Feb 2001 15 Sep 2005 15 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 22 Apr 2002 24 Sep 2003 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 16 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 13 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 27 Jun 2000 5 Oct 2001 5 Jul 2000 5 Jun 2000 7 Sep 2000 27 Sep 2010 16 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 24 Sep 2003 a 9 Dec 2008 a 6 May 2009 a 24 Sep 2009 30 Apr 2001 8 Mar 2002 11 Oct 2007 a 8 Sep 2000 10 Sep 2002 30 Sep 2005 29 Mar 2011 a 26 Sep 2006 26 Jul 2005
 1 Feb 2002 3 Jul 2002 20 Feb 2003 26 Jun 2002 21 Sep 2004 a 6 Sep 2000 17 Oct 2003 a 25 Jan 2006 a 5 Aug 2002 a 6 May 2002 27 Feb 2006 a 1 Dec 2003 12 Jan 2004 31 Jan 2005 2 Aug 2004 a 9 Dec 2009 22 Dec 2004 a 28 Nov 2005 10 Oct 2003 2 Jan 2003 4 Oct 2004 4 May 2004 27 Jan 2004 29 Apr 2005 a 6 May 2002 a 12 Feb 2002 6 Jul 2007 11 Jul 2005 24 Jun 2008 24 Jun 2003 16 Jul 2004 11 Nov 2004 a 23 Dec 2002 7 Jul 2000 10 May 2002 a 9 Sep 2003 23 Dec 2008 a 26 Sep 2007 23 Sep 2003 20 Dec 2001 2 Mar 2007 a 142 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography The Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography is a Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and criminalizes specific acts relating to the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, including attempt to engage in and complicity in such acts.
It lays down minimum standards for protecting child victims in criminal justice processes and recognizes the right of victims to seek compensation.

Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child The main premises of the Protocol are that all children must be protected, that such exploitation is Prostitution and Child criminal in nature, and that the Pornography perpetrators must be identified and punished.
It encourages Entry into force: 18 January 2002 strengthening of international Signatories: 119 Parties: 153 India ratified the Optional Protocol on 16 August 2005 cooperation and assistance and the adoption of extra-territorial legislation, but does not provide for exemption from the dual criminality principle.
Since the Optional Protocol applies to specific forms of sexual exploitation, it is important to bear in mind that Article 34 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) gives children the right to protection from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse including the right to recovery and social reintegration under Article 39.
St. Vincent and the Grenadines Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Lucia Sudan Suriname Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan Syrian Arab Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of 17 Jul 2001 United Kingdom of Great Britain 7 Sep 2000 and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 7 Sep 2000 Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia 24 Sep 2009 16 Sep 2005 8 Feb 2002 6 Sep 2000 21 Aug 2000 22 Sep 2011 9 May 2002 10 May 2002 8 Jun 2000 7 Sep 2000 15 Nov 2001 22 Apr 2002 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 5 Jul 2000 7 Sep 2000 16 Sep 2005 8 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 24 Sep 2009 8 Mar 2002 8 Sep 2000 29 Mar 2011 a 26 Jul 2005 20 Feb 2003 26 Jun 2002 17 Oct 2003 a 5 Aug 2002 a 27 Feb 2006 a 12 Jan 2004 2 Aug 2004 a 28 Nov 2005 2 Jan 2003 4 May 2004 29 Apr 2005 a 6 May 2002 a 11 Jul 2005 24 Jun 2003 11 Nov 2004 a 23 Dec 2002 9 Sep 2003 23 Dec 2008 a 26 Sep 2007 23 Sep 2003 20 Dec 2001 2 Mar 2007 a Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography The Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography is a Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and criminalizes specific acts relating to the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, including attempt to engage in and complicity in such acts.
It lays down minimum standards for protecting child victims in criminal justice processes and recognizes the right of victims to seek compensation.
Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography Entry into force: 18 January 2002 Signatories: 119 Parties: 153 India ratified the Optional Protocol on 16 August 2005 The main premises of the Protocol are that all children must be protected, that such exploitation is criminal in nature, and that the identified perpetrators must be and punished.
encourages international of strengthening cooperation and assistance and the adoption extra-territorial legislation, but does not provide for exemption the dual criminality principle.
from of It Since the Optional Protocol applies to specific forms of sexual exploitation, it is important to bear in mind that Article 34 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) gives children the right to protection from all forms of sexual exploitation and abuse including the right to recovery and social reintegration under Article 39.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 143 Key Definitions The Protocol requires states to prohibit the sale of children, child prostitution child pornography.
Article 2 of the Optional Protocol defines these terms as under: and Sale of children is any act or transaction whereby a child is transferred by any person or group of persons to another for remuneration or any other consideration Child prostitution is the use of a child in sexual activities for remuneration form of or any other consideration Article 1 of the Optional Protocol declares that states must protect the rights and interests of child victims of trafficking, child prostitution and child pornography, child labour and especially, the worst forms of child labour.
The remaining articles in the protocol outline the standards for law international enforcement covering diverse jurisdictional issues such as factors, extradition, mutual investigations, assistance criminal extradition proceedings and seizure and confiscation of assets.

in or Child pornography is any representation, by whatever means, of a child engaged in real or simulated explicit sexual activities or any representation of the sexual parts of for a primarily sexual purposes.
child The Protocol builds on and the general enhances both principles of the CRC and its specific rights, such as those dealing with separation of children from parents, illicit transfer of children and the issue of non- return.

It also obliges nations to pass laws within their own territories against these practices "punishable by appropriate penalties that take into account their grave nature."
144 National Human Rights Commission, India Article 8 of the Protocol requires that States Parties “adopt appropriate measures to protect the rights and interests of child victims of the practices prohibited under the present Protocol at all stages of the criminal justice process.” This detailed Article contains provisions on the treatment to which child victims are entitled and the rights of those who work with child victims.
There is also a final paragraph safeguarding the rights of accused persons to a fair and impartial trial.

Article 8 contains specific rights for children and duties for States.
It gives children the right to: Procedures that recognize children’s vulnerability and special needs, as witnesses and in general (Article 8.1(a)); Be informed of their rights, their role, the scope, timing and progress of the proceedings and of the disposition of their cases (Article 8.1(b)); Have their views, needs and concerns presented and considered in proceedings where their personal interests are affected in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law (for child victims) (Article 8.1(c)); Appropriate support services throughout the legal process Privacy and the confidentiality of information concerning their Safety and protection against intimidation and retaliation (Article 8.1(d)); identity (Article 8.1(e)); (Article 8.1(f); Procedures free from unnecessary delays (Article 8.1(g)).
In addition, Article 8 assigns States the duty to: Investigate, even when the age of the victim needs to be clarified (article 8.2); Key Definitions Article 1 of the Optional Protocol declares that states must protect the rights and The Protocol requires states to prohibit the sale of children, child interests of child victims of and child trafficking, child prostitution prostitution pornography.
Article 2 of the Optional Protocol defines these terms as under: Sale of children is any act or transaction whereby a child is transferred by any person or group of persons to another for remuneration or any other consideration and child pornography, child labour and especially, the worst forms of child labour.
The remaining articles in the protocol outline the standards for international law enforcement covering diverse issues such as jurisdictional Child prostitution is the factors, extradition, mutual use of a child in sexual activities for remuneration or any other form of consideration assistance in investigations, criminal or extradition proceedings and seizure and confiscation of assets.
Child pornography is any representation, by whatever means, of a child engaged in real or simulated explicit sexual activities or any representation of the sexual parts of a child for primarily sexual purposes.

The Protocol builds on and enhances both the general principles of the CRC and its specific rights, such as those dealing with separation of children from parents, illicit transfer of children and the issue of non- return.
It also obliges nations to pass laws within their own territories against these practices "punishable by appropriate penalties that take into account their grave nature."
Article 8 of the Protocol requires that States Parties “adopt appropriate measures to protect the rights and interests of child victims of the practices prohibited under the present Protocol at all stages of the criminal justice process.” This detailed Article contains provisions on the treatment to which child victims are entitled and the rights of those who work with child victims.

There is also a final paragraph safeguarding the rights of accused persons to a fair and impartial trial.
Article 8 contains specific rights for children and duties for States.
It gives children the right to: Procedures that recognize children’s vulnerability and special needs, as witnesses and in general (Article 8.1(a)); Be informed of their rights, their role, the scope, timing and progress of the proceedings and of the disposition of their cases (Article 8.1(b)); Have their views, needs and concerns presented and considered in proceedings where their personal interests are affected in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law (for child victims) (Article 8.1(c)); Appropriate support services throughout the legal process (Article 8.1(d)); Privacy and the confidentiality of information concerning their identity (Article 8.1(e)); Safety and protection against intimidation and retaliation (Article 8.1(f); Procedures free from unnecessary delays (Article 8.1(g)).
In addition, Article 8 assigns States the duty to: Investigate, even when the age of the victim needs to be clarified (article 8.2); A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 145 Consider the best interests of the child victim as a primary consideration (article 8.3); Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Provide appropriate training to all those who work with child Child Pornography victims (article 8.4) The global concern with child exploitation that led to the adoption of this Protocol also led to the nearly simultaneous adoption of two other important instruments: the International Labour Organization Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour (‘Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention’ No.
182 of 17 June 1999) and the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (the ‘Palermo Protocol’ of 15 November 2000).
supplementing COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Antigua and Barbuda Participant Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Succession(d) 19 Sep 2002 a 5 Feb 2008 a 27 Dec 2006 a 30 Apr 2001 24 Mar 2005 a 30 Apr 2002 25 Sep 2003 30 Jun 2005 8 Jan 2007 6 May 2004 3 Jul 2002 21 Sep 2004 a 6 Sep 2000 23 Jan 2002 a 17 Mar 2006 1 Dec 2003 31 Jan 2005 26 Oct 2009 3 Jun 2003 4 Sep 2002 24 Sep 2003 a 27 Jan 2004 21 Nov 2006 a 12 Feb 2002 31 Mar 2006 6 Nov 2007 a 30 May 2002 14 Sep 2005 10 May 2002 a 7 Sep 2000 18 Dec 2001 1 Apr 2002 24 Sep 2003 18 Dec 2001 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 15 Sep 2005 6 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 16 Nov 2001 27 Jun 2000 5 Oct 2001 10 Nov 2001 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 10 Nov 2001 Bosnia and Herzegovina 7 Sep 2000 146 National Human Rights Commission, India Consider the best interests of the child victim as a primary Provide appropriate training to all those who work with child consideration (article 8.3); victims (article 8.4) The global concern with child exploitation that led to the adoption of this Protocol also led to the nearly simultaneous adoption of two other important instruments: the International Labour Organization Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour (‘Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention’ No.
182 of 17 June 1999) and the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (the ‘Palermo Protocol’ of 15 November 2000).
Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde 7 Sep 2000 18 Dec 2001 1 Apr 2002 24 Sep 2003 18 Dec 2001 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 15 Sep 2005 10 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 16 Nov 2001 27 Jun 2000 5 Oct 2001 10 Nov 2001 19 Sep 2002 a 5 Feb 2008 a 27 Dec 2006 a 30 Apr 2001 24 Mar 2005 a 30 Apr 2002 25 Sep 2003 30 Jun 2005 8 Jan 2007 6 May 2004 3 Jul 2002 21 Sep 2004 a 6 Sep 2000 23 Jan 2002 a 17 Mar 2006 1 Dec 2003 31 Jan 2005 26 Oct 2009 3 Jun 2003 4 Sep 2002 24 Sep 2003 a 27 Jan 2004 21 Nov 2006 a 12 Feb 2002 31 Mar 2006 6 Nov 2007 a 30 May 2002 14 Sep 2005 10 May 2002 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 147 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Central African Republic Afghanistan Chad Albania Chile Algeria China Andorra Colombia Angola Comoros Antigua and Barbuda Congo Argentina Costa Rica Armenia Côte d'Ivoire Australia Croatia Austria Cuba Azerbaijan Cyprus Bahrain Czech Republic Bangladesh Democratic Republic of the Belarus Congo Belgium Denmark Belize Djibouti Benin Dominica Bhutan Dominican Republic Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Ecuador Bosnia and Herzegovina Egypt Botswana El Salvador Brazil Equatorial Guinea Brunei Darussalam Eritrea Bulgaria Estonia
 Burkina Faso Fiji Burundi Finland Cambodia France Cameroon Gabon Canada Gambia Cape Verde Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Signature 27 Sep 2010 3 May 2002 28 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 18 Dec 2001 1 Apr 2002 7 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 18 Dec 2001 8 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 13 Oct 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Feb 2001 26 Jan 2005 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2006 22 Feb 2001 15 Sep 2005 10 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 13 Sep 2002 6 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 24 Sep 2003 16 Nov 2001 16 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 27 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 5 Oct 2001 8 Sep 2000 10 Nov 2001 21 Dec 2000 6 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 19 Sep 2002 a 28 Aug 2002 5 Feb 2008 a 6 Feb 2003 27 Dec 2006 a 3 Dec 2002 30 Apr 2001 11 Nov 2003 24 Mar 2005 a 23 Feb 2007 a 30 Apr 2002 27 Oct 2009 a 25 Sep 2003 9 Apr 2002 30 Jun 2005 19 Sep 2011 a 8 Jan 2007 13 May 2002 6 May 2004 25 Sep 2001 3 Jul 2002 6 Apr 2006 21 Sep 2004 a 6 Sep 2000 11 Nov 2001 a 23 Jan 2002 a 17 Mar 2006 24 Jul 2003 1 Dec 2003 27 Apr 2011 31 Jan 2005 20 Sep 2002 a 26 Oct 2009 6 Dec 2006 a 3 Jun 2003 30 Jan 2004 4 Sep 2002 12 Jul 2002 a 24 Sep 2003 a 17 May 2004 27 Jan 2004 7 Feb 2003 a 21 Nov 2006 a 16 Feb 2005 a 12 Feb 2002 3 Aug 2004 31 Mar 2006 6 Nov 2007 a 30 May 2002 5 Feb 2003 1 Oct 2007 14 Sep 2005 8 Apr 2010 10 May 2002 a 28 Jun 2005 a 15 Jul 2009 22 Feb 2008 6 Feb 2012 a 9 May 2002 16 Nov 2011 a 148 National Human Rights Commission, India Guinea-Bissau 8 Sep 2000 Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lao People's Democratic Guyana Haiti Holy See Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania 15 Aug 2002 10 Oct 2000 11 Mar 2002 7 Sep 2000 15 Nov 2004 24 Sep 2001 7 Sep 2000 14 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000
 1 Feb 2002 10 Oct 2001 6 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 7 Sep 2000 1 Nov 2010 30 Jul 2010 a 24 Oct 2001 8 May 2002 a 24 Feb 2010 9 Jul 2001 16 Aug 2005 26 Sep 2007 a 24 Jun 2008 a 23 Jul 2008 9 May 2002 26 Aug 2011 24 Jan 2005 4 Dec 2006 24 Aug 2001 26 Aug 2004 a 12 Feb 2003 a 20 Sep 2006 a 22 Feb 2006 8 Nov 2004 24 Sep 2003 18 Jun 2004 a 5 Aug 2004 a 2 Sep 2011 22 Sep 2004 7 Oct 2009 10 May 2002 16 May 2002 a 28 Sep 2010 23 Apr 2007 a Central African Republic Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Eritrea Estonia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea 27 Sep 2010 3 May 2002 28 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 May 2002 13 Oct 2000 8 Feb 2001 26 Jan 2005 7 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2006 6 Sep 2000 13 Sep 2002 24 Sep 2003 16 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 21 Dec 2000 6 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2003 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 28 Aug 2002 6 Feb 2003 3 Dec 2002 11 Nov 2003 23 Feb 2007 a 27 Oct 2009 a 9 Apr 2002 19 Sep 2011 a 13 May 2002 25 Sep 2001 6 Apr 2006 11 Nov 2001 a 24 Jul 2003 27 Apr 2011 20 Sep 2002 a 6 Dec 2006 a 30 Jan 2004 12 Jul 2002 a 17 May 2004 7 Feb 2003 a 16 Feb 2005 a 3 Aug 2004 5 Feb 2003 1 Oct 2007 8 Apr 2010 28 Jun 2005 a 15 Jul 2009 22 Feb 2008 6 Feb 2012 a 9 May 2002 16 Nov 2011 a Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Guinea-Bissau Afghanistan Guyana Albania Haiti Algeria Holy See Andorra Honduras Angola Hungary Antigua and Barbuda Iceland Argentina India Armenia Indonesia Australia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Austria Iraq Azerbaijan Ireland Bahrain Israel Bangladesh
 Italy Belarus Jamaica Belgium Japan Belize Jordan Benin Kazakhstan Bhutan Kenya Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Kuwait Bosnia and Herzegovina Kyrgyzstan Botswana Lao People's Democratic Brazil Republic Brunei Darussalam Latvia Bulgaria Lebanon Burkina Faso Lesotho Burundi Liberia Cambodia Libya Cameroon Liechtenstein Canada Lithuania Cape Verde Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Signature 8 Sep 2000 15 Aug 2002 10 Oct 2000 7 Sep 2000 11 Mar 2002 18 Dec 2001 7 Sep 2000 1 Apr 2002 15 Nov 2004 24 Sep 2003 24 Sep 2001 18 Dec 2001 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 14 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 6 Sep 2000 15 Sep 2005 8 Sep 2000 10 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 1 Feb 2002 8 Jun 2001 10 Oct 2001 16 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 27 Jun 2000 5 Oct 2001 8 Sep 2000 10 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 10 May 2002 7 Sep 2000 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 1 Nov 2010 19 Sep 2002 a 30 Jul 2010 a 5 Feb 2008 a 27 Dec 2006 a 24 Oct 2001 30 Apr 2001 8 May 2002 a 24 Mar 2005 a 24 Feb 2010 30 Apr 2002 9 Jul 2001 25 Sep 2003 16 Aug 2005 30 Jun 2005 8 Jan 2007 26 Sep 2007 a 6 May 2004 24 Jun 2008 a 3 Jul 2002 21 Sep 2004 a 23 Jul 2008 6 Sep 2000 9 May 2002 23 Jan 2002 a 26 Aug 2011 17 Mar 2006 24 Jan 2005 1 Dec 2003 4 Dec 2006 31 Jan 2005 24 Aug 2001 26 Oct 2009 3 Jun 2003 26 Aug 2004 a 4 Sep 2002 12 Feb 2003 a 24 Sep 2003 a 20 Sep 2006 a 27 Jan 2004 21 Nov 2006 a 22 Feb 2006 12 Feb 2002 8 Nov 2004 31 Mar 2006 24 Sep 2003 6 Nov 2007 a 30 May 2002 18 Jun 2004 a 14 Sep 2005 5 Aug 2004 a 10 May 2002 a 2 Sep 2011 22 Sep 2004 7 Oct 2009 10 May 2002 16 May 2002 a 28 Sep 2010 23 Apr 2007 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 149 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website
 http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Mauritius Afghanistan Mexico Albania Micronesia (Federated States of) Algeria Monaco Andorra Mongolia Angola Montenegro Antigua and Barbuda Morocco Argentina Mozambique Armenia Myanmar Australia Namibia Austria Nauru Azerbaijan Nepal Bahrain Netherlands Bangladesh New Zealand Belarus Nicaragua Belgium Niger Belize Nigeria Benin Norway Bhutan Oman Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Pakistan Bosnia and Herzegovina Panama Botswana Paraguay Brazil Peru Brunei Darussalam Philippines Bulgaria Poland Burkina Faso Portugal Burundi Qatar Cambodia Republic of Korea Cameroon Republic of Moldova Canada Romania Cape Verde Rwanda San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone 11 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 8 May 2002 26 Jun 2000 7 Sep 2000 12 Nov 2001 18 Dec 2001 8 Sep 2000 1 Apr 2002 24 Sep 2003 18 Dec 2001 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 27 Mar 2002 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 13 Jun 2000 15 Sep 2005 10 Nov 2001 26 Sep 2001 7 Sep 2000 31 Oct 2000 13 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 1 Nov 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 13 Feb 2002 16 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 27 Jun 2000 6 Sep 2000 5 Oct 2001 8 Feb 2002 10 Nov 2001 6 Sep 2000 5 Jun 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 2001 23 Jan 2001 8 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2011 19 Sep 2002 a 15 Mar 2002 5 Feb 2008 a 27 Dec 2006 a 24 Sep 2008 30 Apr 2001 27 Jun 2003 24 Mar 2005 a 23 Oct 2006 d 30 Apr 2002 2 Oct 2001 25 Sep 2003 6 Mar 2003 a 30 Jun 2005 16 Jan 2012 a 8 Jan 2007 16 Apr 2002 6 May 2004 3 Jul 2002 20 Jan 2006 21 Sep 2004 a 23 Aug 2005 6 Sep 2000 20 Sep 2011 23 Jan 2002 a 2 Dec 2004 a 17 Mar 2006 26 Oct 2004 1 Dec 2003 27 Sep 2010 31 Jan 2005 2 Oct 2001 26 Oct 2009 17 Sep 2004 a 3 Jun 2003 5 Jul 2011 4 Sep 2002 9 Feb 2001 24 Sep 2003 a 18 Aug 2003 27 Jan 2004 8 May 2002 21 Nov 2006 a 28 May 2002 12 Feb 2002 4 Feb 2005 31 Mar 2006 16 May 2003 6 Nov 2007 a 14 Dec 2001 a 30 May 2002 24 Sep 2004 12 Apr 2007 14
 Sep 2005 18 Oct 2001 10 May 2002 a 14 Mar 2002 a 26 Sep 2011 18 Aug 2010 a 5 Nov 2003 10 Oct 2002 17 Sep 2001 150 National Human Rights Commission, India St. Vincent and the Grenadines Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Lucia Sudan Suriname Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Macedonia Timor-Leste Togo Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan Syrian Arab Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of 17 Jul 2001 United Kingdom of Great Britain 7 Sep 2000 and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 7 Sep 2000 Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 30 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2009 6 Sep 2000 8 May 2002 22 Sep 2011 10 May 2002 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 15 Nov 2001 22 Apr 2002 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 5 Jul 2000 7 Sep 2000 16 Sep 2005 8 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 25 Jun 2004 23 Sep 2004 30 Jun 2003 a 18 Dec 2001 22 Sep 2006 15 Sep 2005 a 2 Nov 2004 a 19 Jan 2007 19 Sep 2006 15 May 2003 a 5 Aug 2002 a 11 Jan 2006 a 17 Oct 2003 16 Apr 2003 a 2 Jul 2004 13 Sep 2002 19 Aug 2002 28 Mar 2005 a 30 Nov 2001 a 3 Jul 2003 20 Feb 2009 24 Apr 2003 a 23 Dec 2002 3 Jul 2003 23 Dec 2008 a 17 May 2007 8 May 2002 20 Dec 2001 15 Dec 2004 a 14 Feb 2012 a Micronesia (Federated States of) 8 May 2002 Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Rwanda San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova 11 Nov 2001 7 Sep 2000 26 Jun 2000 12 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 27 Mar 2002 8 Sep 2000 13 Jun 2000 26 Sep 2001 31 Oct 2000 13 Sep 2000 1 Nov 2000 8 Sep 2000 13 Feb 2002 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 Feb 2002 6 Sep 2000 5 Jun 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Oct 2001 23 Jan 2001 8 Sep 2000 14 Jun 2011 15 Mar 2002 24 Sep 2008 27 Jun 2003 23
 Oct 2006 d 2 Oct 2001 6 Mar 2003 a 16 Jan 2012 a 16 Apr 2002 20 Jan 2006 23 Aug 2005 20 Sep 2011 2 Dec 2004 a 26 Oct 2004 27 Sep 2010 2 Oct 2001 17 Sep 2004 a 5 Jul 2011 9 Feb 2001 18 Aug 2003 8 May 2002 28 May 2002 4 Feb 2005 16 May 2003 14 Dec 2001 a 24 Sep 2004 12 Apr 2007 18 Oct 2001 14 Mar 2002 a 26 Sep 2011 18 Aug 2010 a 5 Nov 2003 10 Oct 2002 17 Sep 2001 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Slovakia Afghanistan Slovenia Albania Solomon Islands Algeria South Africa Andorra Spain Angola Sri Lanka Antigua and Barbuda St. Lucia Argentina St. Vincent and the Grenadines Armenia Sudan Australia Suriname Austria Sweden Azerbaijan Switzerland Bahrain Syrian Arab Republic Bangladesh Tajikistan Belarus Thailand Belgium The former Yugoslav Republic of Belize Macedonia Benin Timor-Leste Bhutan Togo Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Tunisia Bosnia and Herzegovina Turkey Botswana Turkmenistan Brazil Uganda Brunei Darussalam Ukraine Bulgaria United Kingdom of Great Britain Burkina Faso and Northern Ireland Burundi United Republic of Tanzania Cambodia United States of America Cameroon Uruguay Canada Uzbekistan Cape Verde Vanuatu Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 30 Nov 2001 8 Sep 2000 24 Sep 2009 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 8 May 2002 18 Dec 2001 22 Sep 2011 1 Apr 2002 24 Sep 2003 18 Dec 2001 10 May 2002 6 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 17 Jul 2001 6 Sep 2000 22 Feb 2001 15 Sep 2005 15 Nov 2001 10 Nov 2001 22 Apr 2002 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 6 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 8 Jun 2001 7 Sep 2000 16 Nov 2001 27 Jun 2000 5 Jul 2000 5 Oct 2001 7 Sep 2000 10 Nov 2001 16 Sep 2005 7 Sep 2000 8 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 25 Jun 2004 19 Sep 2002 a 23 Sep 2004 5 Feb 2008 a 27 Dec 2006 a
 30 Jun 2003 a 30 Apr 2001 18 Dec 2001 24 Mar 2005 a 22 Sep 2006 30 Apr 2002 25 Sep 2003 15 Sep 2005 a 30 Jun 2005 2 Nov 2004 a 8 Jan 2007 6 May 2004 19 Jan 2007 3 Jul 2002 19 Sep 2006 21 Sep 2004 a 15 May 2003 a 6 Sep 2000 5 Aug 2002 a 23 Jan 2002 a 11 Jan 2006 a 17 Mar 2006 17 Oct 2003 1 Dec 2003 31 Jan 2005 16 Apr 2003 a 26 Oct 2009 2 Jul 2004 3 Jun 2003 13 Sep 2002 4 Sep 2002 19 Aug 2002 24 Sep 2003 a 28 Mar 2005 a 27 Jan 2004 30 Nov 2001 a 21 Nov 2006 a 3 Jul 2003 12 Feb 2002 20 Feb 2009 31 Mar 2006 6 Nov 2007 a 24 Apr 2003 a 30 May 2002 23 Dec 2002 3 Jul 2003 14 Sep 2005 23 Dec 2008 a 10 May 2002 a 17 May 2007 8 May 2002 20 Dec 2001 15 Dec 2004 a 14 Feb 2012 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 151 International Convention on Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW) The United Nations Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW) is the only UN convention devoted specifically to safeguarding the fundamental rights of undocumented migrants and addressing their needs.
The ICMRW defines migrant workers as follows: “The term "migrant worker" refers to a person who is engaged or has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a State of which he or she is not a national.” ICMRW It was adopted by Resolution 45/158 of 18 December 1990.

It is designed to foster respect for the rights and freedoms of migrant workers and their families.

Entry into force: 1 July 2003 Signatories: 33; Parties: 45 Treaty Body: Committee on Migrant Workers (CMW) India is has not signed the ICMRW.
According to UNOHCHR, an estimated 214 million people currently live and/or work outside their country of origin as migrant workers and since they are outside the legal protection of their home countries, migrants are often vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.

In December 1990 therefore, the UN General Assembly adopted the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
The Convention is by far the most comprehensive international instrument for the protection and promotion of the fundamental rights International Convention on Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW) The United Nations Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICMRW) is the only UN convention devoted specifically to safeguarding the fundamental rights of undocumented migrants and addressing their needs.
The ICMRW defines migrant workers as follows: “The term "migrant worker" refers to a person who is engaged or has been engaged in a remunerated activity in a State of which he or she is not a national.” ICMRW It was adopted by Resolution 45/158 of 18 December 1990.

It is designed to foster respect for the rights and freedoms of migrant workers and their families.

Entry into force: 1 July 2003 Signatories: 33; Parties: 45 Treaty Body: Committee on Migrant Workers (CMW) India is has not signed the ICMRW.
According to UNOHCHR, an estimated 214 million people currently live and/or work outside their country of origin as migrant workers and since they are outside the legal protection of their home countries, migrants are often vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.

In December 1990 therefore, the UN General Assembly adopted the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
The Convention is by far the most comprehensive international instrument for the protection and promotion of the fundamental rights A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 153 of migrants.

The strength of the Convention lies in enabling all those persons, who qualify as migrant workers under its provisions, to enjoy their human rights regardless of their legal status.
Right to leave and return to the Key Rights of Migrant Workers recognized by ICMRW Thus, the Convention protects both documented and undocumented workers by setting human rights standards that individual States must guarantee.

Indeed, when a State ratifies or accedes to the Convention, to adopt the legislative and other measures that are necessary to implement the provisions of the Convention.

Furthermore, States undertake that migrants whose rights have been judicial violated may remedy.
Right to life (Article 9) Prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 10) Prohibition of slavery or State of origin (Article 1) it undertakes ensure seek to servitude and of forced or compulsory labour (Article 11) Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 12) Right to hold and express his opinion (Article 13) Respect of honour, of dignity and of privacy (Article 14) Prohibition of arbitrary depriving of property (Article 15) Necessity to ensure an equitable procedure of recourse to migrant workers and members of their family (Article 16 – 20) Prohibition of arbitrary expulsion (Article 22) Equal treatment to nationals of the State of employment (Article 25 – 28) In order for the Convention to become a binding instrument of international it must be law, ratified by 20 States.
Thirteen years after its adoption by the UN General Assembly, on 14 March 2003, Guatemala became the 20th ratifying State, followed by El Salvador on the same day, thus making it a legally binding rights international instrument.
human The rights of migrant workers as established by the Convention can be divided into two broad categories: 154 National Human Rights Commission, India Part III: Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their Family; Applicable to All Migrant Workers (including the Rights for Migrant Workers in a Regular Situation (with Residence Permits) Right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose their residence (Article 39) Equality of access to and participation in cultural life (Article 43) Protection against dismissal, unemployment benefits, access to public work schemes intended to combat unemployment, access to alternative employment in the event of loss of work or termination of other remunerated activity (Article 54) ‘undocumented’ ones) Part IV: Specific Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families; Applicable only to Migrant Workers in a Regular Situation.
Migrant workers experience among the lowest incomes, poorest working conditions, and fewest benefits from social services, yet contribute significantly towards strengthening the economies of the states where they work.

The lack of citizenship and resident status are key factors in understanding the conditions that migrant workers experience, for without a vote they are unable to make politicians accountable.
Consequently, it is difficult to enact legislation or to enforce extant laws offering protection, leaving migrant workers particularly vulnerable to exploitation by employers and without the benefit of social services provided by the state.

The countries from which these workers come and those in which they work have a shared responsibility to lessen the burdens on them by protecting and promoting their rights.
This can be done by increasing the supervision and regulation of international labour migration and engaging in international cooperation in the interest of promoting their rights and preventing abusive conditions.

persons, who qualify as migrant workers under its provisions, to enjoy their human rights regardless of their legal status.

Thus, the Convention protects both documented and undocumented workers by setting human rights standards that individual States must guarantee.
Indeed, when a State ratifies or accedes to the Key Rights of Migrant Workers Convention, it undertakes to recognized by ICMRW adopt the legislative and other Right to leave and return to the State of origin (Article 1) Right to life (Article 9) Prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 10) Prohibition of slavery or servitude and of forced or compulsory labour (Article 11) Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 12) Right to hold and express his opinion (Article 13) Respect of honour, of dignity and of privacy (Article 14) Prohibition of arbitrary depriving of property (Article 15) Necessity to ensure an to migrant workers and members of their family (Article 16 – 20) Prohibition of arbitrary expulsion (Article 22) measures that are necessary to implement the provisions of the Convention.
Furthermore, States undertake to ensure that migrants whose rights have been violated may seek judicial remedy.

In order for the Convention to become a binding instrument of international law, it must be ratified by 20 States.

Thirteen years after its adoption by the UN General Assembly, on 14 March 2003, Guatemala became the 20th ratifying State, followed by El Salvador on the same day, international human rights instrument.
The rights of migrant workers as established by the Convention can be divided into two broad equitable procedure of recourse thus making it a legally binding Equal treatment to nationals of the State of employment (Article 25 – 28) categories: of migrants.
The strength of the Convention lies in enabling all those Part III: Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their the to All Migrant Workers (including Family; Applicable Rights for Migrant Workers in a Regular Situation (with Residence Permits) Right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose their residence (Article 39) Equality of access to and participation in cultural life (Article 43) ‘undocumented’ ones) Part IV: Specific Rights of Migrant Workers and Members of their Families; Applicable only to Migrant Workers in a Regular Situation.
the lowest Migrant workers experience incomes, among poorest working conditions, and fewest benefits from social contribute yet services, significantly towards Protection against dismissal, unemployment benefits, access to public work schemes intended to combat unemployment, access to alternative employment in the event of loss of work or termination of other remunerated activity (Article 54) strengthening the economies of the states where they work.
The lack of citizenship and resident in status are key understanding the conditions that migrant workers experience, for without a vote they are unable to make politicians accountable.

Consequently, it is difficult to enact legislation or to enforce extant laws offering protection, leaving migrant workers particularly vulnerable to exploitation by employers and without the benefit of social services provided by the state.
factors The countries from which these workers come and those in which they work have a shared responsibility to lessen the burdens on them by protecting and promoting their rights.

This can be done by increasing the supervision and regulation of international labour migration and engaging in international cooperation in the interest of promoting their rights and preventing abusive conditions.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 155 The Convention applies to the entire migration process, including preparation for migration, departure, transit and the entire period of stay and remunerated activity in the state of employment as well as return to the state of origin or of habitual residence.

the majority of the rights are relevant to the receiving state, though there are also obligations specifically placed upon the sending state.
The Convention begins with the familiar prohibition of discrimination in the enjoyment of the Convention’s rights.

The Convention then sets out in two separate parts the rights, firstly, of all migrant workers and members of their families, irrespective of their migration status and, secondly, the additional rights of documented migrant workers and their families.

In defining the civil and political rights of migrant workers, the Convention follows very closely the language of the ICCPR.
Some articles restate the rights taking into account the particular situation of migrant workers, such as consular notification rights upon arrest and specific provisions concerning breaches of migration law and identity documents and prohibition of collective destruction of expulsion.

In addition, the right to property, originally protected in the Declaration but not contained in the ICCPR, is specifically enumerated for migrant workers.
The Convention defines the economic, social and cultural rights of migrant workers in the light of their particular situation.

Thus, for example, at a minimum urgent medical care must be provided, as it would be provided to a national, and the children of migrant workers have the basic right of access to education irrespective of legal status.
Additional rights exist for workers who are properly documented, and to particular classes of migrant workers such as frontier, seasonal, itinerant and project-tied workers.

The Convention, in Part VII, requires all states parties to report regularly to the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, established to monitor implementation of the treaty’s provisions.
Articles 76 and 77 also provide for a right of complaint by other state parties or individuals, provided the state party accepts the Committee’s competence in this regard.
156 National Human Rights Commission, India International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature, Ratification, Accession(a), Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Albania Algeria Argentina Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belize Benin Burkina Faso Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Chile Colombia Comoros Congo Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Gabon Ghana Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Honduras Indonesia Succession to signature(d) 10 Aug 2004 7 Oct 1998 15 Sep 2005 16 Nov 2001 27 Sep 2004 15 Dec 2009 24 Sep 1993 22 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 13 Sep 2002 15 Dec 2004 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 12 Sep 2000 15 Sep 2005 22 Sep 2004 Succession(d) 5 Jun 2007 a 21 Apr 2005 a 23 Feb 2007 11 Jan 1999 a 24 Aug 2011 14 Nov 2001 a 16 Oct 2000 a 13 Dec 1996 a 26 Nov 2003 16 Sep 1997 a 21 Mar 2005 24 May 1995 a 5 Feb 2002 a 19 Feb 1993 a 14 Mar 2003 7 Sep 2000 14 Mar 2003 7 Sep 2000 a 7 Jul 2010 9 Aug 2005 a The Convention applies to the entire migration process, including preparation for migration, departure, transit and the entire period of stay and remunerated activity in the state of employment as well as return to the state of origin or of habitual residence.
the majority of the rights are relevant to the receiving state, though there are also obligations specifically placed upon the sending state.

The Convention begins with the familiar prohibition of discrimination in the enjoyment of the Convention’s rights.

The Convention then sets out in two separate parts the rights, firstly, of all migrant workers and members of their families, irrespective of their migration status and, secondly, the additional rights of documented migrant workers and their families.
In defining the civil and political rights of migrant workers, the Convention follows very closely the language of the ICCPR.

Some articles restate the rights taking into account the particular situation of migrant workers, such as consular notification rights upon arrest and specific provisions concerning breaches of migration law and destruction of identity documents and prohibition of collective expulsion.
In addition, the right to property, originally protected in the Declaration but not contained in the ICCPR, is specifically enumerated for migrant workers.

The Convention defines the economic, social and cultural rights of migrant workers in the light of their particular situation.

Thus, for example, at a minimum urgent medical care must be provided, as it would be provided to a national, and the children of migrant workers have the basic right of access to education irrespective of legal status.
Additional rights exist for workers who are properly documented, and to particular classes of migrant workers such as frontier, seasonal, itinerant and project-tied workers.

The Convention, in Part VII, requires all states parties to report regularly to the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, established to monitor implementation of the treaty’s provisions.
Articles 76 and 77 also provide for a right of complaint by other state parties or individuals, provided the state party accepts the Committee’s competence in this regard.
International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Albania Algeria Argentina Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belize Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Burkina Faso Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Chile Colombia Comoros Congo Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Gabon Ghana Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Honduras Indonesia Signature, Succession to signature(d) Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) 5 Jun 2007 a 21 Apr 2005 a 23 Feb 2007 11 Jan 1999 a 24 Aug 2011 14 Nov 2001 a 16 Oct 2000 a 13 Dec 1996 a 26 Nov 2003 16 Sep 1997 a 21 Mar 2005 24 May 1995 a 5 Feb 2002 a 19 Feb 1993 a 14 Mar 2003 7 Sep 2000 14 Mar 2003 7 Sep 2000 a 7 Jul 2010 9 Aug 2005 a 10 Aug 2004 7 Oct 1998 15 Sep 2005 16 Nov 2001 27 Sep 2004 15 Dec 2009 24 Sep 1993 22 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 13 Sep 2002 15 Dec 2004 7 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 12 Sep 2000 15 Sep 2005 22 Sep 2004 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 157 International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Albania Jamaica Algeria Kyrgyzstan Argentina Lesotho Azerbaijan Liberia Bangladesh Libya Belize Mali Benin Mauritania Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Mexico Bosnia and Herzegovina Montenegro Burkina Faso Morocco Cambodia Mozambique Cameroon Nicaragua Cape Verde Niger Chile Nigeria Colombia Palau Comoros Paraguay Congo Peru Ecuador Philippines Egypt Rwanda El Salvador Sao Tome and Principe Gabon Senegal Ghana Serbia Guatemala Seychelles Guinea Sierra Leone Guinea-Bissau Sri Lanka Guyana St. Vincent and the Grenadines Honduras Syrian Arab Republic Indonesia Tajikistan Timor-Leste Togo Turkey Uganda Uruguay Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Signature, Succession to signature(d) 25 Sep 2008 10 Aug 2004 24 Sep 2004
 22 Sep 2004 7 Oct 1998 15 Sep 2005 22 May 1991 23 Oct 2006 d 16 Nov 2001 15 Aug 1991 27 Sep 2004 15 Mar 2012 15 Dec 2009 24 Sep 1993 20 Sep 2011 22 Sep 2000 13 Sep 2000 29 Sep 2008 22 Sep 2004 15 Nov 1993 13 Sep 2002 6 Sep 2000 15 Dec 2004 7 Sep 2000 11 Nov 2004 7 Sep 2000 15 Sep 2000 12 Sep 2000 15 Sep 2005 22 Sep 2004 7 Sep 2000 15 Nov 2001 13 Jan 1999 4 Oct 2011 Ratification, Accession(a), Succession(d) Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) 5 Jun 2007 a 25 Sep 2008 21 Apr 2005 a 29 Sep 2003 a 23 Feb 2007 16 Sep 2005 11 Jan 1999 a 24 Aug 2011 18 Jun 2004 a 14 Nov 2001 a 5 Jun 2003 a 22 Jan 2007 a 16 Oct 2000 a 8 Mar 1999 13 Dec 1996 a 26 Nov 2003 21 Jun 1993 26 Oct 2005 a 16 Sep 1997 a 18 Mar 2009 a 21 Mar 2005 27 Jul 2009 a 24 May 1995 a 23 Sep 2008 14 Sep 2005 5 Feb 2002 a 5 Jul 1995 19 Feb 1993 a 15 Dec 2008 a 14 Mar 2003 9 Jun 1999 a 7 Sep 2000 14 Mar 2003 15 Dec 1994 a 7 Sep 2000 a 11 Mar 1996 a 7 Jul 2010 29 Oct 2010 a 9 Aug 2005 a 2 Jun 2005 a 8 Jan 2002 30 Jan 2004 a 27 Sep 2004 14 Nov 1995 a 15 Feb 2001 a The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families by its State parties.
All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights are being implemented.

States must report initially one year after acceding to the Convention and then every five years.

The Committee will examine each report and address its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of “concluding observations”.

Committee on Migrant Workers (CMW) The CMW is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the ICMRW by its State parties.
this The Committee will also, under certain circumstances, be able to consider individual complaints or communications from individuals claiming that their rights under the Convention have been violated once 10 States parties have accepted It was established under Article of the Covenant It held its first session in procedure in accordance with Article 77 of the Convention.

At present, two States have accepted this procedure.
The Committee March 2004. meets in Geneva and normally holds two sessions per year.

The Committee also organizes days of general discussion and can publish statements on themes related to its work and interpretations of the content of the provisions in the Convention (general comments).
158 National Human Rights Commission, India Jamaica Kyrgyzstan Lesotho Liberia Libya Mali Mauritania Mexico Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Palau Paraguay Peru Philippines Rwanda Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Sri Lanka Tajikistan Timor-Leste Togo Turkey Uganda Uruguay of) Sao Tome and Principe 6 Sep 2000 St. Vincent and the Grenadines Syrian Arab Republic Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 4 Oct 2011 25 Sep 2008 24 Sep 2004 22 Sep 2004 22 May 1991 23 Oct 2006 d 15 Aug 1991 15 Mar 2012 20 Sep 2011 13 Sep 2000 22 Sep 2004 15 Nov 1993 11 Nov 2004 15 Sep 2000 7 Sep 2000 15 Nov 2001 13 Jan 1999 25 Sep 2008 29 Sep 2003 a 16 Sep 2005 18 Jun 2004 a 5 Jun 2003 a 22 Jan 2007 a 8 Mar 1999 21 Jun 1993 26 Oct 2005 a 18 Mar 2009 a 27 Jul 2009 a 23 Sep 2008 14 Sep 2005 5 Jul 1995 15 Dec 2008 a 9 Jun 1999 a 15 Dec 1994 a 11 Mar 1996 a 29 Oct 2010 a 2 Jun 2005 a 8 Jan 2002 30 Jan 2004 a 27 Sep 2004 14 Nov 1995 a 15 Feb 2001 a Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW) is the body of independent experts the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families by its State parties.
implementation of that monitors All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights are being implemented.

States must report initially one year after acceding to the Convention and then every five years.

The Committee will examine each report and address its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of “concluding observations”.
Committee on Migrant Workers (CMW) The CMW is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the ICMRW by its State parties.

It was established under Article of the Covenant It held its first session in March 2004.
The Committee will also, under certain circumstances, be able to consider individual complaints or communications from individuals claiming that their rights under the Convention have been violated once 10 States parties have accepted this in accordance with procedure Article 77 of the Convention.

At present, two States have accepted this procedure.

The Committee meets in Geneva and normally holds two sessions per year.
The Committee also organizes days of general discussion and can publish statements on themes related to its work and interpretations of the content of the provisions in the Convention (general comments).

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 159 concern a State party which has so recognized the competence of the Committee.
If the Committee is satisfied that the matter has not been, and is not being examined by another procedure of international investigation or settlement, and that all domestic remedies have been exhausted, it may request written explanations and express its views after having considered all the available information.

The individual communication procedure requires 10 declarations by States parties to enter into force.

The implementation of the Convention rests with its States parties.
Article 72 provides that this process is monitored by a committee— the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families—consisting of 10 independent experts to be elected by the States parties and serving in their personal capacity, the number rising to 14 when 41 States will have become parties to the Convention.
Members of the Committee are elected by states parties by means of a secret ballot, with due regard to fair geographical distribution, including both States of origin and States of employment of migrant workers, and to representation of the world’s main legal systems.

These independent experts are persons of “high moral character, with recognized competence in the field covered by the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.
States parties accept the obligation under Article 73 to report on the steps they have taken to implement the Convention within one year of its entry into force for the State concerned, and thereafter every five years.

The reports also are expected to indicate problems encountered in implementing the Convention, and to provide information on migration flows.

After examining the reports, the Committee transmits such comments as it may consider appropriate to the State party concerned.
Close cooperation between international agencies, in particular the International Labour Office, is foreseen in the Convention (Article 74 (2) and (5)).

the Committee and Under Article 77, a State party may make a declaration recognizing the competence of to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals within that State’s jurisdiction who claim that their rights under the Convention have been violated.
Such communications may be received only if they the Committee 160 National Human Rights Commission, India The implementation of the Convention rests with its States parties.
Article 72 provides that this process is monitored by a committee— the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families—consisting of 10 independent experts to be elected by the States parties and serving in their personal capacity, the number rising to 14 when 41 States will have become parties to the Convention.
Members of the Committee are elected by states parties by means of a secret ballot, with due regard to fair geographical distribution, including both States of origin and States of employment of migrant workers, and to representation of the world’s main legal systems.

These independent experts are persons of “high moral character, with recognized competence in the field covered by the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families.
States parties accept the obligation under Article 73 to report on the steps they have taken to implement the Convention within one year of its entry into force for the State concerned, and thereafter every five years.

The reports also are expected to indicate problems encountered in implementing the Convention, and to provide information on migration flows.

After examining the reports, the Committee transmits such comments as it may consider appropriate to the State party concerned.
Close cooperation between the Committee and international agencies, in particular the International Labour Office, is foreseen in the Convention (Article 74 (2) and (5)).

Under Article 77, a State party may make a declaration recognizing the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals within that State’s jurisdiction who claim that their rights under the Convention have been violated.
Such communications may be received only if they concern a State party which has so recognized the competence of the Committee.
If the Committee is satisfied that the matter has not been, and is not being examined by another procedure of international investigation or settlement, and that all domestic remedies have been exhausted, it may request written explanations and express its views after having considered individual communication procedure requires 10 declarations by States parties to enter into force.

information.
information.

The available the all A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 161 Convention on Disabilities (CRPD) the Rights of Persons with The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 December 2006 and came into force on 3 May 2008.
The purpose of the Convention is to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.

CRPD The Convention is an international human rights instrument intended to protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities.
Parties to the Convention are required to promote, protect, and ensure the full enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities and ensure that they enjoy full equality under the law.

Entry into force: 3 May 2008 Signatories: 153 Parties: 110 Treaty Body: Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) The CRPD consists of 50 articles addressing the full array of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.
The Convention does not seek to create new rights for disabled persons, but rather elaborates and clarifies existing obligations for countries within the context of disability.
The Preamble clearly endorses a social approach to disability— referred to as the social model of disability—by recognizing that 162 National Human Rights Commission, India “disability is an evolving concept and that disability results from interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers that hinders their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others”.
How does the CRPD define It establishes a committee of "Discrimination on the basis experts to monitor of disability"?

Article 2 defines it as “any distinction, exclusion or restriction on the basis of disability which has the purpose or effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, its the implementation at international level and also provides for the operation of independent national-level monitoring mechanisms.
The CRPD also has an Optional Protocol that recognizes “the enjoyment or exercise, on an equal competence of the Committee on basis with others, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.
It includes all forms of discrimination, including denial of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals subject to its reasonable accommodation.” jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of the provisions of the Convention.” The CRPD is therefore, comprehensive not only in terms of its substantive content, but also in the manner in which monitoring and implementation at all levels is addressed.
The Convention is intended as a human rights instrument with an explicit, social development dimension.

It adopts a broad categorization of persons with disabilities and reaffirms that all persons with all types of disabilities must enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It clarifies and qualifies how all categories of rights apply to persons with disabilities and identifies areas where adaptations have to be made for persons with disabilities to Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 December 2006 and came into force on 3 May 2008.
The purpose of the Convention is to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.

CRPD The Convention is an international human rights instrument intended to protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities.
Parties to the Convention are required to promote, protect, and ensure the full enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities and ensure that they enjoy full equality under the law.

Entry into force: 3 May 2008 Signatories: 153 Parties: 110 Treaty Body: Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) The CRPD consists of 50 articles addressing the full array of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.
The Convention does not seek to create new rights for disabled persons, but rather elaborates and clarifies existing obligations for countries within the context of disability.
The Preamble clearly endorses a social approach to disability— referred to as the social model of disability—by recognizing that “disability is an evolving concept and that disability results from interaction between persons with impairments and attitudinal and environmental barriers full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others”.

that hinders their to How does the CRPD define of disability"?
"Discrimination on the basis Article 2 defines it as “any distinction, exclusion or restriction on the basis of disability which has the purpose or effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal basis with others, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.
It includes all forms of discrimination, including denial of reasonable accommodation.” It establishes a committee of its experts monitor the implementation at level international also and the operation of provides for national-level independent monitoring mechanisms.
The CRPD also has an Optional recognizes “the Protocol competence of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to receive and consider communications from or on behalf individuals or groups of of individuals its subject to be jurisdiction who claim victims of a violation by that State Party of the provisions of the Convention.” The CRPD is therefore, comprehensive not only in terms of its substantive content, but also in the manner in which monitoring and implementation at all levels is addressed.
that to The Convention is intended as a human rights instrument with an explicit, social development dimension.

It adopts a broad categorization of persons with disabilities and reaffirms that all persons with all types of disabilities must enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It clarifies and qualifies how all categories of rights apply to persons with disabilities and identifies areas where adaptations have to be made for persons with disabilities to A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 163 effectively exercise their rights and areas where their rights have been violated, and where protection of rights must be reinforced.

understanding and interpreting the rights of persons with disabilities, providing benchmarks against which each right is measured.
The Convention is intended as a human rights instrument with an explicit, social development dimension.

It adopts a broad categorization of persons with disabilities and reaffirms that all persons with all types of disabilities must enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It clarifies and qualifies how all categories of rights apply to persons with disabilities and identifies areas where adaptations have to be made for persons with disabilities to effectively exercise their rights and areas where their rights have been violated, and where protection of rights must be reinforced.
The Convention was adopted as a response to the fact that although pre-existing human rights conventions offer considerable potential to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities, such persons continued being denied their human rights the and were kept on margins of society across the world.
Key Rights recognized by the CRPD (Articles 10-30) Right to life Equal recognition before the law Access to justice Liberty and security of the person Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment Freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse Liberty of movement and nationality Living independently and being included in the community Freedom of expression Respect for privacy Respect for home and the family Education Health Habilitation and rehabilitation Work and employment Adequate standard of living and social protection Participation in political/public life, in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport Principally, the Convention recognises that persons with disabilities have inherent rights, and that they are capable of claiming those rights and making decisions for their lives based on their free and informed consent as well as being active members of society.
set Article 3 of the Convention of identifies a and overarching principles.

foundational the These and interpretation implementation of the entire Convention, cutting across the issues.

They are all for starting guide point 164 National Human Rights Commission, India effectively exercise their rights and areas where their rights have been violated, and where protection of rights must be reinforced.
The Convention was adopted as a response to the fact that although pre-existing human rights conventions offer considerable potential to promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities, such Key Rights recognized by the CRPD (Articles 10-30) persons continued being denied their human rights and were kept on the margins of society across the Right to life Equal recognition before the law world.
Access to justice Liberty and security of the person Freedom from torture or cruel, Principally, the Convention recognises that persons with inhuman or degrading treatment or disabilities have inherent punishment Freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse Liberty of movement and nationality Living independently and being included in the community Freedom of expression Respect for privacy Respect for home and the family Education Health Work and employment Adequate standard of living and social protection Participation in political/public life, in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport rights, and that they are capable of claiming those rights and making decisions for their lives based on their free and informed consent as well as being active members of society.
Article 3 of the Convention identifies a set overarching These guide interpretation implementation of the entire Convention, cutting across all issues.

They are the starting point for of and the and Habilitation and rehabilitation foundational principles.

understanding and the rights of persons with disabilities, providing benchmarks against which each right is measured.

interpreting The Convention is intended as a human rights instrument with an explicit, social development dimension.
It adopts a broad categorization of persons with disabilities and reaffirms that all persons with all types of disabilities must enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms.

It clarifies and qualifies how all categories of rights apply to persons with disabilities and identifies areas where adaptations have to be made for persons with disabilities to effectively exercise their rights and areas where their rights have been violated, and where protection of rights must be reinforced.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 165 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification Albania Algeria Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chile 22 Dec 2009 30 Mar 2007 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 25 Jun 2007 9 May 2007 19 Jul 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2011 8 Feb 2008 21 Sep 2010 13 Aug 2007 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 18 Dec 2007 27 Sep 2007 23 May 2007 26 Apr 2007 1 Oct 2007 1 Oct 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 4 Dec 2009 2 Sep 2008 22 Sep 2010 17 Jul 2008 26 Sep 2008 28 Jan 2009 22 Sep 2011 30 Nov 2007 2 Jul 2009 2 Jun 2011 16 Nov 2009 12 Mar 2010 1 Aug 2008 22 Mar 2012 23 Jul 2009 11 Mar 2010 10 Oct 2011 29 Jul 2008 166 National Human Rights Commission, India China Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Estonia Ethiopia European Union Fiji Finland France Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 7 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 4 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 2 Jun 2010 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 10 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 12 Jul 2010 30 Mar 2007 16 May 2007 11 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 Aug 2008 10 May 2011 8 May 2009 a 1 Oct 2008 15 Aug 2007 6 Sep 2007 27 Jun 2011 28 Sep 2009 24 Jul 2009 18 Aug 2009
 3 Apr 2008 14 Apr 2008 14 Dec 2007 7 Jul 2010 23 Dec 2010 c 18 Feb 2010 1 Oct 2007 24 Feb 2009 7 Apr 2009 8 Feb 2008 23 Jul 2009 a 14 Apr 2008 20 Jul 2007 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification Antigua and Barbuda Albania Algeria Andorra Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chile 22 Dec 2009 30 Mar 2007 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 25 Jun 2007 9 May 2007 19 Jul 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2011 8 Feb 2008 21 Sep 2010 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 18 Dec 2007 27 Sep 2007 23 May 2007 26 Apr 2007 1 Oct 2007 1 Oct 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 13 Aug 2007 Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Brunei Darussalam 4 Dec 2009 2 Sep 2008 22 Sep 2010 17 Jul 2008 26 Sep 2008 28 Jan 2009 22 Sep 2011 30 Nov 2007 2 Jul 2009 2 Jun 2011 16 Nov 2009 12 Mar 2010 1 Aug 2008 22 Mar 2012 23 Jul 2009 11 Mar 2010 10 Oct 2011 29 Jul 2008 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification Albania China Algeria Colombia Andorra Comoros Antigua and Barbuda Congo Argentina Cook Islands Armenia Costa Rica Australia Côte d'Ivoire Austria Croatia Azerbaijan Cuba Bahrain Cyprus Bangladesh Czech Republic Barbados Denmark Belgium Dominica Belize Dominican Republic Benin Ecuador Bhutan Egypt Bolivia (Plurinational State of) El Salvador Bosnia and Herzegovina Estonia Brazil Ethiopia Brunei Darussalam European Union Bulgaria Fiji Burkina Faso Finland Burundi France Cambodia Gabon Cameroon
 Georgia Canada Germany Cape Verde Ghana Central African Republic Greece Chile Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland 22 Dec 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Apr 2007 26 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 7 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 26 Apr 2007 25 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 19 Jul 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2011 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 30 Mar 2007 21 Sep 2010 4 Apr 2007 13 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 29 Jul 2009 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 18 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2007 2 Jun 2010 23 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 Oct 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 Oct 2008 10 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 12 Jul 2010 30 Mar 2007 16 May 2007 11 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 Aug 2008 4 Dec 2009 10 May 2011 2 Sep 2008 8 May 2009 a 22 Sep 2010 1 Oct 2008 17 Jul 2008 26 Sep 2008 15 Aug 2007 28 Jan 2009 6 Sep 2007 22 Sep 2011 27 Jun 2011 30 Nov 2007 28 Sep 2009 24 Jul 2009 2 Jul 2009 2 Jun 2011 18 Aug 2009 3 Apr 2008 14 Apr 2008 16 Nov 2009 14 Dec 2007 12 Mar 2010 1 Aug 2008 7 Jul 2010 23 Dec 2010 c 22 Mar 2012 23 Jul 2009 18 Feb 2010 1 Oct 2007 11 Mar 2010 24 Feb 2009 10 Oct 2011 29 Jul 2008 7 Apr 2009 8 Feb 2008 23 Jul 2009 a 14 Apr 2008 20 Jul 2007 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 167 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification Albania India Algeria Indonesia Andorra Iran (Islamic Republic of) Antigua and Barbuda Ireland Argentina Israel Armenia Italy Australia Jamaica Austria Japan Azerbaijan Jordan Bahrain Kazakhstan Bangladesh Kenya Barbados Kyrgyzstan Belgium Lao People's Democratic Belize Republic Benin Latvia Bhutan Lebanon Bolivia (Plurinational State
 of) Lesotho Bosnia and Herzegovina Liberia Brazil Libya Brunei Darussalam Lithuania Bulgaria Luxembourg Burkina Faso Madagascar Burundi Malawi Cambodia Malaysia Cameroon Maldives Canada Mali Cape Verde Malta Central African Republic Mauritius Chile Mexico Micronesia (Federated States of) Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar 22 Dec 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 28 Sep 2007 9 Jan 2008 30 Mar 2007 25 Jun 2007 11 Dec 2008 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 19 Jul 2007 21 Sep 2011 30 Mar 2007 15 Jan 2008 9 May 2011 8 Feb 2008 18 Jul 2008 21 Sep 2010 14 Jun 2007 13 Aug 2007 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 May 2008 18 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 May 2007 25 Sep 2007 26 Apr 2007 27 Sep 2007 1 Oct 2007 8 Apr 2008 1 Oct 2008 2 Oct 2007 30 Mar 2007 15 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2011 23 Sep 2009 27 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 Oct 2007 4 Dec 2009 30 Nov 2011 23 Oct 2009 a 2 Sep 2008 22 Sep 2010 15 May 2009 17 Jul 2008 30 Mar 2007 26 Sep 2008 28 Jan 2009 31 Mar 2008 22 Sep 2011 30 Nov 2007 19 May 2008 2 Jul 2009 25 Sep 2009 2 Jun 2011 1 Mar 2010 16 Nov 2009 2 Dec 2008 a 12 Mar 2010 1 Aug 2008 18 Aug 2010 22 Mar 2012 26 Sep 2011 23 Jul 2009 27 Aug 2009 19 Jul 2010 5 Apr 2010 11 Mar 2010 7 Apr 2008 10 Oct 2011 8 Jan 2010 29 Jul 2008 17 Dec 2007 13 May 2009 a 2 Nov 2009 8 Apr 2009 30 Jan 2012 7 Dec 2011 a 168 National Human Rights Commission, India Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Papua New Guinea Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Rwanda San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain Sri Lanka 25 Apr 2007 3 Jan 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30
 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 17 Mar 2008 25 Sep 2008 20 Sep 2011 30 Mar 2007 2 Jun 2011 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jul 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Sep 2007 24 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 25 Apr 2007 17 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 4 Dec 2007 7 May 2010 25 Sep 2008 7 Dec 2007 24 Jun 2008 24 Sep 2010 6 Jan 2009 5 Jul 2011 7 Aug 2007 3 Sep 2008 30 Jan 2008 15 Apr 2008 23 Sep 2009 13 May 2008 11 Dec 2008 21 Sep 2010 31 Jan 2011 15 Dec 2008 a 22 Feb 2008 24 Jun 2008 a 7 Sep 2010 31 Jul 2009 2 Oct 2009 4 Oct 2010 26 May 2010 24 Apr 2008 30 Nov 2007 3 Dec 2007 Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lao People's Democratic India Indonesia Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kyrgyzstan Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Mauritius Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 28 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 11 Dec 2008 30 Mar 2007 21 Sep 2011 15 Jan 2008 18 Jul 2008 14 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 May 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 27 Sep 2007 8 Apr 2008 2 Oct 2007 15 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2009 27 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 Micronesia (Federated States of) 23 Sep 2011 1 Oct 2007 30 Nov 2011 23 Oct 2009 a 15 May 2009 30 Mar 2007 31 Mar 2008 19 May 2008 25 Sep 2009 1 Mar 2010 2 Dec 2008 a 18 Aug 2010 26 Sep 2011 27 Aug 2009 19 Jul 2010 5 Apr 2010 7 Apr 2008 8 Jan 2010 17 Dec 2007 13 May 2009 a 2 Nov 2009 8 Apr 2009 30 Jan 2012 7 Dec 2011 a Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification Albania Namibia Algeria Nepal Andorra Netherlands Antigua and Barbuda New Zealand Argentina
 Nicaragua Armenia Niger Australia Nigeria Austria Norway Azerbaijan Oman Bahrain Pakistan Bangladesh Palau Barbados Panama Belgium Papua New Guinea Belize Paraguay Benin Peru Bhutan Philippines Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Poland Bosnia and Herzegovina Portugal Brazil Qatar Brunei Darussalam Republic of Korea Bulgaria Republic of Moldova Burkina Faso Romania Burundi Russian Federation Cambodia Rwanda Cameroon San Marino Canada Saudi Arabia Cape Verde Senegal Central African Republic Serbia Chile Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain Sri Lanka 22 Dec 2009 25 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 3 Jan 2008 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 17 Mar 2008 25 Jun 2007 25 Sep 2008 9 May 2007 20 Sep 2011 19 Jul 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 2 Jun 2011 9 May 2011 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 30 Mar 2007 21 Sep 2010 25 Sep 2007 13 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jul 2007 18 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 May 2007 26 Sep 2007 26 Apr 2007 24 Sep 2008 1 Oct 2007 1 Oct 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Apr 2007 9 May 2007 17 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 4 Dec 2007 4 Dec 2009 7 May 2010 25 Sep 2008 2 Sep 2008 7 Dec 2007 22 Sep 2010 24 Jun 2008 17 Jul 2008 24 Sep 2010 26 Sep 2008 28 Jan 2009 6 Jan 2009 22 Sep 2011 5 Jul 2011 30 Nov 2007 7 Aug 2007 2 Jul 2009 2 Jun 2011 3 Sep 2008 30 Jan 2008 15 Apr 2008 16 Nov 2009 12 Mar 2010 23 Sep 2009 1 Aug 2008 13 May 2008 11 Dec 2008 22 Mar 2012 21 Sep 2010 23 Jul 2009 31 Jan 2011 15 Dec 2008 a 22 Feb 2008 11 Mar 2010 24 Jun 2008 a 10 Oct 2011 7 Sep 2010 31 Jul 2009 29 Jul 2008 2 Oct 2009 4 Oct 2010 26 May 2010 24 Apr 2008 30 Nov 2007 3 Dec 2007 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 169 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE
 RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification Albania St. Lucia Algeria St. Vincent and the Grenadines Andorra Sudan Antigua and Barbuda Suriname Argentina Swaziland Armenia Sweden Australia Syrian Arab Republic Austria Thailand Azerbaijan The former Yugoslav Republic of Bahrain Macedonia Bangladesh Togo Barbados Tonga Belgium Trinidad and Tobago Belize Tunisia Benin Turkey Bhutan Turkmenistan Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Uganda Bosnia and Herzegovina Ukraine Brazil United Arab Emirates Brunei Darussalam United Kingdom of Great Britain Bulgaria and Northern Ireland Burkina Faso United Republic of Tanzania Burundi United States of America Cambodia Uruguay Cameroon Uzbekistan Canada Vanuatu Cape Verde Viet Nam Central African Republic Yemen Chile Zambia 22 Dec 2009 22 Sep 2011 30 Mar 2007 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 30 Mar 2007 25 Jun 2007 9 May 2007 23 Sep 2008 19 Jul 2007 15 Nov 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2007 9 May 2011 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 30 Mar 2007 21 Sep 2010 13 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 29 Jul 2009 24 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 18 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2007 23 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Apr 2007 30 Jul 2009 1 Oct 2007 3 Apr 2007 1 Oct 2008 27 Feb 2009 30 Mar 2007 17 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 22 Oct 2007 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2008 4 Dec 2009 29 Oct 2010 a 24 Apr 2009 2 Sep 2008 22 Sep 2010 15 Dec 2008 17 Jul 2008 10 Jul 2009 26 Sep 2008 29 Jul 2008 28 Jan 2009 29 Dec 2011 22 Sep 2011 30 Nov 2007 1 Mar 2011 2 Jul 2009 2 Jun 2011 2 Apr 2008 28 Sep 2009 4 Sep 2008 a 16 Nov 2009 25 Sep 2008 12 Mar 2010 4 Feb 2010 1 Aug 2008 19 Mar 2010 8 Jun 2009 22 Mar 2012 23 Jul 2009 10 Nov 2009 11 Feb 2009 11 Mar 2010 23 Oct 2008 10 Oct 2011 26 Mar 2009 29 Jul 2008 1 Feb 2010 170 National Human Rights
 Commission, India Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted by the General Assembly in 2006, created a Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities mandated to monitor the implementation of human rights obligations under the Convention, through the consideration of periodic reports submitted by State parties.
Article 34 of the CRPD provides for the establishment of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – a committee of independent experts with several functions.
First, on the basis of periodic reports received from States and other interested parties such as national monitoring mechanisms and civil society organizations, the Committee engages in a constructive dialogue with States on the implementation of the Convention, and issues concluding observations and recommendations for follow-up action to improve and strengthen implementation.
Second, the Committee holds days of general discussion, open to the public, during which it discusses issues of general interest arising from the Convention.

Third, the Committee may issue authoritative statements, known as general comments, to clarify specific provisions in the Convention or specific issues arising in the implementation of the Convention.
Fourth, the Optional Protocol gives the Committee authority to receive complaints, known as communications, from individuals alleging violations of any of the Convention’s provisions by a State that has ratified the Optional Protocol.

The Committee may present its views after considering the complaint in the light of the comments from the State concerned.
Fifth, the Optional Protocol also provides the Committee with an opportunity to undertake inquiries in States parties if it receives reliable information indicating grave or systematic violations of the Convention.
The former Yugoslav Republic of 30 Mar 2007 St. Vincent and the Grenadines St. Lucia Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Syrian Arab Republic Thailand Trinidad and Tobago Macedonia Togo Tonga Turkmenistan Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine 22 Sep 2011 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 15 Nov 2007 27 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 24 Sep 2008 8 Feb 2008 30 Jul 2009 3 Apr 2007 27 Feb 2009 17 May 2007 22 Oct 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2008 Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Viet Nam Yemen Zambia 29 Oct 2010 a 24 Apr 2009 15 Dec 2008 10 Jul 2009 29 Jul 2008 29 Dec 2011 1 Mar 2011 2 Apr 2008 28 Sep 2009 4 Sep 2008 a 25 Sep 2008 4 Feb 2010 19 Mar 2010 8 Jun 2009 11 Feb 2009 23 Oct 2008 26 Mar 2009 1 Feb 2010 United Arab Emirates and Northern Ireland United Kingdom of Great Britain 30 Mar 2007 United Republic of Tanzania 30 Mar 2007 10 Nov 2009 United States of America Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted by the General Assembly in 2006, created a Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities mandated to monitor the implementation of human rights obligations under the Convention, through the consideration of periodic reports submitted by State parties.
Article 34 of the CRPD provides for the establishment of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – a committee of independent experts with several functions.
First, on the basis of periodic reports received from States and other interested parties such as national monitoring mechanisms and civil society organizations, the Committee engages in a constructive dialogue with States on the implementation of the Convention, and issues concluding observations and recommendations for follow-up action to improve and strengthen implementation.
Second, the Committee holds days of general discussion, open to the public, during which it discusses issues of general interest arising from the Convention.

Third, the Committee may issue authoritative statements, known as general comments, to clarify specific provisions in the Convention or specific issues arising in the implementation of the Convention.
Fourth, the Optional Protocol gives the Committee authority to receive complaints, known as communications, from individuals alleging violations of any of the Convention’s provisions by a State that has ratified the Optional Protocol.

The Committee may present its views after considering the complaint in the light of the comments from the State concerned.
Fifth, the Optional Protocol also provides the Committee with an opportunity to undertake inquiries in States parties if it receives reliable information the Convention.

indicating grave or systematic violations of A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 171 All states parties are required to submit regular reports to the judicial, policy and other Committee outlining the legislative, measures they have taken to implement the rights affirmed in the Convention.
The first report is due within two years of ratifying the Convention; thereafter reports are due every four years.

The Committee will examine each report and address its concerns and recommendations to the state party in the form of “concluding observations”.
The Optional Protocol to the Convention allows the Committee to receive and consider complaints on behalf of individuals as well as groups, and also provides for the Committee to conduct confidential investigations of allegations regarding grave or systematic violations of the Convention.

Investigations may be carried out through country visits with the consent of the State.

The Convention and the Optional Protocol entered into force on 3 May 2008.
172 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Rights of Persons with Persons with Disabilities Disabilities.
It was adopted on 13 with Disabilities is a side- agreement to the Convention on Entry into force: 3 May 2008 Signatories: 90 Parties: 66 India has not signed the CRPD Optional Protocol Key Provisions: December 2006, and entered into force at the same time as its parent Convention, on 3 May 2008.
The Optional Protocol establishes an individual complaints mechanism for the The Optional Protocol Convention similar to those of establishes an individual complaints mechanism for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention; Convention It also includes an inquiry mechanism whereby Parties recognise the competence of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Parties agree to recognise the competence of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to consider complaints from individuals or groups who claim their rights under the Convention have been violated.

The Committee can request information from and make recommendations to a party.
All states parties are required to submit regular reports to the Committee outlining the legislative, judicial, policy and other measures they have taken to implement the rights affirmed in the Convention.

The first report is due within two years of ratifying the Convention; thereafter reports are due every four years.

The Committee will examine each report and address its concerns and recommendations to the state party in the form of “concluding observations”.
The Optional Protocol to the Convention allows the Committee to receive and consider complaints on behalf of individuals as well as groups, and also provides for the Committee to conduct confidential investigations of allegations regarding grave or systematic violations of the Convention.

Investigations may be carried out through country visits with the consent of the State.
The Convention and the Optional Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is a Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons side- with Disabilities agreement to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

It was adopted on 13 December 2006, and entered into force at the same time as its parent Convention, on 3 May 2008.
Entry into force: 3 May 2008 Signatories: 90 Parties: 66 Protocol entered into force on 3 May 2008.
Key Provisions: India has not signed the CRPD Optional Protocol The Optional Protocol establishes an individual complaints mechanism for the Convention; The Optional Protocol individual an establishes complaints mechanism for the Convention similar to those of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of against Women and Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Discrimination It also includes an inquiry mechanism whereby Parties recognise the competence of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.

Parties agree to recognise the competence of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with consider Disabilities complaints from individuals or groups who claim their rights under the Convention have been violated.
The Committee can request information from and make recommendations to a party.

to A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 173 In addition, parties may permit the Committee to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.

Parties may opt out of this obligation on signature or ratification.

The Optional Protocol required ten ratifications to come into force.
The Optional Protocol to the Convention allows individuals who are victims of violations of Convention to present complaints before the Committee against a state that has ratified the convention and violates its obligations.
174 National Human Rights Commission, India Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Antigua and Barbuda Participant Algeria Andorra Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belgium Benin Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Chile Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cyprus Ecuador El Salvador Fiji Finland France Central African Republic Czech Republic Dominican Republic 30 Mar 2007 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 13 Aug 2007 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 18 Dec 2008 23 May 2007 26 Apr 2007 1 Oct 2007 1 Oct 2008 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 7 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 2 Jun 2010 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 2 Sep 2008 21 Aug 2009 a 26 Sep 2008 28 Jan 2009 12 May 2008 a 2 Jul 2009 16 Nov 2009 12 Mar 2010 1 Aug 2008 23 Jul 2009 29 Jul 2008 8 May 2009 a 1 Oct 2008 15 Aug 2007 27 Jun 2011 18 Aug 2009 3 Apr 2008 14 Dec 2007 18 Feb 2010 In addition, parties may permit the Committee to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the Convention.
Parties may opt out of this obligation on signature or ratification.

The Optional Protocol required ten ratifications to come into force.

The Optional Protocol to the Convention allows individuals who are victims of violations of Convention to present complaints before the Committee against a state that has ratified the convention and violates its obligations.
Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Algeria Andorra Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belgium Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Central African Republic Chile Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Dominican Republic Ecuador El Salvador Fiji Finland France Signature 30 Mar 2007 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 13 Aug 2007 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 18 Dec 2008 23 May 2007 26 Apr 2007 1 Oct 2007 1 Oct 2008 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 7 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 2 Jun 2010 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification 2 Sep 2008 21 Aug 2009 a 26 Sep 2008 28 Jan 2009 12 May 2008 a 2 Jul 2009 16 Nov 2009 12 Mar 2010 1 Aug 2008 23 Jul 2009 29 Jul 2008 8 May 2009 a 1 Oct 2008 15 Aug 2007 27 Jun 2011 18 Aug 2009 3 Apr 2008 14 Dec 2007 18 Feb 2010 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 175 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Algeria Gabon Andorra Georgia Antigua and Barbuda Germany Argentina Ghana Armenia Greece Australia Guatemala Austria Guinea Azerbaijan Haiti Bangladesh Honduras Belgium Hungary Benin Iceland Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Italy Bosnia and Herzegovina Jamaica Brazil Jordan Bulgaria Kazakhstan Burkina Faso Latvia Burundi Lebanon Cambodia Liberia Cameroon Lithuania Central African Republic Luxembourg Chile Madagascar Congo Mali Cook Islands Malta Costa Rica Mauritius Côte d'Ivoire Mexico Croatia Mongolia Cyprus Montenegro Czech Republic Morocco
 Dominican Republic Mozambique Ecuador Namibia El Salvador Nepal Fiji Nicaragua Finland Niger France Nigeria Panama Paraguay Peru Portugal Qatar Signature 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 27 Apr 2007 10 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2010 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 31 Aug 2007 9 Jan 2008 23 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 30 Mar 2007 13 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 18 Dec 2008 11 Dec 2008 23 May 2007 22 Jan 2010 26 Apr 2007 14 Jun 2007 1 Oct 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 Oct 2008 30 Mar 2007 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 15 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 7 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 3 Jan 2008 2 Jun 2010 21 Oct 2008 30 Mar 2007 2 Aug 2007 23 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jul 2007 Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification 24 Feb 2009 2 Sep 2008 21 Aug 2009 a 7 Apr 2009 26 Sep 2008 8 Feb 2008 28 Jan 2009 23 Jul 2009 a 12 May 2008 a 16 Aug 2010 2 Jul 2009 20 Jul 2007 16 Nov 2009 15 May 2009 12 Mar 2010 1 Aug 2008 23 Jul 2009 31 Aug 2010 18 Aug 2010 26 Sep 2011 29 Jul 2008 7 Apr 2008 8 May 2009 a 1 Oct 2008 17 Dec 2007 15 Aug 2007 13 May 2009 a 27 Jun 2011 2 Nov 2009 8 Apr 2009 a 18 Aug 2009 30 Jan 2012 a 3 Apr 2008 4 Dec 2007 14 Dec 2007 7 May 2010 2 Feb 2010 24 Jun 2008 18 Feb 2010 24 Sep 2010 7 Aug 2007 3 Sep 2008 30 Jan 2008 23 Sep 2009 176 National Human Rights Commission, India Romania Rwanda San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands South Africa Spain Sudan Swaziland Sweden Macedonia Togo Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine St. Vincent and the Grenadines Syrian Arab Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of 29 Jul 2009 25 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 25 Apr 2007 17 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 26 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 24 Sep 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007
 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 28 Sep 2009 30 Mar 2007 24 Sep 2008 12 Feb 2008 26 Feb 2009 15 Dec 2008 a 22 Feb 2008 24 Jun 2008 a 31 Jul 2009 26 May 2010 24 Apr 2008 30 Nov 2007 3 Dec 2007 29 Oct 2010 a 24 Apr 2009 a 15 Dec 2008 10 Jul 2009 a 29 Dec 2011 1 Mar 2011 2 Apr 2008 10 Nov 2010 a 25 Sep 2008 4 Feb 2010 7 Aug 2009 United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania 29 Sep 2008 10 Nov 2009 Uruguay Yemen Zambia 11 Apr 2007 29 Sep 2008 28 Oct 2011 a 26 Mar 2009 Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Guatemala Guinea Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland Italy Jamaica Jordan Kazakhstan Latvia Lebanon Liberia Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Mali Malta Mauritius Mexico Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Panama Paraguay Peru Portugal Qatar 25 Sep 2007 10 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2010 30 Mar 2007 31 Aug 2007 23 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 11 Dec 2008 22 Jan 2010 14 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 15 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 27 Sep 2007 25 Apr 2007 3 Jan 2008 21 Oct 2008 2 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jul 2007 24 Feb 2009 7 Apr 2009 8 Feb 2008 23 Jul 2009 a 16 Aug 2010 20 Jul 2007 15 May 2009 31 Aug 2010 18 Aug 2010 26 Sep 2011 7 Apr 2008 17 Dec 2007 13 May 2009 a 2 Nov 2009 8 Apr 2009 a 30 Jan 2012 a 4 Dec 2007 7 May 2010 2 Feb 2010 24 Jun 2008 24 Sep 2010 7 Aug 2007 3 Sep 2008 30 Jan 2008 23 Sep 2009 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Algeria Romania Andorra Rwanda Antigua and Barbuda San Marino Argentina Saudi Arabia Armenia Senegal Australia Serbia Austria Seychelles Azerbaijan Sierra Leone Bangladesh Slovakia Belgium Slovenia Benin Solomon Islands Bolivia
 (Plurinational State of) South Africa Bosnia and Herzegovina Spain Brazil St. Vincent and the Grenadines Bulgaria Sudan Burkina Faso Swaziland Burundi Sweden Cambodia Syrian Arab Republic Cameroon The former Yugoslav Republic of Central African Republic Macedonia Chile Togo Congo Tunisia Cook Islands Turkey Costa Rica Turkmenistan Côte d'Ivoire Uganda Croatia Ukraine Cyprus United Arab Emirates Czech Republic United Kingdom of Great Britain Dominican Republic and Northern Ireland Ecuador United Republic of Tanzania El Salvador Fiji Finland France Uruguay Yemen Zambia Signature 30 Mar 2007 25 Sep 2008 27 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 25 Apr 2007 17 Dec 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 9 Jan 2008 30 Mar 2007 26 Sep 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 8 Feb 2008 24 Sep 2009 13 Aug 2007 30 Mar 2007 29 Jul 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 18 Dec 2008 23 May 2007 25 Sep 2007 26 Apr 2007 30 Mar 2007 1 Oct 2007 1 Oct 2008 29 Jul 2009 9 May 2007 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 28 Sep 2009 30 Mar 2007 7 Jun 2007 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 24 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 12 Feb 2008 30 Mar 2007 26 Feb 2009 30 Mar 2007 30 Mar 2007 29 Sep 2008 30 Mar 2007 2 Jun 2010 30 Mar 2007 23 Sep 2008 11 Apr 2007 29 Sep 2008 Formal confirmation(c), Accession(a), Ratification 15 Dec 2008 a 22 Feb 2008 2 Sep 2008 24 Jun 2008 a 21 Aug 2009 a 31 Jul 2009 26 Sep 2008 28 Jan 2009 12 May 2008 a 26 May 2010 2 Jul 2009 24 Apr 2008 16 Nov 2009 30 Nov 2007 12 Mar 2010 3 Dec 2007 1 Aug 2008 29 Oct 2010 a 24 Apr 2009 a 23 Jul 2009 15 Dec 2008 10 Jul 2009 a 29 Dec 2011 29 Jul 2008 1 Mar 2011 2 Apr 2008 8 May 2009 a 1 Oct 2008 10 Nov 2010 a 25 Sep 2008 15 Aug 2007 4 Feb 2010 27 Jun 2011 7 Aug 2009 18 Aug 2009 3 Apr 2008 10 Nov 2009 14 Dec 2007 18 Feb 2010 28 Oct 2011 a 26 Mar 2009 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 177 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance Enforced disappearance or the arrest, detention or abduction of a
 person by the state or agents acting on its behalf, who subsequently deny that the person is being held or conceal their whereabouts, placing them outside the protection of the law, has been carried out by regimes all over the world from the Second World War until today.
ICPAPED It was adopted by Resolution A/RES/61/177 on 20 December 2006 during the sixty-first session of the General Assembly.

The Convention is intended to prevent forced disappearances.
Entry into force: 23 December 2010 Signatories: 91; Parties: 30 Treaty Body: Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) India signed the ICPAPED on 6 February 2007 30 August is commemorated as the ‘International Day of the Disappeared’ According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), enforced disappearance constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law and human rights, both in international and non- international armed conflict.
“It violates, or threatens to violate, a number of fundamental customary rules such as the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty, the prohibition of torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, and the prohibition of murder.” To prevent the practice of enforced disappearance, which causes unspeakable anguish, fear and sorrow for thousands of families, there was an urgent need for a legally binding universal instrument.
International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance Enforced disappearance or the arrest, detention or abduction of a person by the state or agents acting on its behalf, who subsequently deny that the person is being held or conceal their whereabouts, placing them outside the protection of the law, has been carried out by regimes all over the world from the Second World War until today.
ICPAPED It was adopted by Resolution A/RES/61/177 on 20 December 2006 during the sixty-first session of the General Assembly.

The Convention is intended to prevent forced disappearances.
Entry into force: 23 December 2010 Signatories: 91; Parties: 30 Treaty Body: Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) India signed the ICPAPED on 6 February 2007 30 August is commemorated as the ‘International Day of the Disappeared’ According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), enforced disappearance constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law and human rights, both in international and non- international armed conflict.
“It violates, or threatens to violate, a number of fundamental customary rules such as the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty, the prohibition of torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment, and the prohibition of murder.” To prevent the practice of enforced disappearance, which causes unspeakable anguish, fear and sorrow for thousands of families, there was an urgent need for a legally binding universal instrument.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 179 How does the ICPAPED define “enforced disappearance”?

the the UN In December 2006, adopted International Convention for the Protection of from Enforced All Persons Disappearance.
Article 2 of the Convention defines “enforced disappearance” as under: “…the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law.” The Convention aims to prevent disappearances, enforced uncover the truth when they do occur, punish the perpetrators and provide reparations to the victims and their families.
On 23 December 2010, four years after the adoption of the Convention by the UN General Assembly, eventually the reached ratification which was necessary for its entry into force.

Iraq was the 20th this ICPAPED the 20th ratified that country international treaty.

Which human rights does an “enforced disappearance” violate?
Right to security and dignity of person Right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment Right to humane conditions of detention Right to a legal personality Right to a fair trial Right to a family life If the disappeared person is killed, the right to life international The Convention is perhaps the first human instrument which rights recognizes the right of any person not to be subjected to It enforced disappearance.
recognizes it as a non- derogable right which means that no circumstances may be invoked as a justification to carry enforced out disappearances [Article 1(2)].

180 National Human Rights Commission, India Key Provisions Article 5 of the Convention asserts that the widespread practice of enforced disappearance constitutes a crime against humanity and this potentially enables, for instance, the involvement of the International Criminal Court.
Each State party is required to incorporate the provisions of the Convention in its domestic criminal law by making enforced disappearance an offence under its criminal law; holding any person involved, criminally responsible; and making the offence punishable by appropriate penalties.

Article 6 describes who can be held criminally responsible for an enforced disappearance.
According to the Article, “Any person who commits, orders, solicits or induces the commission of, attempts to commit, is an accomplice to or participates in an enforced disappearance”.

To prevent the occurrence of enforced disappearances, the Convention requires States to adopt stringent safeguards.

These preventive measures can be of consequence for national laws, for instance regarding detention.
The Convention prohibits secret detention and gives specific rules and regulations with regard to deprivation of liberty including the maintenance of up-to-date official registers of persons deprived of liberty.

For all places where people are deprived of their liberty, a register like this should be available.

It also requires States to impose sanctions on conduct that undermines these safeguards.
Article 21 requires persons to be released from prison in a manner permitting reliable verification that they have actually been released.

Article 24 obliges States to provide training to law enforcement personnel.

The Convention contains several provisions on protective measures after a disappearance occurs.

The State should for instance enable How does the ICPAPED define In December 2006, the UN “enforced disappearance”?
adopted the International Article 2 of the Convention defines “enforced disappearance” as under: Disappearance.
Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced “…the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law.” The Convention aims to prevent enforced disappearances, uncover the truth when they do occur, punish the perpetrators and provide reparations to the victims and their families.
On 23 December 2010, four years after the adoption of the Convention by the UN General Assembly, the ICPAPED eventually reached the 20th ratification which was necessary for its entry into force.

Iraq was the 20th Which human rights does an “enforced disappearance” violate?
Right to security and dignity of person Right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or Right to humane conditions of punishment detention Right to a legal personality Right to a fair trial Right to a family life If the disappeared person is killed, the right to life country that ratified this international treaty.
The Convention is perhaps the first international human rights instrument which recognizes the right of any person not to be subjected to enforced disappearance.

It recognizes it as a non- derogable right which means that no circumstances may be invoked as a justification to carry out enforced disappearances [Article 1(2)].
Key Provisions Article 5 of the Convention asserts that the widespread practice of enforced disappearance constitutes a crime against humanity and this potentially enables, for instance, the involvement of the International Criminal Court.
Each State party is required to incorporate the provisions of the Convention in its domestic criminal law by making enforced disappearance an offence under its criminal law; holding any person involved, criminally responsible; and making the offence punishable by appropriate penalties.

Article 6 describes who can be held criminally responsible for an enforced disappearance.
According to the Article, “Any person who commits, orders, solicits or induces the commission of, attempts to commit, in an enforced disappearance”.

is an accomplice to or participates the occurrence of enforced disappearances, the To prevent Convention requires States to adopt stringent safeguards.

These preventive measures can be of consequence for national laws, for instance regarding detention.
The Convention prohibits secret detention and gives specific rules and regulations with regard to deprivation of liberty including the maintenance of up-to-date official registers of persons deprived of liberty.

For all places where people are deprived of their liberty, a register like this should be available.

It also requires States to impose sanctions on conduct that undermines these safeguards.
Article 21 requires persons to be released from prison in a manner permitting reliable verification that they have actually been released.

Article 24 obliges States to provide training to law enforcement personnel.

The Convention contains several provisions on protective measures after a disappearance occurs.
The State should for instance enable A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 181 individuals to report an enforced disappearance, protect witnesses and investigate complaints and reports of disappearances.

The convention also establishes several rights for victims.

Enforced disappearances create many more victims that just the person who has been deprived of her/his liberty.
Relatives of the disappeared are included in the definition of victim as well as any person who has suffered harm as a direct result of the enforced disappearance.

State parties should submit suspects who are found on their territory to the competent authorities, extradite them to another state, or surrender them to an international criminal court.

They should also take care that no person is expelled, returned surrendered or extradited who may be in danger of being subjected to enforced disappearance.
The right to information is guaranteed under Article 18.

It requires every person with a legitimate interest to have access to basic information such as the date, time and place of the deprivation of liberty and the whereabouts of the person.

Restrictions of such information are only permitted when a person is under judicial to an enforced control and disappearance.

the restriction does not lead reparation The right to know the truth is guaranteed in Article 24.
States should rehabilitation, (including also ensure guarantees of non-repetition) adequate compensation as well as the right to form organizations and associations trying to address the enforced disappearances.

and prompt restitution, and With regard to Children, Article 25 states that States are responsible for the prevention and punishment of the wrongful removal of children who are subjected to enforced disappearance or whose parents are subjected to enforced disappearance.
States should search for, identify and return such children to their families.

The Convention also recognizes the importance of International Cooperation (Articles 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15) to make the convention effective since in many instances, enforced disappearances concern the involvement of more than one State.

To this end, it requires State Parties to cooperate in searching for disappeared persons and, in the event of death, exhuming and identifying them and returning the mortal remains.
182 National Human Rights Commission, India individuals to report an enforced disappearance, protect witnesses and investigate complaints and reports of disappearances.

The convention also establishes several rights for victims.

Enforced disappearances create many more victims that just the person who has been deprived of her/his liberty.

Relatives of the disappeared are included in the definition of victim as well as any person who has suffered harm as a direct result of the enforced disappearance.
The right to information is guaranteed under Article 18.

It requires every person with a legitimate interest to have access to basic information such as the date, time and place of the deprivation of liberty and the whereabouts of the person.

Restrictions of such information are only permitted when a person is under judicial control and the restriction does not lead to an enforced disappearance.

The right to know the truth is guaranteed in Article 24.
States should also ensure reparation (including restitution, rehabilitation, guarantees of non-repetition) and prompt and adequate compensation as well as the right to form organizations and associations trying to address the enforced disappearances.

With regard to Children, Article 25 states that States are responsible for the prevention and punishment of the wrongful removal of children who are subjected to enforced disappearance or whose parents are subjected to enforced disappearance.
States should search for, identify and return such children to their families.

The Convention also recognizes the importance of International Cooperation (Articles 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15) to make the convention effective since in many instances, enforced disappearances concern the involvement of more than one State.

To this end, it requires State Parties to cooperate in searching for disappeared persons and, in the event of death, exhuming and identifying them and returning the mortal remains.
State parties should submit suspects who are found on their territory to the competent authorities, extradite them to another state, or surrender them to an international criminal court.

They should also take care that no person is expelled, returned surrendered or extradited who may be in danger of being subjected to enforced disappearance.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 183 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Accession(a), Ratification Albania Algeria Argentina Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Benin Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Chad Chile Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Denmark Ecuador Finland France Gabon 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 10 Apr 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 19 Mar 2010 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 Sep 2008 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 24 May 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 8 Nov 2007 14 Dec 2007 24 Jan 2011 2 Jun 2011 17 Dec 2008 29 Nov 2010 3 Dec 2009 8 Dec 2009 16 Feb 2012 2 Feb 2009 20 Oct 2009 23 Sep 2008 19 Jan 2011 184 National Human Rights Commission, India 26 Sep 2007 24 Sep 2009 Lao People's Democratic Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Haiti Honduras Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Italy Japan Kazakhstan Kenya Republic Lebanon Lesotho Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mexico Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Netherlands Niger Nigeria 6 Feb 2007 1 Oct 2008 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 1 Oct 2008 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2010 29 Mar 2007 3 Jul 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 29 Sep 2008 6 Feb 2007 22 Sep 2010 1 Oct 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2011 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 Dec 2008 29 Apr 2008 6 Feb 2007 1 Apr 2008 23 Nov 2010 a 23 Jul 2009 27 Feb 2009 a 1 Jul 2009 18 Mar 2008 20 Sep 2011 23 Mar 2011 27 Jul 2009 a International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION
 STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Signature Accession(a), Ratification Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Participant Albania Algeria Argentina Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Benin Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Chad Chile Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Denmark Ecuador Finland France Gabon 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 10 Apr 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 19 Mar 2010 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 Sep 2008 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 24 May 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 8 Nov 2007 14 Dec 2007 24 Jan 2011 2 Jun 2011 17 Dec 2008 29 Nov 2010 3 Dec 2009 8 Dec 2009 16 Feb 2012 2 Feb 2009 20 Oct 2009 23 Sep 2008 19 Jan 2011 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Accession(a), Ratification Albania Germany Algeria Ghana Argentina Greece Armenia Grenada Austria Guatemala Azerbaijan Haiti Belgium Honduras Benin Iceland Bolivia (Plurinational State of) India Bosnia and Herzegovina Indonesia Brazil Iraq Bulgaria Ireland Burkina Faso Italy Burundi Japan Cameroon Kazakhstan Cape Verde Kenya Chad Lao People's Democratic Chile Republic Colombia Lebanon Comoros Lesotho Congo Liechtenstein Costa Rica Lithuania Croatia Luxembourg Cuba Madagascar Cyprus Maldives Denmark Mali Ecuador Malta Finland Mauritania France Mexico Gabon Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Netherlands Niger Nigeria 6 Feb 2007 26 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 1 Oct 2008 10 Apr 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 19 Mar 2010 1 Oct 2008 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2010 6 Feb 2007 24 Sep 2008
 29 Mar 2007 6 Feb 2007 3 Jul 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 29 Sep 2008 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 22 Sep 2010 6 Feb 2007 1 Oct 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 May 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2011 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 Dec 2008 29 Apr 2008 6 Feb 2007 8 Nov 2007 24 Sep 2009 14 Dec 2007 24 Jan 2011 2 Jun 2011 1 Apr 2008 17 Dec 2008 29 Nov 2010 23 Nov 2010 a 3 Dec 2009 23 Jul 2009 27 Feb 2009 a 8 Dec 2009 16 Feb 2012 2 Feb 2009 1 Jul 2009 20 Oct 2009 23 Sep 2008 18 Mar 2008 19 Jan 2011 20 Sep 2011 23 Mar 2011 27 Jul 2009 a A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 185 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/) Participant Signature Accession(a), Ratification Albania Norway Algeria Palau Argentina Panama Armenia Paraguay Austria Portugal Azerbaijan Republic of Moldova Belgium Romania Benin Samoa Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Senegal Bosnia and Herzegovina Serbia Brazil Sierra Leone Bulgaria Slovakia Burkina Faso Slovenia Burundi Spain Cameroon St. Vincent and the Grenadines Cape Verde Swaziland Chad Sweden Chile Switzerland Colombia Thailand Comoros The former Yugoslav Republic of Congo Macedonia Costa Rica Togo Croatia Tunisia Cuba Uganda Cyprus United Republic of Tanzania Denmark Uruguay Ecuador Vanuatu Finland Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic France of) Gabon Zambia 6 Feb 2007 21 Dec 2007 6 Feb 2007 20 Sep 2011 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 10 Apr 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 3 Dec 2008 19 Mar 2010 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 Sep 2008 26 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 26 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 27 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 29 Mar 2010 6
 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 19 Jan 2011 27 Sep 2007 9 Jan 2012 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 27 Oct 2010 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 29 Sep 2008 25 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 May 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 21 Oct 2008 6 Feb 2007 25 Sep 2007 27 Sep 2010 8 Nov 2007 14 Dec 2007 24 Jun 2011 24 Jan 2011 3 Aug 2010 2 Jun 2011 17 Dec 2008 11 Dec 2008 18 May 2011 29 Nov 2010 3 Dec 2009 24 Sep 2009 8 Dec 2009 16 Feb 2012 29 Jun 2011 2 Feb 2009 4 Mar 2009 20 Oct 2009 23 Sep 2008 19 Jan 2011 4 Apr 2011 186 National Human Rights Commission, India Committee on Enforced Disappearances The Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) is the body of independent experts which monitors implementation of the Convention by the States Parties.
All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights are being implemented.

States must report initially within two years of accepting the Convention.

The Committee examines each report and makes such suggestions and general recommendations on the report as it may consider appropriate and forwards these to the State Party concerned.
In accordance with Article 31, a State Party may at the time of ratification of this Convention or at any time afterwards declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals subject to its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by this State Party of provisions of this Convention.

Article 26(1) of the Convention provides that “[t]he Committee shall consist of ten experts”.
The Convention establishes a 10 member independent expert Committee on Enforced Disappearances.

The Committee deals with cases of enforced disappearances that occurred after the Convention came into force.

The members of the Committee are elected for a four-year term and are eligible for reelection only once (Article 26(4)).

Each State party must submit a report to the Committee.

The Committee will issue comments, observations and recommendations.

It will also carry out country visits.


A State can recognize the specific competence of the Committee to consider communications from individuals.

Unique to the Convention is an urgent humanitarian procedure to search for and find disappeared persons on the request of a relative.
Republic of Moldova Norway Palau Panama Paraguay Portugal Romania Samoa Senegal Serbia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sierra Leone Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Thailand Macedonia Togo Tunisia Uganda Uruguay Vanuatu of) Zambia 21 Dec 2007 20 Sep 2011 25 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 3 Dec 2008 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 26 Sep 2007 26 Sep 2007 27 Sep 2007 25 Sep 2007 6 Feb 2007 19 Jan 2011 9 Jan 2012 27 Oct 2010 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 6 Feb 2007 24 Jun 2011 3 Aug 2010 11 Dec 2008 18 May 2011 24 Sep 2009 29 Jun 2011 4 Mar 2009 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 29 Mar 2010 The former Yugoslav Republic of 6 Feb 2007 United Republic of Tanzania 29 Sep 2008 Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic 21 Oct 2008 27 Sep 2010 4 Apr 2011 Committee on Enforced Disappearances The Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) is the body of independent experts which monitors the Convention by the States Parties.
All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights are being implemented.

implementation of States must report initially within two years of accepting the Convention.

The Committee examines each report and makes such suggestions and general recommendations on the report as it may consider appropriate and forwards these to the State Party concerned.
In accordance with Article 31, a State Party may at the time of ratification of this Convention or at any time afterwards declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals subject to its jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by this State Party of provisions of this Convention.

Article 26(1) of the Convention provides that “[t]he Committee shall consist of ten experts”.
The Convention establishes a 10 member independent expert Committee on Enforced Disappearances.

The Committee deals with cases of enforced disappearances that occurred after the Convention came into force.

The members of the Committee are elected for a four-year term and are eligible for reelection only once (Article 26(4)).

Each State party must submit a report to the Committee.

The Committee will issue comments, observations and recommendations.

It will also carry out country visits.


A State can recognize the specific competence of the Committee to consider communications from individuals.

Unique to the Convention is an urgent humanitarian procedure to search for and find disappeared persons on the request of a relative.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 187 The requirements for admissibility of a request are as follows: The request is not manifestly unfounded; Does not constitute an abuse of the right of submission of such Has already been duly presented to the competent bodies of the requests; State party concerned; The same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement of the same nature; Is not incompatible with the provision of the Convention.
If the Committee considers the request admissible, it shall request the State Party concerned to provide information sought on the situation of the persons, within a time limit set by the Committee.

Article 31 of the Convention provides for States which have accepted it, the possibility to submit individual communications.
However, the communication will not be admissible if: It is anonymous; It constitutes an abuse of the right of submission of such communications or is incompatible with provisions of the Convention; It is being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement of the same nature; All effective available domestic remedies have not been exhausted.

This rule shall not apply where the application of the remedies is unreasonably prolonged.
This is similar to the task of the existing ‘Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances’.

The Committee has the power to bring "widespread and systematic" practice of enforced disappearance to the attention of the UN General Assembly.

The NGOs play an important role before the Committee on Enforced Disappearance.

They will be heard before the session of considering the periodic reports of every country and they will be invited to submit written information.
The individuals who are victims of violations of the Convention can report their situation to the local and international NGOs which transmit the information to the States and the Committee.

All States parties to the Convention against Enforced Disappearance are obliged to provide periodic reports.

FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE The Committee fulfils the usual functions of a treaty body, but some improvements have to be noted in comparison to other treaties.
In addition, a number of functions have been added, to take into account the specificities of Enforced Disappearance.

States are bound to submit to the Committee “a report on the measures taken to give effect to its obligations under this Convention, within two years after the entry into force of this Convention for the State Party concerned.” The Committee, like the Human Rights Committee and others, “shall issue such comments, observations or recommendations as it may deem appropriate.
The Committee on Enforced Disappearance can be appealed in a matter of urgency “by relatives of the disappeared person or their legal representatives, their counsel or any person authorized by them, as well as by any other person having a legitimate interest” (Article 30, paragraph 1).

188 National Human Rights Commission, India This is similar to the task of the existing ‘Working Group on Enforced The requirements for admissibility of a request are as follows: and Involuntary Disappearances’.
The Committee has the power to bring "widespread and systematic" practice of enforced disappearance to the attention of the UN General Assembly.

The NGOs play an important role before the Committee on Enforced Disappearance.

They will be heard before the session of considering the periodic reports of every country and they will be invited to submit written information.
The individuals who are victims of violations of the Convention can report their situation to the local and international NGOs which transmit the information to the States and the Committee.

All States parties to the Convention against Enforced Disappearance are obliged to provide periodic reports.

FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMITTEE The Committee fulfils the usual functions of a treaty body, but some improvements have to be noted in comparison to other treaties.
In addition, a number of functions have been added, to take into account the specificities of Enforced Disappearance.

States are bound to submit to the Committee “a report on the measures taken to give effect to its obligations under this Convention, within two years after the entry into force of this Convention for the State Party concerned.” The Committee, like the Human Rights Committee and others, “shall issue such comments, observations or recommendations as it may deem appropriate.
The Committee on Enforced Disappearance can be appealed in a matter of urgency “by relatives of the disappeared person or their legal representatives, their counsel or any person authorized by them, as well as by any other person having a legitimate interest” (Article 30, paragraph 1).
The request is not manifestly unfounded; Does not constitute an abuse of the right of submission of such requests; Has already been duly presented to the competent bodies of the State party concerned; The same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement of the same nature; Is not incompatible with the provision of the Convention.
If the Committee considers the request admissible, it shall request the State Party concerned to provide information sought on the situation of the persons, within a time limit set by the Committee.

Article 31 of the Convention provides for States which have accepted it, the possibility to submit individual communications.
However, the communication will not be admissible if: It is anonymous; It constitutes an abuse of the right of submission of such communications or is incompatible with provisions of the Convention; It is being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement of the same nature; All effective available domestic remedies have not been exhausted.

This rule shall not apply where the application of the remedies is unreasonably prolonged.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 189 Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 The International Labour Organization (ILO) has estimated that there are over 12 million people working under conditions of forced labour worldwide.

Children are believed to make up between 40 and 50 per cent of all forced labourers.

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (ILO Convention No.

29) The Convention concerns Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value.
Entry into force: 1 May 1932 Parties: 175 India ratified the Convention on 30 November 1954 Forced labour is any work or service which people are forced to do against their will, under the threat of some form of punishment.

Almost all slavery practices, including trafficking in people and bonded labour, contain some element of forced labour.
Forced labour is most frequently found in labour intensive and/or under-regulated industries, such as: Agriculture Domestic work Construction, mining, quarrying and brick kilns Manufacturing, processing and packaging Prostitution and sexual exploitation Market trading and illegal activities 190 National Human Rights Commission, India The Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No.
29) According to ILO Convention 29, forced labour is characterized by the presence of two key elements: Article 2(1) defines ‘forced Menace of Penalty: or compulsory labor’ as “all This may consist of punitive work or service which is exacted from any person sanctions or the suppression of rights and privileges.

Coercion can include use of violence, under the menace of any physical obligations, psychological threats or even penalty and for which the said person has not offered death.
himself voluntarily.” financial nature, including Other penalties can be of a This definition comprises two key elements: the work or service is exacted under the menace of a penalty, it is undertaken involuntarily.

economic penalties linked to debts.

Work or Service Undertaken Involuntarily: This refers to the principle that all work relations should be founded on the mutual consent of the contracting parties.
It implies that both parties may leave the work relationship at any moment by providing the applicable notice period.

If the worker is prevented from leaving the work previously accepted voluntarily, it may be considered forced labour, starting from the moment the possibility of withdrawal has been denied.

Similarly, if the worker is made to work in circumstances where the agreement to work cannot have been freely given, this may also be considered forced labour.
Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 The International Labour Organization (ILO) has estimated that there are over 12 million people working under conditions of forced labour worldwide.

Children are believed to make up between 40 and 50 per cent of all forced labourers.

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (ILO Convention No.

29) The Convention concerns Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value.
Entry into force: 1 May 1932 Parties: 175 India ratified the Convention on 30 November 1954 Forced labour is any work or service which people are forced to do against their will, under the threat of some form of punishment.

Almost all slavery practices, including trafficking in people and bonded labour, contain some element of forced labour.
Forced labour is most frequently found in labour intensive and/or under-regulated industries, such as: Agriculture Domestic work Construction, mining, quarrying and brick kilns Manufacturing, processing and packaging Prostitution and sexual exploitation Market trading and illegal activities The Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No.
29) According to ILO Convention 29, forced labour is characterized by the presence of two key elements: Article 2(1) defines ‘forced Menace of Penalty: or compulsory labor’ as “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.” This definition comprises two key elements: the work or service is exacted under the menace of a penalty, it is undertaken involuntarily.
This may consist of punitive sanctions or the suppression of rights and privileges.

Coercion include use of violence, can physical obligations, psychological threats or even death.

Other penalties can be of a including financial nature, to linked economic penalties debts.

Work or Service Undertaken Involuntarily: should relations This refers to the principle that all be work founded on the mutual consent of the contracting parties.
It implies that both parties may leave the work relationship at any moment by providing the applicable notice period.

If the worker is prevented from leaving the work previously accepted voluntarily, it may be considered forced labour, starting from the moment the possibility of withdrawal has been denied.

Similarly, if the worker is made to work in circumstances where the agreement to work cannot have been freely given, this may also be considered forced labour.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 191 When defining forced labour, it is important to remember that it is determined by the nature of the relationship between a “worker” and an “employer”, and not by the type of activity performed.

Nor is the legality of the activity under national law relevant in determining whether or not the work is forced.

Forced labour can take many forms that can include debt bondage and slavery.
Compulsory work/service excluded from the purview of the Convention (Para 2) of Article 2 the Convention expressly excludes scope the the from Convention following the forms of compulsory work or service: of Compulsory military service Normal civic obligations Compulsory labour as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law Cases of emergency Minor communal In some cases, forced labour can be the outcome of human trafficking and, some jurisdictions, work performed by prisoners can also be considered forced labour.
in 1930, Under the Forced Labour certain Convention, forms of compulsory work or service, would which otherwise have fallen under the general definition of “forced compulsory labour”, are excluded from its scope.

These include: or (a) Compulsory military The Convention service: exempts “any work or service exacted of compulsory military service laws for work of a purely military character” from its purview.
virtue in (b) Normal civic obligations: The Convention also exempts “any work or service which forms part of 192 National Human Rights Commission, India the normal civic obligations of the citizens of a fully self-governing country.” Three ‘normal civic obligations’ are specifically mentioned in the Convention as exceptions from its scope, namely: compulsory military service, work or service in cases of emergency and minor communal services.
(c) Compulsory labour as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law: The Convention exempts from its provisions “any work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, provided that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority and that the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations”.
Compulsory labour excluded under this provision of the Convention may take the form of compulsory prison labour or labour exacted following the imposition of other kinds of penalty, such as a sentence of community work by a court of law, provided that: (i) the said work is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority; (ii) the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations; (d) Cases of emergency: The Convention exempts from its provisions “any work or service exacted in cases of emergency, that is to say, in the event of war or of a calamity or threatened calamity, such as fire, flood, famine, earthquake, violent epidemic or epizootic diseases, invasion by animal, insect or vegetable pests, and in general any circumstance that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population”.
(e) Minor communal services: The Convention also exempts from its provisions “minor communal services of a kind which, being performed by the members of the community in the direct interest of the said community, can therefore be considered as normal civic obligations incumbent upon the members of the community, provided that the members of the community or their direct representatives shall have the right to be consulted in regard to the need for such services”.
When defining forced labour, it is important to remember that it is determined by the nature of the relationship between a “worker” and an “employer”, and not by the type of activity performed.

Nor is the legality of the activity under national law relevant in determining whether or not the work is forced.

Forced labour can take many forms that can include debt bondage and slavery.
Compulsory work/service excluded from the purview trafficking and, in some In some cases, forced labour can be the outcome of human of the Convention Article 2 (Para 2) of the Convention expressly excludes from the scope of the Convention the following forms of compulsory work or service: Compulsory military service jurisdictions, work performed by prisoners can also be considered forced labour.
Under the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, certain forms of compulsory work or service, which would otherwise have fallen under the general definition of “forced or compulsory labour”, are excluded from its Normal civic obligations scope.
These include: Compulsory labour as a (a) Compulsory military consequence of a conviction in a court of law Cases of emergency service: The Convention exempts “any work or service exacted in virtue of compulsory military service laws for work of a purely military character” from its Minor communal purview.
(b) Normal civic obligations: The Convention also exempts “any work or service which forms part of the normal civic obligations of the citizens of a fully self-governing country.” Three ‘normal civic obligations’ are specifically mentioned in the Convention as exceptions from its scope, namely: compulsory military service, work or service in cases of emergency and minor communal services.
(c) Compulsory labour as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law: The Convention exempts from its provisions “any work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, provided that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority and that the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations”.
Compulsory labour excluded under this provision of the Convention may take the form of compulsory prison labour or labour exacted following the imposition of other kinds of penalty, such as a sentence of community work by a court of law, provided that: (i) the said work is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority; (ii) the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations; (d) Cases of emergency: The Convention exempts from its provisions “any work or service exacted in cases of emergency, that is to say, in the event of war or of a calamity or threatened calamity, such as fire, flood, famine, earthquake, violent epidemic or epizootic diseases, invasion by animal, insect or vegetable pests, and in general any circumstance that would endanger the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population”.
(e) Minor communal services: The Convention also exempts from its provisions “minor communal services of a kind which, being performed by the members of the community in the direct interest of the said community, can therefore be considered as normal civic obligations incumbent upon the members of the community, provided that the members of the community or their direct representatives shall have the right to be consulted in regard to the need for such services”.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 193 Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Democratic Republic of the Congo Country Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile Colombia Comoros Ratification date 25:06:1957 19:10:1962 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 14:03:1950 17:12:2004 02:01:1932 07:06:1960 19:05:1992 25:05:1976 11:06:1981 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 21:08:1956 20:01:1944 15:12:1983 12:12:1960 31:05:2005 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 25:04:1957 22:09:1932 21:11:1960 11:03:1963 24:02:1969 07:06:1960 13:06:2011 03:04:1979 27:10:1960 10:11:1960 31:05:1933 04:03:1969 23:10:1978 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 194 National Human Rights Commission, India Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Dominican Republic Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland 10:11:1960 20:09:1960 02:06:1960 21:11:1960 08:10:1991 20:07:1953 23:09:1960 01:01:1993 11:02:1932 03:08:1978 28:02:1983 05:12:1956 06:07:1954 29:11:1955 15:06:1995 13:08:2001 22:02:2000 07:02:1996 02:09:2003 19:04:1974 13:01:1936 24:06:1937 14:10:1960 04:09:2000 22:06:1997 13:06:1956 20:05:1957 13:06:1952 09:07:1979 13:06:1989 21:02:1977 21:01:1959 08:06:1966 04:03:1958 21:02:1957 08:06:1956 17:02:1958 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Ratification Status Antigua and Barbuda Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad Chile Colombia Comoros Central African Republic Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina date 25:06:1957 19:10:1962 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 14:03:1950 17:12:2004 02:01:1932 07:06:1960 19:05:1992 25:05:1976 11:06:1981 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 21:08:1956 20:01:1944 15:12:1983 12:12:1960 31:05:2005 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 25:04:1957 22:09:1932 21:11:1960 11:03:1963 24:02:1969 07:06:1960 13:06:2011 03:04:1979 27:10:1960 10:11:1960 31:05:1933 04:03:1969 23:10:1978 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Congo Albania Democratic Republic of the Congo Algeria Costa Rica Angola Côte d'Ivoire Antigua and Barbuda Croatia Argentina Cuba Armenia Cyprus Australia Czech Republic Austria Denmark Azerbaijan Djibouti Bahamas Dominica Bahrain Dominican Republic Bangladesh Ecuador Barbados Egypt Belarus El Salvador Belgium Equatorial Guinea Belize Eritrea Benin Estonia Plurinational State of Bolivia Ethiopia Bosnia and Herzegovina Fiji Botswana Finland Brazil France Bulgaria Gabon Burkina Faso Gambia Burundi Georgia
 Cambodia Germany Cameroon Ghana Canada Greece Cape Verde Grenada Central African Republic Guatemala Chad Guinea-Bissau Chile Guinea Colombia Guyana Comoros Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland Ratification date 10:11:1960 25:06:1957 20:09:1960 19:10:1962 02:06:1960 04:06:1976 21:11:1960 02:02:1983 08:10:1991 14:03:1950 20:07:1953 17:12:2004 23:09:1960 02:01:1932 01:01:1993 07:06:1960 11:02:1932 19:05:1992 03:08:1978 25:05:1976 28:02:1983 11:06:1981 05:12:1956 22:06:1972 06:07:1954 08:05:1967 29:11:1955 21:08:1956 15:06:1995 20:01:1944 13:08:2001 15:12:1983 22:02:2000 12:12:1960 07:02:1996 31:05:2005 02:09:2003 02:06:1993 19:04:1974 05:06:1997 13:01:1936 25:04:1957 24:06:1937 22:09:1932 14:10:1960 21:11:1960 04:09:2000 11:03:1963 22:06:1997 24:02:1969 13:06:1956 07:06:1960 20:05:1957 13:06:2011 13:06:1952 03:04:1979 09:07:1979 27:10:1960 13:06:1989 10:11:1960 21:02:1977 31:05:1933 21:01:1959 04:03:1969 08:06:1966 23:10:1978 04:03:1958 21:02:1957 08:06:1956 17:02:1958 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 195 Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country India Albania Indonesia Algeria The Islamic Republic of Iran Angola Iraq Antigua and Barbuda Ireland Argentina Israel Armenia Italy Australia Jamaica Austria Japan Azerbaijan Jordan Bahamas Kazakhstan Bahrain Kenya Bangladesh Kiribati
 Barbados Kuwait Belarus Kyrgyzstan Belgium Lao People's Democratic Republic Belize Latvia Benin Lebanon Plurinational State of Bolivia Lesotho Bosnia and Herzegovina Liberia Botswana Libya Brazil Lithuania Bulgaria Luxembourg Burkina Faso The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Burundi Madagascar Cambodia Malawi Cameroon Malaysia Canada Mali Cape Verde Malta Central African Republic Mauritania Chad Mauritius Chile Mexico Colombia Republic of Moldova Comoros Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Ratification date 30:11:1954 25:06:1957 12:06:1950 19:10:1962 10:06:1957 04:06:1976 27:11:1962 02:02:1983 02:03:1931 14:03:1950 07:06:1955 17:12:2004 18:06:1934 02:01:1932 26:12:1962 07:06:1960 21:11:1932 19:05:1992 06:06:1966 25:05:1976 18:05:2001 11:06:1981 13:01:1964 22:06:1972 03:02:2000 08:05:1967 23:09:1968 21:08:1956 31:03:1992 20:01:1944 23:01:1964 15:12:1983 02:06:2006 12:12:1960 01:06:1977 31:05:2005 31:10:1966 02:06:1993 01:05:1931 05:06:1997 13:06:1961 25:04:1957 26:09:1994 22:09:1932 24:07:1964 21:11:1960 17:11:1991 11:03:1963 01:11:1960 24:02:1969 19:11:1999 07:06:1960 11:11:1957 13:06:2011 22:09:1960 03:04:1979 04:01:1965 27:10:1960 20:06:1961 10:11:1960 02:12:1969 31:05:1933 12:05:1934 04:03:1969 23:03:2000 23:10:1978 15:03:2005 03:06:2006 20:05:1957 16:06:2003 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified 196 National Human Rights Commission, India Myanmar Namibia Nepal
 Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Rwanda Papua New Guinea Russian Federation Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tome and Principe Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands 04:03:1955 15:11:2000 03:01:2002 31:03:1933 29:03:1938 12:04:1934 27:02:1961 17:10:1960 01:07:1932 30:10:1998 23:12:1957 16:05:1966 01:05:1976 28:08:1967 01:02:1960 15:07:2005 30:07:1958 26:06:1956 12:03:1998 28:05:1957 23:06:1956 23:05:2001 12:10:2000 14:05:1980 21:10:1998 30:06:2008 01:02:1995 04:05:2005 15:06:1978 04:11:1960 24:11:2000 06:02:1978 13:06:1961 25:10:1965 01:01:1993 29:05:1992 06:08:1985 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Lao People's Democratic Republic The Islamic Republic of Iran India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Republic of Moldova 30:11:1954 12:06:1950 10:06:1957 27:11:1962 02:03:1931 07:06:1955 18:06:1934 26:12:1962 21:11:1932 06:06:1966 18:05:2001 13:01:1964 03:02:2000 23:09:1968 31:03:1992 23:01:1964 02:06:2006 01:06:1977 31:10:1966 01:05:1931 13:06:1961 26:09:1994 24:07:1964 01:11:1960 19:11:1999 11:11:1957 22:09:1960 04:01:1965 20:06:1961 02:12:1969 12:05:1934 23:03:2000 15:03:2005 03:06:2006 20:05:1957 16:06:2003 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 17:11:1991 Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Myanmar Albania Namibia Algeria Nepal Angola Netherlands Antigua and Barbuda New Zealand Argentina Nicaragua Armenia Niger Australia Nigeria Austria Norway Azerbaijan Oman Bahamas Pakistan Bahrain Panama Bangladesh Papua New Guinea Barbados Paraguay Belarus Peru Belgium Philippines Belize Poland Benin Portugal Plurinational State of Bolivia Qatar Bosnia and Herzegovina Romania Botswana Russian Federation Brazil Rwanda Bulgaria Saint Kitts and Nevis Burkina Faso Saint Lucia Burundi Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Cambodia Samoa Cameroon San Marino Canada Sao Tome and Principe Cape Verde Saudi Arabia Central African Republic Senegal Chad Serbia Chile Seychelles Colombia Sierra Leone Comoros Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Ratification date 04:03:1955 25:06:1957 15:11:2000 19:10:1962 03:01:2002 04:06:1976 31:03:1933 02:02:1983 29:03:1938 14:03:1950 12:04:1934 17:12:2004 27:02:1961 02:01:1932 17:10:1960 07:06:1960 01:07:1932 19:05:1992 30:10:1998 25:05:1976 23:12:1957 11:06:1981 16:05:1966 22:06:1972 01:05:1976 08:05:1967 28:08:1967 21:08:1956 01:02:1960 20:01:1944 15:07:2005 15:12:1983 30:07:1958 12:12:1960 26:06:1956 31:05:2005 12:03:1998 02:06:1993 28:05:1957 05:06:1997 23:06:1956 25:04:1957 23:05:2001 22:09:1932 12:10:2000 21:11:1960 14:05:1980 11:03:1963 21:10:1998 24:02:1969 30:06:2008 07:06:1960 01:02:1995 13:06:2011 04:05:2005 03:04:1979 15:06:1978 27:10:1960 04:11:1960 10:11:1960 24:11:2000 31:05:1933 06:02:1978 04:03:1969 13:06:1961 23:10:1978 25:10:1965 01:01:1993 29:05:1992 06:08:1985 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 197 Convention on Forced Labour, 1930 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Somalia Albania South Africa Algeria Spain Angola Sri Lanka Antigua and Barbuda Sudan Argentina Suriname Armenia Swaziland Australia Sweden Austria Switzerland Azerbaijan Syrian Arab Republic Bahamas Tajikistan Bahrain Tanzania United Republic of Bangladesh Thailand Barbados Timor-Leste Belarus Togo Belgium Trinidad and Tobago Belize Tunisia Benin Turkey Plurinational State of Bolivia Turkmenistan Bosnia and Herzegovina Uganda Botswana Ukraine Brazil United Arab Emirates Bulgaria United Kingdom Burkina Faso Uruguay Burundi Uzbekistan Cambodia Vanuatu Cameroon Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Canada Viet Nam Cape Verde Yemen Central African Republic Zambia Chad Zimbabwe Chile Colombia Comoros Ratification date 18:11:1960 25:06:1957 05:03:1997 19:10:1962 29:08:1932 04:06:1976 05:04:1950 02:02:1983 18:06:1957 14:03:1950 15:06:1976 17:12:2004 26:04:1978 02:01:1932 22:12:1931 07:06:1960 23:05:1940 19:05:1992 26:07:1960 25:05:1976 26:11:1993 11:06:1981 30:01:1962 22:06:1972 26:02:1969 08:05:1967 16:06:2009 21:08:1956 07:06:1960 20:01:1944 24:05:1963 15:12:1983 17:12:1962 12:12:1960 30:10:1998 31:05:2005 15:05:1997 02:06:1993 04:06:1963 05:06:1997 10:08:1956 25:04:1957 27:05:1982 22:09:1932 03:06:1931 21:11:1960 06:09:1995 11:03:1963 13:07:1992 24:02:1969 28:08:2006 07:06:1960 20:11:1944 13:06:2011 05:03:2007 03:04:1979
 14:04:1969 27:10:1960 02:12:1964 10:11:1960 27:08:1998 31:05:1933 04:03:1969 23:10:1978 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 198 National Human Rights Commission, India Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 The most fundamental rights of workers include the right to form and join organizations of their own choosing and to promote and defend their economic and social interests.
These conventions give the same rights to employers.

Convention 87 gives workers the right to form and join trade unions.

Freedom of association is considered the most fundamental of labor standards within ILO.

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 (ILO Convention No.

87) ILO Convention No.


87 establishes the right of all workers and employers to form and join organizations of their own choosing without prior authorization, and lays down a series of guarantees for the free functioning of organizations without interference by the public authorities.

Entry into force: 04 July 1950 Parties: 150 Monitoring Body: Committee on Freedom of Association India has not ratified the Convention.
The standards on freedom of association for trade union purposes have a special place in international labour law, as it is an essential means for workers to defend their interests and a particular aspect of right of association in general, and is therefore considered among the fundamental human rights.

Moreover it has a special importance because of the tripartite structure of the ILO.

As early as 1919, freedom of association was mentioned in the constitutional provisions of the ILO.
The Preamble of Part XIII of the Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania United Republic of Trinidad and Tobago Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 18:11:1960 05:03:1997 29:08:1932 05:04:1950 18:06:1957 15:06:1976 26:04:1978 22:12:1931 23:05:1940 26:07:1960 26:11:1993 30:01:1962 26:02:1969 16:06:2009 07:06:1960 24:05:1963 17:12:1962 30:10:1998 15:05:1997 04:06:1963 10:08:1956 27:05:1982 03:06:1931 06:09:1995 13:07:1992 28:08:2006 20:11:1944 05:03:2007 14:04:1969 02:12:1964 27:08:1998 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 The most fundamental rights of workers include the right to form and join organizations of their own choosing and to promote and defend their economic and social interests.
These conventions give the same rights to employers.

Convention 87 gives workers the right to form and join trade unions.

Freedom of association is considered the most fundamental of labor standards within ILO.

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 (ILO Convention No.

87) ILO Convention No.


87 establishes the right of all workers and employers to form and join organizations of their own choosing without prior authorization, and lays down a series of guarantees for the free functioning of organizations without interference by the public authorities.

Entry into force: 04 July 1950 Parties: 150 Monitoring Body: Committee on Freedom of Association India has not ratified the Convention.
The standards on freedom of association for trade union purposes have a special place in international labour law, as it is an essential means for workers to defend their interests and a particular aspect of right of association in general, and is therefore considered among the fundamental human rights.

Moreover it has a special importance because of the tripartite structure of the ILO.

As early as 1919, freedom of association was mentioned in the constitutional provisions of the ILO.
The Preamble of Part XIII of the A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 199 Treaty of Versailles listed the ‘recognition of principle of freedom of association’ among the objectives of the Organisation and the General principles enunciated in Article 426 contained a provision on ‘the right of association for all lawful purposes by the employed as well as by the employers’.
KEY PROVISIONS Rights of Workers and Employers to Establish or Join Organisations Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, have the right to establish and to join organizations of their own choosing with a view to furthering and defending their respective interests.

Regarding the armed forces and the police, however, national legislation shall determine the extent to which the guarantees provided in the Convention shall apply.
Article 2 states, “Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and, subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation.” The scope of this article is very wide because of the reference to workers ‘without any distinction whatsoever’.

The right hereunder is available to workers & employers of both public and private sectors.
Its guarantee is without any discrimination on the basis of sex, color, race, other parochial considerations.

creed, nationality, origin-based or There is a freedom of choice afforded to the workers and employers, as regards the organizations of which they can become a part.

Hence, a legal provision inhibiting this would be at an inconsistency with the Convention.

However, this may be difficult to achieve as in many countries, the legislation allows for trade union monopoly.
But the Convention’s prime motive is not to make union diversity obligatory.

Recognition of multiple trade unions, if done objectively and in an independent manner, in particular, as having some rights, inter alia, the right of collective bargaining, would not be contrary to the Convention.
200 National Human Rights Commission, India Rights and Guarantees to Organisations Such organisations have the right to draw up their own constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organize their respective administration and activities and to formulate their programmes.

Public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict their right or impede the lawful exercise of this right.
Article 3(1) states, “Workers' and employers' organisations shall have the right to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organise their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes.” Freedom of Action The freedom of action of occupational organizations depends to a great extent on the civil liberties which are recognized in the country concerned viz.
right to freedom and security of person and freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention; freedom to hold opinions without interference; right to protection of property of such organizations etc.

Article 3(2) states, “The public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.” Protection from Dissolution The Convention provides organizations protection against arbitrary dissolution or suspension by administrative authority.
The purpose of this guarantee is to ensure that dissolution or suspension is surrounded by requisite guarantees which are normally ensured by judicial procedure.

Article 4 states, “Workers' and employers' organisations shall not be liable to be dissolved or suspended by administrative authority.” Right to Establish and Join Federations Article 5 of the Convention grants organisations the right to establish and join federations and confederations which shall enjoy the same rights and guarantees.
The Convention also provides for the right to affiliate with international organizations.

Treaty of Versailles listed the ‘recognition of principle of freedom of association’ among the objectives of the Organisation and the General principles enunciated in Article 426 contained a provision on ‘the right of association for all lawful purposes by the employed as well as by the employers’.
KEY PROVISIONS Organisations Rights of Workers and Employers to Establish or Join Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, have the right to establish and to join organizations of their own choosing with a view to furthering and defending their respective interests.

Regarding the armed forces and the police, however, national legislation shall determine the extent to which the guarantees provided in the Convention shall apply.
Article 2 states, “Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and, subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation.” The scope of this article is very wide because of the reference to workers ‘without any distinction whatsoever’.

The right hereunder is available to workers & employers of both public and private sectors.
Its guarantee is without any discrimination on the basis of sex, color, race, creed, nationality, origin-based or other parochial considerations.

There is a freedom of choice afforded to the workers and employers, as regards the organizations of which they can become a part.

Hence, a legal provision inhibiting this would be at an inconsistency with the Convention.

However, this may be difficult to achieve as in many countries, the legislation allows for trade union monopoly.
But the Convention’s prime motive is not to make union diversity obligatory.

Recognition of multiple trade unions, if done objectively and in an independent manner, in particular, as having some rights, inter alia, the right of collective bargaining, would not be contrary to the Convention.
Rights and Guarantees to Organisations Such organisations have the right to draw up their own constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organize their respective administration and activities and to formulate their programmes.

Public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict their right or impede the lawful exercise of this right.
Article 3(1) states, “Workers' and employers' organisations shall have the right to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organise their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes.” Freedom of Action The freedom of action of occupational organizations depends to a great extent on the civil liberties which are recognized in the country concerned viz.
right to freedom and security of person and freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention; freedom to hold opinions without interference; right to protection of property of such organizations etc.

Article 3(2) states, “The public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.” Protection from Dissolution The Convention provides organizations protection against arbitrary dissolution or suspension by administrative authority.
The purpose of this guarantee is to ensure that dissolution or suspension is surrounded by requisite guarantees which are normally ensured by judicial procedure.

Article 4 states, “Workers' and employers' organisations shall not be liable to be dissolved or suspended by administrative authority.” Right to Establish and Join Federations Article 5 of the Convention grants organisations the right to establish and join federations and confederations which shall enjoy the same rights and guarantees.
The Convention also provides for the right to affiliate with international organizations.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 201 Acquisition of legal personality The Convention provides that the acquisition of legal personality by all these organizations will not be subject to restrictive conditions.
Article 7 states, “The acquisition of legal personality by workers' and employers' organisations, federations and confederations shall not be made subject to conditions of such a character as to restrict the application of the provisions of Articles 2, 3 and 4 hereof.” Right to Strike Although the Convention doesn’t expressly deal with the right to strike, on the basis of Articles 3, 8 and 10 of the Convention, the Committee of Experts has considered that a general prohibition of strikes constitutes a considerable restriction of the opportunities open to trade unions for furthering and defending the interests of members and of the right to trade unions to organize their activities.
The supervisory bodies of ILO on the question of strike and political activities hold the view that States should be able, without prohibiting a priori and in general terms all political activity by occupational organizations, to entrust to the judical authorities the in certain cases, be task of repressing abuses which might, committed by organiations which had lost sight of the fact that their prime object should be economic and social advancement of their members.
The Freedom of Association Committee has also stressed repeatedly, when examining various complaints on the matter, that ‘ the right to strike by workers and their organizations is generally recognized as a legitimate means of defending their occupational interests, albeit subject to certain restrictions viz.

in civil service, in essential services, in emergencies etc.
There should be adequate guarantees to safeguard the interests of workers, which should take the form of adequate, impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration proceedings.
202 National Human Rights Commission, India Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Ratification Status Antigua and Barbuda Country Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad Chile Colombia Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Central African Republic date 03:06:1957 19:10:1962 13:06:2001 02:02:1983 18:01:1960 02:01:2006 28:02:1973 18:10:1950 19:05:1992 14:06:2001 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 06:11:1956 23:10:1951 15:12:1983 12:12:1960 04:01:1965 02:06:1993 22:12:1997 08:06:1959 21:11:1960 25:06:1993 23:08:1999 07:06:1960 23:03:1972 01:02:1999 27:10:1960 10:11:1960 01:02:1999 16:11:1976 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Acquisition of legal personality The Convention provides that the acquisition of legal personality by all these organizations will not be subject to restrictive conditions.
Article 7 states, “The acquisition of legal personality by workers' and employers' organisations, federations and confederations shall not be made subject to conditions of such a character as to restrict the application of the provisions of Articles 2, 3 and 4 hereof.” Right to Strike Although the Convention doesn’t expressly deal with the right to strike, on the basis of Articles 3, 8 and 10 of the Convention, the Committee of Experts has considered that a general prohibition of strikes constitutes a considerable restriction of the opportunities open to trade unions for furthering and defending the interests of members and of the right to trade unions to organize their activities.
The supervisory bodies of ILO on the question of strike and political activities hold the view that States should be able, without prohibiting a priori and in general terms all political activity by occupational organizations, to entrust to the judical authorities the task of repressing abuses which might, in certain cases, be committed by organiations which had lost sight of the fact that their prime object should be economic and social advancement of their members.
The Freedom of Association Committee has also stressed repeatedly, when examining various complaints on the matter, that ‘ the right to strike by workers and their organizations is generally recognized as a legitimate means of defending their occupational interests, albeit subject to certain restrictions viz.

in civil service, in essential services, in emergencies etc.
There should be adequate guarantees to safeguard the interests of workers, which should take the form of adequate, impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration proceedings.
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile Colombia Ratification date 03:06:1957 19:10:1962 13:06:2001 02:02:1983 18:01:1960 02:01:2006 28:02:1973 18:10:1950 19:05:1992 14:06:2001 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 06:11:1956 23:10:1951 15:12:1983 12:12:1960 04:01:1965 02:06:1993 22:12:1997 08:06:1959 21:11:1960 25:06:1993 23:08:1999 07:06:1960 23:03:1972 01:02:1999 27:10:1960 10:11:1960 01:02:1999 16:11:1976 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 203 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Comoros Algeria Congo Angola Democratic Republic of the Congo Antigua and Barbuda Costa Rica Argentina Côte d'Ivoire Armenia Croatia Australia Cuba Austria Cyprus Azerbaijan Czech Republic Bahamas Denmark Bangladesh Djibouti Barbados Dominica Belarus Dominican Republic Belgium Ecuador Belize Egypt Benin El Salvador Plurinational State of Bolivia Equatorial Guinea Bosnia and Herzegovina Eritrea Botswana Estonia Bulgaria Ethiopia Burkina Faso Fiji Burundi Finland Cambodia France Cameroon Gabon Canada Gambia Cape Verde Georgia Central African Republic Germany Chad Ghana Chile Greece Colombia Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Ratification date 03:06:1957 23:10:1978 19:10:1962 10:11:1960 13:06:2001 20:06:2001 02:02:1983 02:06:1960 18:01:1960
 21:11:1960 02:01:2006 08:10:1991 28:02:1973 25:06:1952 18:10:1950 24:05:1966 19:05:1992 01:01:1993 14:06:2001 13:06:1951 22:06:1972 03:08:1978 08:05:1967 28:02:1983 06:11:1956 05:12:1956 23:10:1951 29:05:1967 15:12:1983 06:11:1957 12:12:1960 06:09:2006 04:01:1965 13:08:2001 02:06:1993 22:02:2000 22:12:1997 22:03:1994 08:06:1959 04:06:1963 21:11:1960 17:04:2002 25:06:1993 20:01:1950 23:08:1999 28:06:1951 07:06:1960 14:10:1960 23:03:1972 04:09:2000 01:02:1999 03:08:1999 27:10:1960 20:03:1957 10:11:1960 02:06:1965 01:02:1999 30:03:1962 16:11:1976 25:10:1994 13:02:1952 21:01:1959 25:09:1967 05:06:1979 27:06:1956 06:06:1957 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 204 National Human Rights Commission, India The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 17:11:1991 Iceland Indonesia Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Kiribati Kuwait Latvia Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Mongolia Montenegro Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Netherlands Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Republic of Moldova 19:08:1950 09:06:1998 04:06:1955 28:01:1957 13:05:1958 26:12:1962 14:06:1965 13:12:2000 03:02:2000 21:09:1961 31:03:1992 27:01:1992 31:10:1966 25:05:1962 04:10:2000 26:09:1994 03:03:1958 01:11:1960 19:11:1999 22:09:1960 04:01:1965 20:06:1961 01:04:2005 01:04:1950 12:08:1996 03:06:1969 03:06:2006 23:12:1996 04:03:1955 03:01:1995 07:03:1950 31:10:1967 27:02:1961
 17:10:1960 04:07:1949 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Democratic Republic of the Congo Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Dominican Republic Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary 23:10:1978 10:11:1960 20:06:2001 02:06:1960 21:11:1960 08:10:1991 25:06:1952 24:05:1966 01:01:1993 13:06:1951 03:08:1978 28:02:1983 05:12:1956 29:05:1967 06:11:1957 06:09:2006 13:08:2001 22:02:2000 22:03:1994 04:06:1963 17:04:2002 20:01:1950 28:06:1951 14:10:1960 04:09:2000 03:08:1999 20:03:1957 02:06:1965 30:03:1962 25:10:1994 13:02:1952 21:01:1959 25:09:1967 05:06:1979 27:06:1956 06:06:1957 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Iceland Algeria Indonesia Angola Ireland Antigua and Barbuda Israel Argentina Italy Armenia Jamaica Australia Japan Austria Kazakhstan Azerbaijan Kiribati Bahamas Kuwait Bangladesh Kyrgyzstan Barbados Latvia Belarus Lesotho Belgium Liberia Belize Libya Benin Lithuania Plurinational State of Bolivia Luxembourg Bosnia and Herzegovina The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Botswana Madagascar Bulgaria Malawi Burkina Faso Mali Burundi Malta Cambodia
 Mauritania Cameroon Mauritius Canada Mexico Cape Verde Republic of Moldova Central African Republic Mongolia Chad Montenegro Chile Mozambique Colombia Myanmar Namibia Netherlands Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Ratification date 03:06:1957 19:08:1950 19:10:1962 09:06:1998 13:06:2001 04:06:1955 02:02:1983 28:01:1957 18:01:1960 13:05:1958 02:01:2006 26:12:1962 28:02:1973 14:06:1965 18:10:1950 13:12:2000 19:05:1992 03:02:2000 14:06:2001 21:09:1961 22:06:1972 31:03:1992 08:05:1967 27:01:1992 06:11:1956 31:10:1966 23:10:1951 25:05:1962 15:12:1983 04:10:2000 12:12:1960 26:09:1994 04:01:1965 03:03:1958 02:06:1993 17:11:1991 22:12:1997 01:11:1960 08:06:1959 19:11:1999 21:11:1960 22:09:1960 25:06:1993 04:01:1965 23:08:1999 20:06:1961 07:06:1960 01:04:2005 23:03:1972 01:04:1950 01:02:1999 12:08:1996 27:10:1960 03:06:1969 10:11:1960 03:06:2006 01:02:1999 23:12:1996 16:11:1976 04:03:1955 03:01:1995 07:03:1950 31:10:1967 27:02:1961 17:10:1960 04:07:1949 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 205 Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan United Kingdom Uruguay Vanuatu Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela 18:06:1957 12:07:1993 15:05:1997 02:06:2005 14:09:1956 27:06:1949 18:03:1954 28:08:2006 20:09:1982 29:07:1976 02:09:1996 09:04:2003 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Freedom of
 Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Pakistan Algeria Panama Angola Papua New Guinea Antigua and Barbuda Paraguay Argentina Peru Armenia Philippines Australia Poland Austria Portugal Azerbaijan Romania Bahamas Russian Federation Bangladesh Rwanda Barbados Saint Kitts and Nevis Belarus Saint Lucia Belgium Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Belize Samoa Benin San Marino Plurinational State of Bolivia Sao Tome and Principe Bosnia and Herzegovina Senegal Botswana Serbia Bulgaria Seychelles Burkina Faso Sierra Leone Burundi Slovakia Cambodia Slovenia Cameroon South Africa Canada Spain Cape Verde Sri Lanka Central African Republic Suriname Chad Swaziland Chile Sweden Colombia Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania United Republic of Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago Ratification date 03:06:1957 14:02:1951 19:10:1962 03:06:1958 13:06:2001 02:06:2000 02:02:1983 28:06:1962 18:01:1960 02:03:1960 02:01:2006 29:12:1953 28:02:1973 25:02:1957 18:10:1950 14:10:1977 19:05:1992 28:05:1957 14:06:2001 10:08:1956 22:06:1972 08:11:1988 08:05:1967 25:08:2000 06:11:1956 14:05:1980 23:10:1951 09:11:2001 15:12:1983 30:06:2008 12:12:1960 19:12:1986 04:01:1965 17:06:1992 02:06:1993 04:11:1960 22:12:1997 24:11:2000 08:06:1959 06:02:1978 21:11:1960 15:06:1961 25:06:1993 01:01:1993 23:08:1999 29:05:1992 07:06:1960 19:02:1996 23:03:1972 20:04:1977 01:02:1999 15:09:1995 27:10:1960 15:06:1976 10:11:1960 26:04:1978 01:02:1999 25:11:1949 16:11:1976 25:03:1975 26:07:1960 26:11:1993 18:04:2000 16:06:2009 07:06:1960 24:05:1963 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 206 National Human Rights Commission, India Papua New Guinea Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tome and Principe Samoa San Marino Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania United Republic of Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago 14:02:1951 03:06:1958 02:06:2000 28:06:1962 02:03:1960 29:12:1953 25:02:1957 14:10:1977 28:05:1957 10:08:1956 08:11:1988 25:08:2000 14:05:1980 09:11:2001 30:06:2008 19:12:1986 17:06:1992 04:11:1960 24:11:2000 06:02:1978 15:06:1961 01:01:1993 29:05:1992 19:02:1996 20:04:1977 15:09:1995 15:06:1976 26:04:1978 25:11:1949 25:03:1975 26:07:1960 26:11:1993 18:04:2000 16:06:2009 07:06:1960 24:05:1963 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, 1948 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Tunisia Algeria Turkey Angola Turkmenistan Antigua and Barbuda Uganda Argentina Ukraine Armenia United Kingdom Australia Uruguay Austria Vanuatu Azerbaijan Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Bahamas Yemen Bangladesh Zambia Barbados Zimbabwe Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile
 Colombia Ratification date 03:06:1957 18:06:1957 19:10:1962 12:07:1993 13:06:2001 15:05:1997 02:02:1983 02:06:2005 18:01:1960 14:09:1956 02:01:2006 27:06:1949 28:02:1973 18:03:1954 18:10:1950 28:08:2006 19:05:1992 20:09:1982 14:06:2001 29:07:1976 22:06:1972 02:09:1996 08:05:1967 09:04:2003 06:11:1956 23:10:1951 15:12:1983 12:12:1960 04:01:1965 02:06:1993 22:12:1997 08:06:1959 21:11:1960 25:06:1993 23:08:1999 07:06:1960 23:03:1972 01:02:1999 27:10:1960 10:11:1960 01:02:1999 16:11:1976 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 207 Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining are the foundations for a process in which workers and employers make claims upon each other and resolve leading to collective them through a process of negotiation agreements that are mutually beneficial; in the process, different interests are reconciled.
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 (ILO Convention No.

98) ILO Convention No.

98 lays down the key principles of the right to organize and bargain collectively and provides the protection that workers and their organizations need against acts of anti-union discrimination and of interference by either public authorities or employers.
Entry into force: 18 July 1951 Parties: 160 India has not ratified the Convention The Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (ILO Convention No.
98), provides in the first place (Article 1) that “workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment.” This provision aims at protecting workers and trade union leaders against victimization by their employers, both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of their employment relationship.

The Convention lays down the obligations of ratifying states to freedom of association and collective respect and promote bargaining.
Not only does the Convention establish the right of a trade union to exist, it also defines its purpose, which is to negotiate with employers “with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment by means of collective agreements.” 208 National Human Rights Commission, India Key Provisions ILO Convention No.
98 contains the following key provisions: Workers must be protected against acts of anti-union discrimination, such as [Article 1]: (i) Making their employment subject to the condition that they This Convention provides for protection against anti- union discrimination, for protection of workers’ and employers’ organizations, against acts of interference by each other, and for measures to promote and shall not join a union or shall encourage collective relinquish membership thereof; bargaining.
(ii) Causing the dismissal or otherwise prejudice a worker by reason of union membership, participation in union activities outside working hours, or, with The Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No.

98) is the consent of the employer, always cited together with within working hours.

 Workers’ and employers’ organizations must enjoy adequate protection against any acts of interference by each other [Article 2].
Measures to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of the ILO Convention on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize, 1948 (No.

87).

Together, these conventions are referred to as the twin machinery for voluntary negotiations conventions on “freedom of with regard to employment contracts, and to collective agreements [Article 4].
The Convention leaves it to national laws or regulations to determine the extent to which it applies to the armed forces and the police.

Furthermore, it association and collective bargaining”.

These conventions grant workers their most fundamental rights—the right to form does not deal with the position of and join organizations of public servants engaged in the administration of the State [Article 5].

their own choosing and to promote and defend their economic and social interests.
These conventions grant the same rights to employers.

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining are the foundations for a process in which workers and employers make claims upon each other and resolve them through a process of negotiation leading to collective agreements that are mutually beneficial; in the process, different interests are reconciled.
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 (ILO Convention No.

98) ILO Convention No.

98 lays down the key principles of the right to organize and bargain collectively and provides the protection that workers and their organizations need against acts of anti-union discrimination and of interference by either public authorities or employers.
Entry into force: 18 July 1951 Parties: 160 India has not ratified the Convention The Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (ILO Convention No.
98), provides in the first place (Article 1) that “workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment.” This provision aims at protecting workers and trade union leaders against victimization by their employers, both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of their employment relationship.

The Convention lays down the obligations of ratifying states to respect and promote freedom of association and collective bargaining.
Not only does the Convention establish the right of a trade union to exist, it also defines its purpose, which is to negotiate with employers “with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment by means of collective agreements.” Key Provisions ILO Convention No.
98 contains following key provisions: the Workers must be protected against acts of anti-union discrimination, such as [Article 1]: (i) Making their employment subject to the condition that they shall not join a union or shall relinquish membership thereof; This Convention provides for protection against anti- union discrimination, for protection of workers’ and employers’ organizations, against acts of interference by each other, and for measures to promote and encourage collective bargaining.
(ii) Causing the dismissal or otherwise prejudice a worker by reason of union membership, participation in union activities outside working hours, or, with the consent of the employer, within working hours.

 Workers’ and employers’ organizations must enjoy adequate protection against any acts of interference by each other [Article 2].

The Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No.
98) is always cited together with the ILO Convention on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize, 1948 (No.

87).

Together, these conventions are referred to as the twin conventions on “freedom of association and collective These bargaining”.

conventions grant workers their most fundamental rights—the right to form and join organizations of their own choosing and to promote and defend their economic and social interests.

These conventions grant the same rights to employers.
The Convention leaves it to national laws or regulations to determine the extent to which it applies to the armed forces and the police.

Furthermore, it does not deal with the position of public the administration of the State [Article 5].

 Measures to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiations with regard to employment contracts, and to collective agreements [Article 4].
engaged servants in A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 209 ‘Freedom of association’ applies to both employers and workers in formal and informal economies.

It is considered an “enabling” right in that it allows key actors in the economy to join together to pursue their interests.
While Convention 87 gives workers the right to form and join trade unions, Convention 98 consolidates this basic right with guarantees and safeguards for trade unions to operate freely and independently of governments and employers.

Further, Convention 98 lays down the key principles of the right to organize and bargain collectively.

It provides the protection that workers and their organizations need against acts of anti-union discrimination and of interference by either public authorities or employers.
210 National Human Rights Commission, India Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Ratification Status Antigua and Barbuda Country Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Chad Chile Colombia Comoros Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Central African Republic date 03:06:1957 19:10:1962 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 24:09:1956 12:11:2003 28:02:1973 10:11:1951 19:05:1992 25:05:1976 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 06:11:1956 10:12:1953 15:12:1983 16:05:1968 15:11:1973 02:06:1993 22:12:1997 18:11:1952 08:06:1959 16:04:1962 10:10:1997 23:08:1999 03:09:1962 03:04:1979 09:06:1964 08:06:1961 01:02:1999 16:11:1976 23:10:1978 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ‘Freedom of association’ applies to both employers and workers in formal and informal economies.
It is considered an “enabling” right in that it allows key actors in the economy to join together to pursue their interests.

While Convention 87 gives workers the right to form and join trade unions, Convention 98 consolidates this basic right with guarantees and safeguards for trade unions to operate freely and independently of governments and employers.

Further, Convention 98 lays down the key principles of the right to organize and bargain collectively.
It provides the protection that workers and their organizations need against acts of anti-union discrimination and of interference by either public authorities or employers.
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile Colombia Comoros Ratification date 03:06:1957 19:10:1962 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 24:09:1956 12:11:2003 28:02:1973 10:11:1951 19:05:1992 25:05:1976 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 06:11:1956 10:12:1953 15:12:1983 16:05:1968 15:11:1973 02:06:1993 22:12:1997 18:11:1952 08:06:1959 16:04:1962 10:10:1997 23:08:1999 03:09:1962 03:04:1979 09:06:1964 08:06:1961 01:02:1999 16:11:1976 23:10:1978 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 211 Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Congo Algeria Democratic Republic of the Congo Angola Costa Rica Antigua and Barbuda Côte d'Ivoire Argentina Croatia Armenia Cuba Australia Cyprus Austria Czech Republic Azerbaijan Denmark Bahamas Djibouti Bangladesh Dominica Barbados Dominican Republic Belarus Ecuador Belgium Egypt Belize El Salvador Benin Equatorial Guinea Plurinational State of Bolivia Eritrea Bosnia and Herzegovina Estonia Botswana Ethiopia Brazil Fiji Bulgaria Finland Burkina Faso France Burundi Gabon Cambodia Gambia Cameroon Georgia Cape Verde Germany Central African Republic Ghana Chad Greece Chile Grenada Colombia Guatemala Comoros Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Ratification date 03:06:1957 26:11:1999 19:10:1962 16:06:1969 04:06:1976 02:06:1960 02:02:1983 05:05:1961 24:09:1956
 08:10:1991 12:11:2003 29:04:1952 28:02:1973 24:05:1966 10:11:1951 01:01:1993 19:05:1992 15:08:1955 25:05:1976 03:08:1978 22:06:1972 28:02:1983 08:05:1967 22:09:1953 06:11:1956 28:05:1959 10:12:1953 03:07:1954 15:12:1983 06:09:2006 16:05:1968 13:08:2001 15:11:1973 22:02:2000 02:06:1993 22:03:1994 22:12:1997 04:06:1963 18:11:1952 19:04:1974 08:06:1959 22:12:1951 16:04:1962 26:10:1951 10:10:1997 29:05:1961 23:08:1999 04:09:2000 03:09:1962 22:06:1993 03:04:1979 08:06:1956 09:06:1964 02:07:1959 08:06:1961 30:03:1962 01:02:1999 09:07:1979 16:11:1976 13:02:1952 23:10:1978 21:02:1977 26:03:1959 08:06:1966 12:04:1957 27:06:1956 06:06:1957 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 212 National Human Rights Commission, India Iceland Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Republic of Moldova The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 15:07:1952 15:07:1957 27:11:1962 04:06:1955 28:01:1957 13:05:1958 26:12:1962 20:10:1953 12:12:1968 18:05:2001 13:01:1964 03:02:2000 09:08:2007 31:03:1992 27:01:1992 01:06:1977 31:10:1966 25:05:1962 20:06:1962 26:09:1994 03:03:1958 17:11:1991 03:06:1998 22:03:1965 05:06:1961 02:03:1964 04:01:1965 03:12:2001 02:12:1969 12:08:1996 03:06:1969 03:06:2006 20:05:1957
 23:12:1996 03:01:1995 11:11:1996 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Democratic Republic of the Congo Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Denmark Djibouti Dominica Czech Republic Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary 26:11:1999 16:06:1969 02:06:1960 05:05:1961 08:10:1991 29:04:1952 24:05:1966 01:01:1993 15:08:1955 03:08:1978 28:02:1983 22:09:1953 28:05:1959 03:07:1954 06:09:2006 13:08:2001 22:02:2000 22:03:1994 04:06:1963 19:04:1974 22:12:1951 26:10:1951 29:05:1961 04:09:2000 22:06:1993 08:06:1956 02:07:1959 30:03:1962 09:07:1979 13:02:1952 21:02:1977 26:03:1959 08:06:1966 12:04:1957 27:06:1956 06:06:1957 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Iceland Algeria Indonesia Angola Iraq Antigua and Barbuda Ireland Argentina Israel Armenia Italy Australia Jamaica Austria Japan Azerbaijan Jordan Bahamas Kazakhstan Bangladesh Kenya Barbados Kiribati Belarus Kuwait Belgium Kyrgyzstan Belize Latvia Benin Lebanon Plurinational State of Bolivia Lesotho Bosnia and Herzegovina Liberia Botswana Libya Brazil Lithuania Bulgaria Luxembourg Burkina Faso The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Burundi Madagascar
 Cambodia Malawi Cameroon Malaysia Cape Verde Mali Central African Republic Malta Chad Mauritania Chile Mauritius Colombia Republic of Moldova Comoros Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Ratification date 03:06:1957 15:07:1952 19:10:1962 15:07:1957 04:06:1976 27:11:1962 02:02:1983 04:06:1955 24:09:1956 28:01:1957 12:11:2003 13:05:1958 28:02:1973 26:12:1962 10:11:1951 20:10:1953 19:05:1992 12:12:1968 25:05:1976 18:05:2001 22:06:1972 13:01:1964 08:05:1967 03:02:2000 06:11:1956 09:08:2007 10:12:1953 31:03:1992 15:12:1983 27:01:1992 16:05:1968 01:06:1977 15:11:1973 31:10:1966 02:06:1993 25:05:1962 22:12:1997 20:06:1962 18:11:1952 26:09:1994 08:06:1959 03:03:1958 16:04:1962 17:11:1991 10:10:1997 03:06:1998 23:08:1999 22:03:1965 03:09:1962 05:06:1961 03:04:1979 02:03:1964 09:06:1964 04:01:1965 08:06:1961 03:12:2001 01:02:1999 02:12:1969 16:11:1976 12:08:1996 23:10:1978 03:06:1969 03:06:2006 20:05:1957 23:12:1996 03:01:1995 11:11:1996 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 213 Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Netherlands Algeria New Zealand Angola Nicaragua Antigua and Barbuda Niger Argentina Nigeria Armenia Norway Australia Pakistan Austria Panama Azerbaijan Papua New Guinea Bahamas Paraguay Bangladesh Peru Barbados Philippines Belarus Poland Belgium
 Portugal Belize Romania Benin Russian Federation Plurinational State of Bolivia Rwanda Bosnia and Herzegovina Saint Kitts and Nevis Botswana Saint Lucia Brazil Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Bulgaria Samoa Burkina Faso San Marino Burundi Sao Tome and Principe Cambodia Senegal Cameroon Serbia Cape Verde Seychelles Central African Republic Sierra Leone Chad Singapore Chile Slovakia Colombia Slovenia Comoros South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Ratification date 03:06:1957 22:12:1993 19:10:1962 09:06:2003 04:06:1976 31:10:1967 02:02:1983 23:03:1962 24:09:1956 17:10:1960 12:11:2003 17:02:1955 28:02:1973 26:05:1952 10:11:1951 16:05:1966 19:05:1992 01:05:1976 25:05:1976 21:03:1966 22:06:1972 13:03:1964 08:05:1967 29:12:1953 06:11:1956 25:02:1957 10:12:1953 01:07:1964 15:12:1983 26:11:1958 16:05:1968 10:08:1956 15:11:1973 08:11:1988 02:06:1993 04:09:2000 22:12:1997 14:05:1980 18:11:1952 21:10:1998 08:06:1959 30:06:2008 16:04:1962 19:12:1986 10:10:1997 17:06:1992 23:08:1999 28:07:1961 03:09:1962 24:11:2000 03:04:1979 04:10:1999 09:06:1964 13:06:1961 08:06:1961 25:10:1965 01:02:1999 01:01:1993 16:11:1976 29:05:1992 23:10:1978 19:02:1996 20:04:1977 13:12:1972 18:06:1957 05:06:1996 26:04:1978 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 214 National Human Rights Commission, India Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania United Republic of Timor-Leste Togo Trinidad and Tobago
 Turkmenistan Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine United Kingdom Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela 18:07:1950 17:08:1999 07:06:1957 26:11:1993 30:01:1962 16:06:2009 08:11:1983 24:05:1963 15:05:1957 23:01:1952 15:05:1997 04:06:1963 14:09:1956 30:06:1950 18:03:1954 13:07:1992 28:08:2006 19:12:1968 14:04:1969 02:09:1996 27:08:1998 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Papua New Guinea Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tome and Principe Samoa San Marino Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland 22:12:1993 09:06:2003 31:10:1967 23:03:1962 17:10:1960 17:02:1955 26:05:1952 16:05:1966 01:05:1976 21:03:1966 13:03:1964 29:12:1953 25:02:1957 01:07:1964 26:11:1958 10:08:1956 08:11:1988 04:09:2000 14:05:1980 21:10:1998 30:06:2008 19:12:1986 17:06:1992 28:07:1961 24:11:2000 04:10:1999 13:06:1961 25:10:1965 01:01:1993 29:05:1992 19:02:1996 20:04:1977 13:12:1972 18:06:1957 05:06:1996 26:04:1978 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Albania Sweden Algeria Switzerland Angola Syrian Arab Republic Antigua and Barbuda Tajikistan Argentina Tanzania United Republic of Armenia Timor-Leste Australia Togo Austria Trinidad and Tobago Azerbaijan Tunisia
 Bahamas Turkey Bangladesh Turkmenistan Barbados Uganda Belarus Ukraine Belgium United Kingdom Belize Uruguay Benin Uzbekistan Plurinational State of Bolivia Vanuatu Bosnia and Herzegovina Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Botswana Yemen Brazil Zambia Bulgaria Zimbabwe Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile Colombia Comoros Ratification date 03:06:1957 18:07:1950 19:10:1962 17:08:1999 04:06:1976 07:06:1957 02:02:1983 26:11:1993 24:09:1956 30:01:1962 12:11:2003 16:06:2009 28:02:1973 08:11:1983 10:11:1951 24:05:1963 19:05:1992 15:05:1957 25:05:1976 23:01:1952 22:06:1972 15:05:1997 08:05:1967 04:06:1963 06:11:1956 14:09:1956 10:12:1953 30:06:1950 15:12:1983 18:03:1954 16:05:1968 13:07:1992 15:11:1973 28:08:2006 02:06:1993 19:12:1968 22:12:1997 14:04:1969 18:11:1952 02:09:1996 08:06:1959 27:08:1998 16:04:1962 10:10:1997 23:08:1999 03:09:1962 03:04:1979 09:06:1964 08:06:1961 01:02:1999 16:11:1976 23:10:1978 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 215 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 The ‘Convention on Equal Remuneration’ or ‘Convention concerning Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value’ was adopted on 29 June 1951 by the General Conference of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) at its thirty-fourth session.
The Convention entered into force on 23 May 1953, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention.

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (ILO Convention No.

100) The Convention concerns Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value.
Entry into force: 23 May 1953 Parties: 168 India ratified the Convention on 25 September 1958 that men and women should receive ‘equal The principle remuneration for work of equal value’ was mentioned, as from 1919, in the General Principles contained in the initial text of the ILO Constitution.

When the Constitution was amended, in 1946, the principle was introduced in the Preamble of the new text of the Constitution.
Various instruments adopted by the International Labor Conference or by the Regional Conferences referred expressly to equal remuneration.

However, it was in 1951 that a Convention dealing specifically with this question was adopted by the Conference.

The term ‘work of equal value’ figured already, among the general principles enunciated in Part XIII of the Treaty of Versailles.
It was also used by the European social Charter and by the 1966 ICESCR 216 National Human Rights Commission, India (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights), while the UDHR (Universal Declaration) referred to ‘equal work’.
‘Remuneration’ & ‘Equal Remuneration’ Article 1 of the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 defines ‘Remuneration’ and ‘Equal Where differential rates between workers correspond, without regard to sex, to differences in the work to be performed, as determined by an objective appraisal, these must not be considered as being contrary to the principle of equal remuneration.
Remuneration’ as under: The Equal Remuneration (a) The term "remuneration" includes the ordinary, basic or minimum wage or salary and any additional emoluments whatsoever payable directly or indirectly, whether in cash Convention,1951 lays down the general principle that each State which ratifies it shall promote and in so far as consistent with the methods in operation in its country for determining rates of or in kind, by the employer to remuneration, ensure the the worker and arising out of application to all workers of the the worker's employment; principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value.
(b) The term "equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value" refers to rates of remuneration established The Convention applies to basic without discrimination based wages or salaries and to any on sex.

additional emoluments whatsoever, payable directly or indirectly, in cash or kind, by the employer to the worker and arising out of his or her employment.
The Convention defines equal remuneration for work of equal value as “remuneration established without discrimination based on sex”.
This principle may be applied by means of national laws or regulations, legal machinery for wage determination, collective Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 The ‘Convention on Equal Remuneration’ or ‘Convention concerning Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value’ was adopted on 29 June 1951 by the General Conference of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) at its thirty-fourth session.
The Convention entered into force on 23 May 1953, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention.

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (ILO Convention No.

100) The Convention concerns Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value.
Entry into force: 23 May 1953 Parties: 168 India ratified the Convention on 25 September 1958 The principle that men and women should receive ‘equal remuneration for work of equal value’ was mentioned, as from 1919, in the General Principles contained in the initial text of the ILO Constitution.

When the Constitution was amended, in 1946, the principle was introduced in the Preamble of the new text of the Constitution.
Various instruments adopted by the International Labor Conference or by the Regional Conferences referred expressly to equal remuneration.

However, it was in 1951 that a Convention dealing specifically with this question was adopted by the Conference.

The term ‘work of equal value’ figured already, among the general principles enunciated in Part XIII of the Treaty of Versailles.
It was also used by the European social Charter and by the 1966 ICESCR (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights), while the UDHR (Universal Declaration) referred to ‘equal work’.

to Where differential rates between workers correspond, without regard to sex, to differences in the work as determined objective these must not be appraisal, considered as being contrary to the principle of equal remuneration.
be performed, an by Equal Remuneration The Convention,1951 lays down the general principle that each State which ratifies it shall promote and in so far as consistent with the methods its in operation country for determining rates of remuneration, the application to all workers of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value.
ensure in ‘Remuneration’ & ‘Equal Remuneration’ Article 1 of the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 defines ‘Remuneration’ and ‘Equal Remuneration’ as under: (a) The term "remuneration" includes the ordinary, basic or minimum wage or salary and any additional emoluments whatsoever payable directly or indirectly, whether in cash or in kind, by the employer to the worker and arising out of the worker's employment; The term (b) "equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value" refers to rates of remuneration established without discrimination based on sex.
The Convention applies to basic wages or salaries and to any emoluments additional whatsoever, payable directly or indirectly, in cash or kind, by the employer to the worker and arising out of his or her employment.

The Convention defines equal remuneration for work of equal value as “remuneration established without discrimination based on sex”.
This principle may be applied by means of national laws or regulations, legal machinery for wage determination, collective A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 217 In some cases, the difficulty is in determining whether certain types of work are of equal value, in particular when the work is not performed by both men and women and when it is exclusively women who are employed in certain occupations.
These difficulties increase where there doesn’t exist a system of objective appraisal of the work to be performed.

agreements or a combination of these various means.

One means specified for assisting in giving effect to the Convention is the objective appraisal of jobs on the basis of the work to be performed.

Key Points The Convention provides that governments shall co-operate with employers’ and workers’ organizations for the purpose of giving effect to its provisions [Article 2(1)].
The notion of ‘work of equal value’ which is used by the Convention has a wider meaning than that of ‘equal work’.

It aims, in particular, at avoiding indirect limitations1 in the implementation of this principle.

 The main criterion is that the sex of the worker who is doing or might do a certain work is not taken into consideration in the determination of rates of remuneration.
Article 2 (2) of the Convention provides that principle of Equal Remuneration for Work of Equal Value may be applied by means of national laws or regulations, legally established or recognized machinery for wage determination, collective agreements or combination of these means.

It requests States to cooperate as appropriate with the employer’s and worker’s organizations concerned for the purpose of giving effect to its provision.
The difficulty, to which, reference is made the most frequently, is the fact that in certain States, the government does not interfere directly in the determination of wages in the private sector.
1 Indirect discrimination on the ground of gender exists if men and women are subjected to unequal treatment because of seemingly gender neutral rules, criteria, or procedures relating to Recruitment, Remuneration, Working conditions and working times, Training measures, Termination of employment, and Social security which may put members of one gender at a specific disadvantage.

Source: “Equal Pay for Equal Work and Work of Equal Value”.

Federal Ministry of Health and Women, Vienna.


http://www.bka.gv.at/DocView.axd?CobId=20830 218 National Human Rights Commission, India agreements or a combination of these various means.

One means specified for assisting in giving effect to the Convention is the objective appraisal of jobs on the basis of the work to be performed.
In some cases, the difficulty is in determining whether certain types of work are of equal value, in particular when the work is not performed by both men and women and when it is exclusively women who are employed in certain occupations.

These difficulties increase where there doesn’t exist a system of objective appraisal of the work to be performed.
Key Points The Convention provides that governments shall co-operate with employers’ and workers’ organizations for the purpose of giving effect to its provisions [Article 2(1)].

 The notion of ‘work of equal value’ which is used by the Convention has a wider meaning than that of ‘equal work’.

It aims, in particular, at avoiding indirect limitations1 in the implementation of this principle.
The main criterion is that the sex of the worker who is doing or might do a certain work is not taken into consideration in the determination of rates of remuneration.

 Article 2 (2) of the Convention provides that principle of Equal Remuneration for Work of Equal Value may be applied by means of national laws or regulations, legally established or recognized machinery for wage determination, collective agreements or combination of these means.
It requests States to cooperate as appropriate with the employer’s and worker’s organizations concerned for the purpose of giving effect to its The difficulty, to which, reference is made the most frequently, is the fact that in certain States, the government does not interfere directly in the determination of wages in the private provision.

sector.
sector.

1 Indirect discrimination on the ground of gender exists if men and women are subjected to unequal treatment because of seemingly gender neutral rules, criteria, or procedures relating to Recruitment, Remuneration, Working conditions and working times, Training measures, Termination of employment, and Social security which may put members of one gender at a specific disadvantage.

Source: “Equal Pay for Equal Work and Work of Equal Value”.

Federal Ministry of Health and Women, Vienna.
http://www.bka.gv.at/DocView.axd?CobId=20830 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 219 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile Ratification date 22:08:1969 03:06:1957 19:10:1962 04:06:1976 02:05:2003 24:09:1956 29:07:1994 10:12:1974 29:10:1953 19:05:1992 14:06:2001 28:01:1998 19:09:1974 21:08:1956 23:05:1952 22:06:1999 16:05:1968 15:11:1973 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 25:04:1957 07:11:1955 30:06:1969 25:06:1993 23:08:1999 25:05:1970 16:11:1972 16:10:1979 09:06:1964 29:03:1966 20:09:1971 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 220 National Human Rights Commission, India Democratic Republic of the Congo China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Denmark Djibouti Dominica Czech Republic Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana 02:11:1990 07:06:1963 23:10:1978 26:11:1999 16:06:1969 02:06:1960 05:05:1961 08:10:1991 13:01:1954 19:11:1987 01:01:1993 22:06:1960 03:08:1978 28:02:1983 22:09:1953 11:03:1957 26:07:1960 12:10:2000 12:06:1985 22:02:2000 10:05:1996 24:03:1999 17:04:2002 14:01:1963 10:03:1953 13:06:1961 04:09:2000 22:06:1993 08:06:1956 14:03:1968 06:06:1975 25:10:1994 02:08:1961 21:02:1977 11:08:1967 13:06:1975 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 Country COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Ratification Status Antigua and Barbuda Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Chad Chile Central African Republic Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina date 22:08:1969 03:06:1957 19:10:1962 04:06:1976 02:05:2003 24:09:1956 29:07:1994 10:12:1974 29:10:1953 19:05:1992 14:06:2001 28:01:1998 19:09:1974 21:08:1956 23:05:1952 22:06:1999 16:05:1968 15:11:1973 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 25:04:1957 07:11:1955 30:06:1969 25:06:1993 23:08:1999 25:05:1970 16:11:1972 16:10:1979 09:06:1964 29:03:1966 20:09:1971 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Afghanistan China Albania Colombia Algeria Comoros Angola Congo Antigua and Barbuda Democratic Republic of the Congo Argentina Costa Rica Armenia Côte d'Ivoire Australia Croatia Austria Cuba Azerbaijan Cyprus Bahamas Czech Republic Bangladesh Denmark Barbados Djibouti Belarus Dominica Belgium Dominican Republic Belize Ecuador Benin Egypt Plurinational State of Bolivia El Salvador Bosnia and Herzegovina Equatorial Guinea Botswana Eritrea Brazil Estonia Bulgaria Ethiopia Burkina Faso Fiji Burundi Finland Cambodia France Cameroon Gabon Canada Gambia Cape Verde Georgia Central
 African Republic Germany Chad Ghana Chile Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana Ratification date 22:08:1969 02:11:1990 03:06:1957 07:06:1963 19:10:1962 23:10:1978 04:06:1976 26:11:1999 02:05:2003 16:06:1969 24:09:1956 02:06:1960 29:07:1994 05:05:1961 10:12:1974 08:10:1991 29:10:1953 13:01:1954 19:05:1992 19:11:1987 14:06:2001 01:01:1993 28:01:1998 22:06:1960 19:09:1974 03:08:1978 21:08:1956 28:02:1983 23:05:1952 22:09:1953 22:06:1999 11:03:1957 16:05:1968 26:07:1960 15:11:1973 12:10:2000 02:06:1993 12:06:1985 05:06:1997 22:02:2000 25:04:1957 10:05:1996 07:11:1955 24:03:1999 30:06:1969 17:04:2002 25:06:1993 14:01:1963 23:08:1999 10:03:1953 25:05:1970 13:06:1961 16:11:1972 04:09:2000 16:10:1979 22:06:1993 09:06:1964 08:06:1956 29:03:1966 14:03:1968 20:09:1971 06:06:1975 25:10:1994 02:08:1961 21:02:1977 11:08:1967 13:06:1975 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 221 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Haiti Albania Honduras Algeria Hungary Angola Iceland Antigua and Barbuda India Argentina Indonesia Armenia The Islamic Republic of Iran Australia Iraq Austria Ireland Azerbaijan Israel Bahamas Italy Bangladesh Jamaica Barbados Japan Belarus Jordan Belgium Kazakhstan Belize Kenya Benin Kiribati Plurinational State of Bolivia Republic of Korea Bosnia and Herzegovina
 Kyrgyzstan Botswana Lao People's Democratic Republic Brazil Latvia Bulgaria Lebanon Burkina Faso Lesotho Burundi Libya Cambodia Lithuania Cameroon Luxembourg Canada The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Cape Verde Madagascar Central African Republic Malawi Chad Malaysia Chile Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Republic of Moldova Ratification date 22:08:1969 04:03:1958 03:06:1957 09:08:1956 19:10:1962 08:06:1956 04:06:1976 17:02:1958 02:05:2003 25:09:1958 24:09:1956 11:08:1958 29:07:1994 10:06:1972 10:12:1974 28:08:1963 29:10:1953 18:12:1974 19:05:1992 09:06:1965 14:06:2001 08:06:1956 28:01:1998 14:01:1975 19:09:1974 24:08:1967 21:08:1956 22:09:1966 23:05:1952 18:05:2001 22:06:1999 07:05:2001 16:05:1968 17:06:2009 15:11:1973 08:12:1997 02:06:1993 31:03:1992 05:06:1997 13:06:2008 25:04:1957 27:01:1992 07:11:1955 01:06:1977 30:06:1969 27:01:1998 25:06:1993 20:06:1962 23:08:1999 26:09:1994 25:05:1970 23:08:1967 16:11:1972 17:11:1991 16:10:1979 10:08:1962 09:06:1964 22:03:1965 29:03:1966 09:09:1997 20:09:1971 12:07:1968 09:06:1988 03:12:2001 18:12:2002 23:08:1952 23:03:2000 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 222 National Human Rights Commission, India Papua New Guinea Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles
 Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tome and Principe 03:06:1969 03:06:2006 11:05:1979 06:06:1977 06:04:2010 10:06:1976 16:06:1971 03:06:1983 31:10:1967 09:08:1966 08:05:1974 24:09:1959 11:10:2001 03:06:1958 02:06:2000 24:06:1964 01:02:1960 29:12:1953 25:10:1954 20:02:1967 28:05:1957 30:04:1956 02:12:1980 25:08:2000 18:08:1983 04:12:2001 30:06:2008 23:05:1985 01:06:1982 15:06:1978 22:10:1962 24:11:2000 23:11:1999 15:11:1968 30:05:2002 01:01:1993 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified The Islamic Republic of Iran Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Republic of Korea Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Republic of Moldova 04:03:1958 09:08:1956 08:06:1956 17:02:1958 25:09:1958 11:08:1958 10:06:1972 28:08:1963 18:12:1974 09:06:1965 08:06:1956 14:01:1975 24:08:1967 22:09:1966 18:05:2001 07:05:2001 17:06:2009 08:12:1997 31:03:1992 13:06:2008 27:01:1992 01:06:1977 27:01:1998 20:06:1962 26:09:1994 23:08:1967 10:08:1962 22:03:1965 09:09:1997 12:07:1968 09:06:1988 03:12:2001 18:12:2002 23:08:1952 23:03:2000 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 17:11:1991 Equal Remuneration
 Convention, 1951 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Mongolia Albania Montenegro Algeria Morocco Angola Mozambique Antigua and Barbuda Namibia Argentina Nepal Armenia Netherlands Australia New Zealand Austria Nicaragua Azerbaijan Niger Bahamas Nigeria Bangladesh Norway Barbados Pakistan Belarus Panama Belgium Papua New Guinea Belize Paraguay Benin Peru Plurinational State of Bolivia Philippines Bosnia and Herzegovina Poland Botswana Portugal Brazil Romania Bulgaria Russian Federation Burkina Faso Rwanda Burundi Saint Kitts and Nevis Cambodia Saint Lucia Cameroon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Canada Samoa Cape Verde San Marino Central African Republic Sao Tome and Principe Chad Saudi Arabia Chile Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Ratification date 22:08:1969 03:06:1969 03:06:1957 03:06:2006 19:10:1962 11:05:1979 04:06:1976 06:06:1977 02:05:2003 06:04:2010 24:09:1956 10:06:1976 29:07:1994 16:06:1971 10:12:1974 03:06:1983 29:10:1953 31:10:1967 19:05:1992 09:08:1966 14:06:2001 08:05:1974 28:01:1998 24:09:1959 19:09:1974 11:10:2001 21:08:1956 03:06:1958 23:05:1952 02:06:2000 22:06:1999 24:06:1964 16:05:1968 01:02:1960 15:11:1973 29:12:1953 02:06:1993 25:10:1954 05:06:1997 20:02:1967 25:04:1957 28:05:1957 07:11:1955 30:04:1956 30:06:1969 02:12:1980 25:06:1993 25:08:2000 23:08:1999 18:08:1983 25:05:1970 04:12:2001 16:11:1972 30:06:2008 16:10:1979 23:05:1985 09:06:1964 01:06:1982 29:03:1966 15:06:1978 20:09:1971 22:10:1962 24:11:2000 23:11:1999 15:11:1968 30:05:2002 01:01:1993 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 223 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Slovenia Albania South Africa Algeria Spain Angola Sri Lanka Antigua and Barbuda Sudan Argentina Swaziland Armenia Sweden Australia Switzerland Austria Syrian Arab Republic Azerbaijan Tajikistan Bahamas Tanzania United Republic of Bangladesh Thailand Barbados Togo Belarus Trinidad and Tobago Belgium Tunisia Belize Turkey Benin Turkmenistan Plurinational State of Bolivia Uganda Bosnia and Herzegovina Ukraine Botswana United Arab Emirates Brazil United Kingdom Bulgaria Uruguay Burkina Faso Uzbekistan Burundi Vanuatu Cambodia Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Cameroon Viet Nam Canada Yemen Cape Verde Zambia Central African Republic Zimbabwe Chad Chile Ratification date 22:08:1969 29:05:1992 03:06:1957 30:03:2000 19:10:1962 06:11:1967 04:06:1976 01:04:1993 02:05:2003 22:10:1970 24:09:1956 05:06:1981 29:07:1994 20:06:1962 10:12:1974 25:10:1972 29:10:1953 07:06:1957 19:05:1992 26:11:1993 14:06:2001 26:02:2002 28:01:1998 08:02:1999 19:09:1974 08:11:1983 21:08:1956 29:05:1997 23:05:1952 11:10:1968 22:06:1999 19:07:1967 16:05:1968 15:05:1997 15:11:1973 02:06:2005 02:06:1993 10:08:1956 05:06:1997 24:02:1997 25:04:1957 15:06:1971 07:11:1955 16:11:1989 30:06:1969 13:07:1992 25:06:1993 28:07:2006 23:08:1999 10:08:1982 25:05:1970 07:10:1997 16:11:1972 29:07:1976 16:10:1979 20:06:1972 09:06:1964 14:12:1989 29:03:1966 20:09:1971 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 Ratified 224 National Human Rights Commission, India Abolition of Forced Labour, 1957 The Convention on the Abolition of Forced Labour obligates each Member of the International Labour Organization which ratifies this Convention to undertake to suppress, not to make use of any form of and to take effective measures to secure the immediate and complete abolition of any form of forced or compulsory labour.
Abolition of Forced Labour, 1957 (ILO Convention No.

105) The Convention prohibits any form of forced or compulsory labour as a means of political coercion or education, punishment for political views, mobilizing labour for economic development, a means of racial, social, national or religious discrimination.

Entry into force: 17 January 1959 Parties: 169 Denounced by: Singapore & Malaysia India ratified the Convention on 18 May 2000.

What is ‘forced labour’ according to ILO Convention No.

105?
105?

In the absence of a definition of “forced or compulsory labour” in Convention No.

105, the definition contained in Convention No.

29 (Forced Labour Convention) has been considered generally valid, and can thus, serve to determine what constitutes “forced or compulsory labour” within the meaning of Convention No.
105, which consequently affords protection against any “work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily” [ILO Forced Labour Convention No.

29, 1930: Art.

2(1)].

The term forced labour includes slavery and practices similar to slavery as well as bonded labour or debt bondage.
The ILO definition generally applies to work or service exacted by governments and public authorities as well as private bodies and individuals.
Slovenia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Togo Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Syrian Arab Republic Tanzania United Republic of Trinidad and Tobago United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela 29:05:1992 30:03:2000 06:11:1967 01:04:1993 22:10:1970 05:06:1981 20:06:1962 25:10:1972 07:06:1957 26:11:1993 26:02:2002 08:02:1999 08:11:1983 29:05:1997 11:10:1968 19:07:1967 15:05:1997 02:06:2005 10:08:1956 24:02:1997 15:06:1971 16:11:1989 13:07:1992 28:07:2006 10:08:1982 07:10:1997 29:07:1976 20:06:1972 14:12:1989 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Abolition of Forced Labour, 1957 The Convention on the Abolition of Forced Labour obligates each Member of the International Labour Organization which ratifies this Convention to undertake to suppress, not to make use of any form of and to take effective measures to secure the immediate and complete abolition of any form of forced or compulsory labour.
Abolition of Forced Labour, 1957 (ILO Convention No.

105) The Convention prohibits any form of forced or compulsory labour as a means of political coercion or education, punishment for political views, mobilizing labour for economic development, a means of racial, social, national or religious discrimination.

Entry into force: 17 January 1959 Parties: 169 Denounced by: Singapore & Malaysia India ratified the Convention on 18 May 2000.

What is ‘forced labour’ according to ILO Convention No.

105?
105?

In the absence of a definition of “forced or compulsory labour” in Convention No.

105, the definition contained in Convention No.

29 (Forced Labour Convention) has been considered generally valid, and can thus, serve to determine what constitutes “forced or compulsory labour” within the meaning of Convention No.
105, which consequently affords protection against any “work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily” [ILO Forced Labour Convention No.

29, 1930: Art.

2(1)].

The term forced labour includes slavery and practices similar to slavery as well as bonded labour or debt bondage.
The ILO definition generally applies to work or service exacted by governments and public authorities as well as private bodies and individuals.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 225 Article 1 of the Convention calls for immediate and complete abolition of any form of forced labor for any the following five purposes: As a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system; As a method of mobilizing and using labour for purposes of economic development; As a means of labour discipline; As a punishment for having participated in strikes; As a means of racial, social, national or religious discrimination.
What characterizes forced labour situations?
The ILO has developed several elements, which individually or in conjunction, can indicate a forced labour situation: Threats or actual physical harm; Restriction of movement or the confinement workplace or a limited area; to Debt bondage; Withholding wages excessive wage that made agreements; violates or reduction previously Retention of passports and identity documents; Threat of denunciation to the authorities, when the worker has an irregular immigration status.
that have the states 4 Article Convention is binding only upon those Members of the Labour International whose Organization ratifications been registered with the Director- General.

Article 5 of the Convention provides that a Member State the which Convention may denounce it after the expiration of ten years from the date on which the Convention into force, by an act communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration.
Such denunciation shall not take effect until one year after the date on which it is registered.
first came ratified has Each Member which has ratified this Convention and which does not, within the year following the expiration of the period of ten years 226 National Human Rights Commission, India mentioned in the preceding paragraph, exercise the right of denunciation provided for in this Article, will be bound for another period of ten years and, thereafter, may denounce this Convention at the expiration of each period of ten years under the terms provided for in this Article.
The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall notify all Members of the International Labour Organisation of the registration of all ratifications and denunciations communicated to him by the Members of the Organisation.
At such times as it may consider necessary the Governing Body of the International Labour Office shall present to the General Conference a report on the working of this Convention and shall examine the desirability of placing on the agenda of the Conference the question of its revision in whole or in part.

ILO Conventions No.

29 & 105 on Forced Labour Convention No.

105 does not constitute a revision of Convention No.

29, but was designed to supplement it.


The two instruments effectively supplement each other, and their concurrent application can help in the complete eradication of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms.

The ILO Conventions of 1930 and 1957 on ‘Forced Labour’ aim at guaranteeing to all human beings freedom from forced labour, irrespective of the nature of the work or the sector of activity in which it may be performed.

Neither Convention No.

105, nor Convention No.


29, contains provisions limiting the scope of its application by excluding certain categories of workers.

Both Conventions are of general application and are designed to protect the entire population of the countries which have ratified them, intended as they are to guarantee respect for certain fundamental human rights.

While Convention No.


29 calls for the general prohibition of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms (subject to certain exceptions), Convention No.

105 requires the abolition of any form of forced or compulsory labour in the five specific cases listed in its Article 1 (outlined above).

The forced labour Conventions are among the most ratified of all ILO Conventions.

To date, Conventions Nos.

29 and 105 have received 175 and 169 ratifications respectively.
Article 1 of the Convention calls for immediate and complete abolition of any form of forced labor for any the following five purposes: As a means of political coercion or education or as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system; As a method of mobilizing and using labour for purposes of economic development; As a means of labour discipline; As a punishment for having participated in strikes; As a means of racial, social, national or religious discrimination.
What characterizes forced labour situations?

Article 4 states that the Convention is binding only upon those Members of the The ILO has developed several elements, which individually or in International Organization Labour whose conjunction, can indicate a forced ratifications have been labour situation: registered with the Director- Threats or actual physical General.
harm; Restriction of movement or confinement to the workplace or a limited area; Debt bondage; Article 5 of the Convention provides that a Member State which has ratified the Convention may denounce it Withholding wages or after the expiration of ten years excessive wage reduction from the date on which the that violates previously made agreements; Retention of passports and identity documents; Threat of denunciation to the authorities, when the worker has an irregular immigration status.
Convention first came into force, by an act communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration.

Such denunciation shall not take effect until one year after the date on which it is registered.
Each Member which has ratified this Convention and which does not, within the year following the expiration of the period of ten years in mentioned the right of the preceding paragraph, exercise denunciation provided for in this Article, will be bound for another period of ten years and, thereafter, may denounce this Convention at the expiration of each period of ten years under the terms provided for in this Article.
The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall notify all Members of the International Labour Organisation of the registration of all ratifications and denunciations communicated to him by the Members of the Organisation.
At such times as it may consider necessary the Governing Body of the International Labour Office shall present to the General Conference a report on the working of this Convention and shall examine the desirability of placing on the agenda of the Conference the question of its revision in whole or in part.

ILO Conventions No.

29 & 105 on Forced Labour Convention No.

105 does not constitute a revision of Convention No.

29, but was designed to supplement it.


The two instruments effectively supplement each other, and their concurrent application can help in the complete eradication of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms.

The ILO Conventions of 1930 and 1957 on ‘Forced Labour’ aim at guaranteeing to all human beings freedom from forced labour, irrespective of the nature of the work or the sector of activity in which it may be performed.

Neither Convention No.

105, nor Convention No.


29, contains provisions limiting the scope of its application by excluding certain categories of workers.

Both Conventions are of general application and are designed to protect the entire population of the countries which have ratified them, intended as they are to guarantee respect for certain fundamental human rights.

While Convention No.


29 calls for the general prohibition of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms (subject to certain exceptions), Convention No.

105 requires the abolition of any form of forced or compulsory labour in the five specific cases listed in its Article 1 (outlined above).

The forced labour Conventions are among the most ratified of all ILO Conventions.

To date, Conventions Nos.

29 and 105 have received 175 and 169 ratifications respectively.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 227 Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Ratification date 16:05:1963 27:02:1997 12:06:1969 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 18:01:1960 17:12:2004 07:06:1960 05:03:1958 09:08:2000 25:05:1976 14:07:1998 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 25:09:1995 23:01:1961 15:12:1983 22:05:1961 11:06:1990 15:11:2000 05:06:1997 18:06:1965 23:03:1999 25:08:1997 11:03:1963 23:08:1999 03:09:1962 14:07:1959 03:04:1979 09:06:1964 08:06:1961 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 228 National Human Rights Commission, India Democratic Republic of the Chile Colombia Comoros Congo Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Denmark Djibouti Dominica Czech Republic Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea 01:02:1999 07:06:1963 23:10:1978 26:11:1999 20:06:2001 04:05:1959 05:05:1961 05:03:1997 02:06:1958 23:09:1960 06:08:1996 17:01:1958 03:08:1978 28:02:1983 23:06:1958 05:02:1962 23:10:1958 18:11:1958 13:08:2001 22:02:2000 07:02:1996 24:03:1999 19:04:1974 27:05:1960 18:12:1969 29:05:1961 04:09:2000 23:09:1996 22:06:1959 15:12:1958 30:03:1962 09:07:1979 09:12:1959 21:02:1977 11:07:1961 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 Country COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Ratification Status Antigua and Barbuda Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina date 16:05:1963 27:02:1997 12:06:1969 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 18:01:1960 17:12:2004 07:06:1960 05:03:1958 09:08:2000 25:05:1976 14:07:1998 22:06:1972 08:05:1967 25:09:1995 23:01:1961 15:12:1983 22:05:1961 11:06:1990 15:11:2000 05:06:1997 18:06:1965 23:03:1999 25:08:1997 11:03:1963 23:08:1999 03:09:1962 14:07:1959 03:04:1979 09:06:1964 08:06:1961 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Afghanistan Chile Albania Colombia Algeria Comoros Angola Congo Antigua and Barbuda Democratic Republic of the Argentina Congo Armenia Costa Rica Australia Côte d'Ivoire Austria Croatia Azerbaijan Cuba Bahamas Cyprus Bahrain Czech Republic Bangladesh Denmark Barbados Djibouti Belarus Dominica Belgium Dominican Republic Belize Ecuador Benin Egypt Plurinational State of Bolivia El Salvador Bosnia and Herzegovina Equatorial Guinea Botswana Eritrea Brazil Estonia Bulgaria Ethiopia Burkina Faso Fiji Burundi Finland Cambodia France Cameroon Gabon Canada Gambia Cape Verde Georgia Central African Republic Germany Chad Ghana Greece
 Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Ratification date 16:05:1963 01:02:1999 27:02:1997 07:06:1963 12:06:1969 23:10:1978 04:06:1976 26:11:1999 02:02:1983 20:06:2001 18:01:1960 17:12:2004 04:05:1959 07:06:1960 05:05:1961 05:03:1958 05:03:1997 09:08:2000 02:06:1958 25:05:1976 23:09:1960 14:07:1998 06:08:1996 22:06:1972 17:01:1958 08:05:1967 03:08:1978 25:09:1995 28:02:1983 23:01:1961 23:06:1958 15:12:1983 05:02:1962 22:05:1961 23:10:1958 11:06:1990 18:11:1958 15:11:2000 13:08:2001 05:06:1997 22:02:2000 18:06:1965 07:02:1996 23:03:1999 24:03:1999 25:08:1997 19:04:1974 11:03:1963 27:05:1960 23:08:1999 18:12:1969 03:09:1962 29:05:1961 14:07:1959 04:09:2000 03:04:1979 23:09:1996 09:06:1964 22:06:1959 08:06:1961 15:12:1958 30:03:1962 09:07:1979 09:12:1959 21:02:1977 11:07:1961 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 229 Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Guyana Albania Haiti Algeria Honduras Angola Hungary Antigua and Barbuda Iceland Argentina India Armenia Indonesia Australia The Islamic Republic of Iran Austria Iraq Azerbaijan Ireland Bahamas Israel Bahrain Italy Bangladesh Jamaica Barbados Jordan Belarus Kazakhstan Belgium Kenya Belize Kiribati Benin Kuwait Plurinational State of Bolivia Kyrgyzstan Bosnia and Herzegovina Latvia Botswana Lebanon Brazil Lesotho Bulgaria Liberia Burkina Faso
 Libya Burundi Lithuania Cambodia Luxembourg Cameroon The former Yugoslav Republic Canada of Macedonia Cape Verde Madagascar Central African Republic Malawi Chad Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Ratification date 16:05:1963 08:06:1966 27:02:1997 04:03:1958 12:06:1969 04:08:1958 04:06:1976 04:01:1994 02:02:1983 29:11:1960 18:01:1960 18:05:2000 17:12:2004 07:06:1999 07:06:1960 13:04:1959 05:03:1958 15:06:1959 09:08:2000 11:06:1958 25:05:1976 10:04:1958 14:07:1998 15:03:1968 22:06:1972 26:12:1962 08:05:1967 31:03:1958 25:09:1995 18:05:2001 23:01:1961 13:01:1964 15:12:1983 03:02:2000 22:05:1961 21:09:1961 11:06:1990 18:02:1999 15:11:2000 27:01:1992 05:06:1997 01:06:1977 18:06:1965 14:06:2001 23:03:1999 25:05:1962 25:08:1997 13:06:1961 11:03:1963 26:09:1994 23:08:1999 24:07:1964 03:09:1962 15:07:2003 14:07:1959 03:04:1979 06:06:2007 09:06:1964 19:11:1999 08:06:1961 13:10:1958 28:05:1962 04:01:1965 03:04:1997 02:12:1969 01:06:1959 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified denounced on 10:01:1990 ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 230 National Human Rights Commission, India Republic of Moldova Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Rwanda Papua New Guinea Russian Federation Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia
 10:03:1993 15:03:2005 03:06:2006 01:12:1966 06:06:1977 15:11:2000 30:08:2007 18:02:1959 14:06:1968 31:10:1967 23:03:1962 17:10:1960 14:04:1958 21:07:2005 15:02:1960 16:05:1966 01:05:1976 16:05:1968 06:12:1960 17:11:1960 30:07:1958 23:11:1959 02:02:2007 03:08:1998 02:07:1998 18:09:1962 12:10:2000 14:05:1980 21:10:1998 30:06:2008 01:02:1995 04:05:2005 15:06:1978 28:07:1961 10:07:2003 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified The Islamic Republic of Iran Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Kazakhstan Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Jordan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Kyrgyzstan Lithuania Luxembourg of Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico 08:06:1966 04:03:1958 04:08:1958 04:01:1994 29:11:1960 18:05:2000 07:06:1999 13:04:1959 15:06:1959 11:06:1958 10:04:1958 15:03:1968 26:12:1962 31:03:1958 18:05:2001 13:01:1964 03:02:2000 21:09:1961 18:02:1999 27:01:1992 01:06:1977 14:06:2001 25:05:1962 13:06:1961 26:09:1994 24:07:1964 06:06:2007 19:11:1999 13:10:1958 28:05:1962 04:01:1965 03:04:1997 02:12:1969 01:06:1959 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified The former Yugoslav Republic 15:07:2003 denounced on 10:01:1990 Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Republic of Moldova Albania Mongolia Algeria Montenegro Angola Morocco Antigua and Barbuda Mozambique Argentina Namibia Armenia
 Nepal Australia Netherlands Austria New Zealand Azerbaijan Nicaragua Bahamas Niger Bahrain Nigeria Bangladesh Norway Barbados Oman Belarus Pakistan Belgium Panama Belize Papua New Guinea Benin Paraguay Plurinational State of Bolivia Peru Bosnia and Herzegovina Philippines Botswana Poland Brazil Portugal Bulgaria Qatar Burkina Faso Romania Burundi Russian Federation Cambodia Rwanda Cameroon Saint Kitts and Nevis Canada Saint Lucia Cape Verde Saint Vincent and the Central African Republic Grenadines Chad Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Ratification date 16:05:1963 10:03:1993 27:02:1997 15:03:2005 12:06:1969 03:06:2006 04:06:1976 01:12:1966 02:02:1983 06:06:1977 18:01:1960 15:11:2000 17:12:2004 30:08:2007 07:06:1960 18:02:1959 05:03:1958 14:06:1968 09:08:2000 31:10:1967 25:05:1976 23:03:1962 14:07:1998 17:10:1960 22:06:1972 14:04:1958 08:05:1967 21:07:2005 25:09:1995 15:02:1960 23:01:1961 16:05:1966 15:12:1983 01:05:1976 22:05:1961 16:05:1968 11:06:1990 06:12:1960 15:11:2000 17:11:1960 05:06:1997 30:07:1958 18:06:1965 23:11:1959 23:03:1999 02:02:2007 25:08:1997 03:08:1998 11:03:1963 02:07:1998 23:08:1999 18:09:1962 03:09:1962 12:10:2000 14:07:1959 14:05:1980 03:04:1979 21:10:1998 09:06:1964 08:06:1961 30:06:2008 01:02:1995 04:05:2005 15:06:1978 28:07:1961 10:07:2003 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 231 Abolition of Forced
 Labour Convention, 1957 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Seychelles Albania Sierra Leone Algeria Singapore Angola Slovakia Antigua and Barbuda Slovenia Argentina Somalia Armenia South Africa Australia Spain Austria Sri Lanka Azerbaijan Sudan Bahamas Suriname Bahrain Swaziland Bangladesh Sweden Barbados Switzerland Belarus Syrian Arab Republic Belgium Tajikistan Belize Tanzania United Republic of Benin Thailand Plurinational State of Bolivia Togo Bosnia and Herzegovina Trinidad and Tobago Botswana Tunisia Brazil Turkey Bulgaria Turkmenistan Burkina Faso Uganda Burundi Ukraine Cambodia United Arab Emirates Cameroon United Kingdom Canada United States Cape Verde Uruguay Central African Republic Uzbekistan Chad Vanuatu Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Ratification date 16:05:1963 06:02:1978 27:02:1997 13:06:1961 12:06:1969 25:10:1965 04:06:1976 29:09:1997 02:02:1983 24:06:1997 18:01:1960 08:12:1961 17:12:2004 05:03:1997 07:06:1960 06:11:1967 05:03:1958 07:01:2003 09:08:2000 22:10:1970 25:05:1976 15:06:1976 14:07:1998 28:02:1979 22:06:1972 02:06:1958 08:05:1967 18:07:1958 25:09:1995 23:10:1958 23:01:1961 23:09:1999 15:12:1983 30:01:1962 22:05:1961 02:12:1969 11:06:1990 10:07:1999 15:11:2000 24:05:1963 05:06:1997 12:01:1959 18:06:1965 29:03:1961 23:03:1999 15:05:1997 25:08:1997 04:06:1963 11:03:1963 14:12:2000 23:08:1999 24:02:1997 03:09:1962 30:12:1957 14:07:1959 25:09:1991 03:04:1979 22:11:1968 09:06:1964 15:12:1997 08:06:1961 28:08:2006 16:11:1964 14:04:1969 22:02:1965 27:08:1998 Status Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 The Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention or the Convention concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation (ILO Convention C111) provides for the protection of all workers against discrimination on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction, social origin, and other criteria as may be
 determined by a ratifying state after consultation with representative employers’ and workers’ organizations.
Discrimination (Employment & Occupation), 1958 (ILO Convention No.

111) The Convention was adopted on 25 June 1958 by the General Conference of the International Labour Organisation at its forty-second session in accordance with Entry into force: 15 June 1960 Article 8.

Parties: 169 India ratified the Convention on 03 June 1960 Any discrimination - in law or in practice, direct or indirect - falls within the scope of the 1958 Convention.
General standards that establish distinctions based on prohibited grounds constitute discrimination in law.

The specific attitude of a public authority or a private individual that treats unequally persons or members of a group on a prohibited ground constitutes discrimination in practice.
ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified denounced on 19:04:1979 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified 232 National Human Rights Commission, India denounced on 19:04:1979 Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania United Republic of Trinidad and Tobago Thailand Togo Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Turkmenistan United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Bolivarian Republic of Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 06:02:1978 13:06:1961 25:10:1965 29:09:1997 24:06:1997 08:12:1961 05:03:1997 06:11:1967 07:01:2003 22:10:1970 15:06:1976 28:02:1979 02:06:1958 18:07:1958 23:10:1958 23:09:1999 30:01:1962 02:12:1969 10:07:1999 24:05:1963 12:01:1959 29:03:1961 15:05:1997 04:06:1963 14:12:2000 24:02:1997 30:12:1957 25:09:1991 22:11:1968 15:12:1997 28:08:2006 16:11:1964 14:04:1969 22:02:1965 27:08:1998 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified (Employment and Occupation) Discrimination Convention, 1958 The Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention or the Convention concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation (ILO Convention C111) provides for the protection of all workers against discrimination on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction, social origin, and other criteria as may be determined by a ratifying state after consultation with representative employers’ and workers’ organizations.
Discrimination (Employment & Occupation), 1958 (ILO Convention No.

111) The Convention was adopted on 25 June 1958 by the General Conference of the International Labour Organisation at its forty-second session in accordance with Article 8.

Entry into force: 15 June 1960 Parties: 169 India ratified the Convention on 03 June 1960 Any discrimination - in law or in practice, direct or indirect - falls within the scope of the 1958 Convention.
General standards that establish distinctions based on prohibited grounds constitute discrimination in law.

The specific attitude of a public authority or a private individual that treats unequally persons or members of a group on a prohibited ground constitutes discrimination in practice.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 233 apparently regulations Defining “Discrimination” Article 1(1) of the Convention defines discrimination to include (a) any distinction, exclusion or preference made on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment or occupation; The Convention covers both – ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ discrimination.
Indirect discrimination refers neutral to situations, or practices which in fact result treatment of in unequal persons certain with characteristics.
It occurs when the same condition, treatment or criterion to everyone, but results in a harsh disproportionately impact on some persons on the basis of characteristics such as race, colour, sex or religion, and is not closely related inherent to requirements of the job.2 employment is applied treatment the in or and (b) such other distinction, exclusion or preference which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity in employment or occupation as may be determined by the Member concerned after consultation with representative employers' workers' organisations, where such exist, and with other appropriate bodies."
Article 5 of the Convention lays down that special measures adopted to meet the of individuals by reason of their "sex, age, family responsibilities or social or cultural status" shall not be deemed to be discrimination."
requirements disablement, specific definition The ‘discrimination’ under Article 1 of Convention contains elements: of outlined the three factual element (the existence of a distinction, or exclusion preference in an act or originating omission) which constitutes a A difference in treatment; A ground on which the difference in treatment is based; and 2 Equality in Employment and Occupation: Scope of the instruments as regards individuals, definition and grounds of discrimination.
Report III, Part 4B.

ILO.

Available at http://intranet.oit.org.pe/WDMS/bib/virtual/coleccion_oit/ilse/English/General%20Surveys/2 5962.htm 234 National Human Rights Commission, India The objective result of this difference in treatment (the nullification or impairment of equality of opportunity or treatment).

Through this broad definition, the 1958 instruments cover all the situations which may affect the equality of opportunity and treatment that they are to promote.
There are some situations/measures, however, that are not considered discriminatory.

These include measures based on the inherent requirements of a particular job, measures intended to safeguard the security of the State, and special measures of protection (for example, to address the specific health needs of women or men) or assistance (for example, affirmative action and accommodation measures).

Convention No.
Convention No.

111 applies to all aspects of employment and occupation, both public and private, and extends to: Access to education, vocational guidance and training; Access to employment and occupation (i.e.
to work, whether self employment, wage employment or in the public service); Access to placement services; Access to workers’ and employers’ organizations; Career advancement; Security of job tenure; Collective bargaining; Equal remuneration for work of equal value; Access to social security, welfare facilities and benefits related to employment; and Other conditions of work including occupational safety and health, hours of work, rest periods, holidays.
The concept of national extraction in the 1958 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, does not refer to the distinctions that may be made between the citizens of one country and those of another, but to distinctions between the citizens of the same country on the basis of a person's place of birth, ancestry or foreign origin.

The Convention covers both – ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ discrimination.
The objective result of this difference in treatment (the nullification or Indirect discrimination refers impairment of equality of opportunity or treatment).
Defining “Discrimination” to apparently neutral Article 1(1) of the Convention defines discrimination to include (a) any distinction, exclusion or preference made on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation; (b) such other distinction, exclusion or preference which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of situations, regulations or practices which in fact result in unequal treatment of persons with certain characteristics.
It occurs when the same condition, treatment or criterion is applied to everyone, but results in a disproportionately harsh impact on some persons on the basis of characteristics such as race, colour, sex or opportunity or treatment in religion, and is not closely employment or occupation as may be determined by the Member concerned after consultation with representative related to the inherent requirements of the job.2 employers' and workers' The definition of organisations, where such exist, and with other appropriate bodies."
Article 5 of the Convention lays down that special measures adopted to meet the specific requirements of ‘discrimination’ outlined under Article 1 of the Convention contains three elements: individuals by reason of their "sex, A factual element (the age, disablement, family responsibilities or social or cultural status" shall not be deemed to be discrimination."
existence of a distinction, exclusion or preference originating in an act or omission) which constitutes a difference in treatment; A ground on which the difference in treatment is based; and 2 Equality in Employment and Occupation: Scope of the instruments as regards individuals, definition and grounds of discrimination.

Report III, Part 4B.

ILO.


Available at http://intranet.oit.org.pe/WDMS/bib/virtual/coleccion_oit/ilse/English/General%20Surveys/2 5962.htm Through this broad definition, the 1958 instruments cover all the situations which may affect the equality of opportunity and treatment that they are to promote.

There are some situations/measures, however, that are not considered discriminatory.
These include measures based on the inherent requirements of a particular job, measures intended to safeguard the security of the State, and special measures of protection (for example, to address the specific health needs of women or men) or assistance (for example, affirmative action and accommodation measures).

Convention No.
Convention No.

111 applies to all aspects of employment and occupation, both public and private, and extends to: Access to education, vocational guidance and training; Access to employment and occupation (i.e.
to work, whether self employment, wage employment or in the public service); Access to placement services; Access to workers’ and employers’ organizations; Career advancement; Security of job tenure; Collective bargaining; Equal remuneration for work of equal value; Access to social security, welfare facilities and benefits related to employment; and Other conditions of work including occupational safety and health, hours of work, rest periods, holidays.
in the 1958 Discrimination The concept of national extraction (Employment and Occupation) Convention, does not refer to the distinctions that may be made between the citizens of one country and those of another, but to distinctions between the citizens of the same country on the basis of a person's place of birth, ancestry or foreign origin.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 235 Thus, discrimination based on national extraction means that which may be directed against persons who are nationals of the country in question, but who have acquired their citizenship by naturalization or who are descendants of foreign immigrants, or persons belonging to groups of different national extraction living in the same State.
Further, in protecting individuals against discrimination in employment and occupation on the basis of political opinion, the Convention implies that this protection shall be afforded to them in respect of activities expressing or demonstrating opposition to the established political principles, or simply a different opinion.
The protection of political opinions only applies to opinions which are either expressed or demonstrated, and does not apply if violent methods are used to express or demonstrate these opinions.

At the same time that the Conference adopted Convention No.

111, it also adopted Recommendation No.

111 which supplements the Convention.

In addition to the seven grounds of discrimination outlined by the Convention, the Convention and Recommendation No.
111 provide that "such other distinction, exclusion or preference which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation (...) may be determined by the Member concerned after consultation with representative employers' and workers' organizations, where such exist, and with other appropriate bodies" (Article 1, Paragraph 1(b) of the Convention, and Paragraph 1, subparagraph (1)(b) of Recommendation No.111) within the framework of a national policy designed to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of employment and occupation.
This participation of employers' and workers' organizations, either directly or through a specialized body, is of particular importance since it provides an additional guarantee of the acceptance and implementation of national policies adopted in accordance with the Convention.
236 National Human Rights Commission, India Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Ratification Status Antigua and Barbuda Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina date 01:10:1969 27:02:1997 12:06:1969 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 18:06:1968 29:07:1994 15:06:1973 10:01:1973 19:05:1992 14:06:2001 26:09:2000 22:06:1972 14:10:1974 04:08:1961 22:03:1977 22:06:1999 22:05:1961 31:01:1977 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 26:11:1965 22:07:1960 16:04:1962 25:06:1993 23:08:1999 13:05:1988 26:11:1964 03:04:1979 09:06:1964 Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Thus, discrimination based on national extraction means that which may be directed against persons who are nationals of the country in question, but who have acquired their citizenship by naturalization or who are descendants of foreign immigrants, or persons belonging to groups of different national extraction living in the same State.
Further, in protecting individuals against discrimination in employment and occupation on the basis of political opinion, the Convention implies that this protection shall be afforded to them in respect of activities expressing or demonstrating opposition to the established political principles, or simply a different opinion.
The protection of political opinions only applies to opinions which are either expressed or demonstrated, and does not apply if violent methods are used to express or demonstrate these opinions.

At the same time that the Conference adopted Convention No.

111, it also adopted Recommendation No.

111 which supplements the Convention.

In addition to the seven grounds of discrimination outlined by the Convention, the Convention and Recommendation No.
111 provide that "such other distinction, exclusion or preference which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation (...) may be determined by the Member concerned after consultation with representative employers' and workers' organizations, where such exist, and with other appropriate bodies" (Article 1, Paragraph 1(b) of the Convention, and Paragraph 1, subparagraph (1)(b) of Recommendation No.111) within the framework of a national policy designed to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of employment and occupation.
This participation of employers' and workers' organizations, either directly or through a specialized body, is of particular importance since it provides an additional guarantee of the acceptance and implementation of national policies adopted in accordance with the Convention.
Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Ratification date 01:10:1969 27:02:1997 12:06:1969 04:06:1976 02:02:1983 18:06:1968 29:07:1994 15:06:1973 10:01:1973 19:05:1992 14:06:2001 26:09:2000 22:06:1972 14:10:1974 04:08:1961 22:03:1977 22:06:1999 22:05:1961 31:01:1977 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 26:11:1965 22:07:1960 16:04:1962 25:06:1993 23:08:1999 13:05:1988 26:11:1964 03:04:1979 09:06:1964 Status Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 237 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Chad Albania Chile Algeria China Angola Colombia Antigua and Barbuda Comoros Argentina Congo Armenia Democratic Republic of the Congo Australia Costa Rica Austria Côte d'Ivoire Azerbaijan Croatia Bahamas Cuba Bahrain Cyprus Bangladesh Czech Republic Barbados Denmark Belarus Djibouti Belgium Dominica Belize Dominican Republic Benin Ecuador Plurinational State of Bolivia Egypt Bosnia and Herzegovina El Salvador Botswana Equatorial Guinea Brazil Eritrea Bulgaria Estonia Burkina Faso Ethiopia Burundi Fiji Cambodia Finland Cameroon France Canada Gabon Cape Verde Gambia Central African Republic Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Ratification date 01:10:1969 29:03:1966 27:02:1997 20:09:1971 12:06:1969 12:01:2006 04:06:1976 04:03:1969 02:02:1983
 17:03:2004 18:06:1968 26:11:1999 29:07:1994 20:06:2001 15:06:1973 01:03:1962 10:01:1973 05:05:1961 19:05:1992 08:10:1991 14:06:2001 26:08:1965 26:09:2000 02:02:1968 22:06:1972 01:01:1993 14:10:1974 22:06:1960 04:08:1961 28:02:2005 22:03:1977 28:02:1983 22:06:1999 13:07:1964 22:05:1961 10:07:1962 31:01:1977 10:05:1960 02:06:1993 15:06:1995 05:06:1997 13:08:2001 26:11:1965 22:02:2000 22:07:1960 17:08:2005 16:04:1962 11:06:1966 25:06:1993 17:04:2002 23:08:1999 23:04:1970 13:05:1988 28:05:1981 26:11:1964 29:05:1961 03:04:1979 04:09:2000 09:06:1964 22:06:1993 15:06:1961 04:04:1961 07:05:1984 14:05:2003 11:10:1960 21:02:1977 Status Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified 238 National Human Rights Commission, India The Islamic Republic of Iran Republic of Korea Lao People's Democratic Republic Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius 01:09:1960 13:06:1975 09:11:1976 20:06:1960 20:06:1961 29:07:1963 03:06:1960 07:06:1999 30:06:1964 15:06:1959 22:04:1999 12:01:1959 12:08:1963 10:01:1975 04:07:1963 06:12:1999 07:05:2001 17:06:2009 04:12:1998 01:12:1966 31:03:1992 13:06:2008 27:01:1992 01:06:1977 27:01:1998 22:07:1959 13:06:1961 26:09:1994 21:03:2001 11:08:1961 22:03:1965 02:03:1964 01:07:1968 08:11:1963 18:12:2002 Ratified
 Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 17:11:1991 Democratic Republic of the Congo Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Dominican Republic Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau 29:03:1966 20:09:1971 12:01:2006 04:03:1969 17:03:2004 26:11:1999 20:06:2001 01:03:1962 05:05:1961 08:10:1991 26:08:1965 02:02:1968 01:01:1993 22:06:1960 28:02:2005 28:02:1983 13:07:1964 10:07:1962 10:05:1960 15:06:1995 13:08:2001 22:02:2000 17:08:2005 11:06:1966 17:04:2002 23:04:1970 28:05:1981 29:05:1961 04:09:2000 22:06:1993 15:06:1961 04:04:1961 07:05:1984 14:05:2003 11:10:1960 21:02:1977 Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Guinea Albania Guyana Algeria Haiti Angola Honduras Antigua and Barbuda Hungary Argentina Iceland Armenia India Australia Indonesia Austria The Islamic Republic of Iran Azerbaijan Iraq Bahamas Ireland Bahrain Israel Bangladesh Italy Barbados Jamaica Belarus Jordan Belgium Kazakhstan Belize Kenya Benin Kiribati Plurinational State of Bolivia Republic of Korea Bosnia and Herzegovina Kuwait Botswana Kyrgyzstan Brazil Lao People's Democratic
 Republic Bulgaria Latvia Burkina Faso Lebanon Burundi Lesotho Cambodia Liberia Cameroon Libya Canada Lithuania Cape Verde Luxembourg Central African Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Ratification date 01:10:1969 01:09:1960 27:02:1997 13:06:1975 12:06:1969 09:11:1976 04:06:1976 20:06:1960 02:02:1983 20:06:1961 18:06:1968 29:07:1963 29:07:1994 03:06:1960 15:06:1973 07:06:1999 10:01:1973 30:06:1964 19:05:1992 15:06:1959 14:06:2001 22:04:1999 26:09:2000 12:01:1959 22:06:1972 12:08:1963 14:10:1974 10:01:1975 04:08:1961 04:07:1963 22:03:1977 06:12:1999 22:06:1999 07:05:2001 22:05:1961 17:06:2009 31:01:1977 04:12:1998 02:06:1993 01:12:1966 05:06:1997 31:03:1992 26:11:1965 13:06:2008 22:07:1960 27:01:1992 16:04:1962 01:06:1977 25:06:1993 27:01:1998 23:08:1999 22:07:1959 13:05:1988 13:06:1961 26:11:1964 26:09:1994 03:04:1979 21:03:2001 09:06:1964 17:11:1991 11:08:1961 22:03:1965 02:03:1964 01:07:1968 08:11:1963 18:12:2002 Status Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 239 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Mexico Albania Republic of Moldova Algeria Mongolia Angola Montenegro Antigua and Barbuda Morocco Argentina Mozambique Armenia Namibia Australia Nepal Austria Netherlands Azerbaijan New Zealand Bahamas Nicaragua Bahrain
 Niger Bangladesh Nigeria Barbados Norway Belarus Pakistan Belgium Panama Belize Papua New Guinea Benin Paraguay Plurinational State of Bolivia Peru Bosnia and Herzegovina Philippines Botswana Poland Brazil Portugal Bulgaria Qatar Burkina Faso Romania Burundi Russian Federation Cambodia Rwanda Cameroon Saint Kitts and Nevis Canada Saint Lucia Cape Verde Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Central African Republic Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Ratification date 01:10:1969 11:09:1961 27:02:1997 12:08:1996 12:06:1969 03:06:1969 04:06:1976 03:06:2006 02:02:1983 27:03:1963 18:06:1968 06:06:1977 29:07:1994 13:11:2001 15:06:1973 19:09:1974 10:01:1973 15:03:1973 19:05:1992 03:06:1983 14:06:2001 31:10:1967 26:09:2000 23:03:1962 22:06:1972 02:10:2002 14:10:1974 24:09:1959 04:08:1961 24:01:1961 22:03:1977 16:05:1966 22:06:1999 02:06:2000 22:05:1961 10:07:1967 31:01:1977 10:08:1970 02:06:1993 17:11:1960 05:06:1997 30:05:1961 26:11:1965 19:11:1959 22:07:1960 18:08:1976 16:04:1962 06:06:1973 25:06:1993 04:05:1961 23:08:1999 02:02:1981 13:05:1988 25:08:2000 26:11:1964 18:08:1983 03:04:1979 09:11:2001 09:06:1964 30:06:2008 19:12:1986 01:06:1982 15:06:1978 13:11:1967 24:11:2000 23:11:1999 Status Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 240 National Human Rights Commission, India Sierra Leone Slovakia Slovenia Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab
 Republic Tajikistan Tanzania United Republic of Trinidad and Tobago Togo Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe 14:10:1966 01:01:1993 29:05:1992 08:12:1961 05:03:1997 06:11:1967 27:11:1998 22:10:1970 05:06:1981 20:06:1962 13:07:1961 10:05:1960 26:11:1993 26:02:2002 08:11:1983 26:11:1970 14:09:1959 19:07:1967 15:05:1997 02:06:2005 04:08:1961 28:06:2001 08:06:1999 16:11:1989 13:07:1992 28:07:2006 03:06:1971 07:10:1997 22:08:1969 23:10:1979 23:06:1999 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Mexico Republic of Moldova Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Papua New Guinea Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Sao Tome and Principe Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles 11:09:1961 12:08:1996 03:06:1969 03:06:2006 27:03:1963 06:06:1977 13:11:2001 19:09:1974 15:03:1973 03:06:1983 31:10:1967 23:03:1962 02:10:2002 24:09:1959 24:01:1961 16:05:1966 02:06:2000 10:07:1967 10:08:1970 17:11:1960 30:05:1961 19:11:1959 18:08:1976 06:06:1973 04:05:1961 02:02:1981 25:08:2000 18:08:1983 09:11:2001 30:06:2008 19:12:1986 01:06:1982 15:06:1978 13:11:1967 24:11:2000 23:11:1999 Ratified Ratified Ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Discrimination
 (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Sierra Leone Albania Slovakia Algeria Slovenia Angola Somalia Antigua and Barbuda South Africa Argentina Spain Armenia Sri Lanka Australia Sudan Austria Swaziland Azerbaijan Sweden Bahamas Switzerland Bahrain Syrian Arab Republic Bangladesh Tajikistan Barbados Tanzania United Republic of Belarus Togo Belgium Trinidad and Tobago Belize Tunisia Benin Turkey Plurinational State of Bolivia Turkmenistan Bosnia and Herzegovina Uganda Botswana Ukraine Brazil United Arab Emirates Bulgaria United Kingdom Burkina Faso Uruguay Burundi Uzbekistan Cambodia Vanuatu Cameroon Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Canada Viet Nam Cape Verde Yemen Central African Republic Zambia Zimbabwe Ratification date 01:10:1969 14:10:1966 27:02:1997 01:01:1993 12:06:1969 29:05:1992 04:06:1976 08:12:1961 02:02:1983 05:03:1997 18:06:1968 06:11:1967 29:07:1994 27:11:1998 15:06:1973 22:10:1970 10:01:1973 05:06:1981 19:05:1992 20:06:1962 14:06:2001 13:07:1961 26:09:2000 10:05:1960 22:06:1972 26:11:1993 14:10:1974 26:02:2002 04:08:1961 08:11:1983 22:03:1977 26:11:1970 22:06:1999 14:09:1959 22:05:1961 19:07:1967 31:01:1977 15:05:1997 02:06:1993 02:06:2005 05:06:1997 04:08:1961 26:11:1965 28:06:2001 22:07:1960 08:06:1999 16:04:1962 16:11:1989 25:06:1993 13:07:1992 23:08:1999 28:07:2006 13:05:1988 03:06:1971 26:11:1964 07:10:1997 03:04:1979 22:08:1969 09:06:1964 23:10:1979 23:06:1999 Status Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified ratified Ratified
 ratified ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 241 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 The ‘Minimum Age Convention’ or the ‘Convention concerning Minimum Age for Admission to Employment’ was adopted on 26 June 1973 by the General Conference of the International Labour Organisation at its fifty-eighth session.
The Convention entered into force on 19 June 1976, in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention.

Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (ILO Convention No.

138) The ‘Minimum Age’ ILO standard is aimed at ensuring the effective abolition of child labour and raising progressively, “the minimum age for admission to employment or work to a level consistent with the fullest physical and mental development of young persons”.
(Article 1) Entry into force: 19 June 1976 in accordance with Article 12 Parties: 161 India has not ratified the Convention This landmark Convention applies to all economic sectors and to all working children, whether they are employed for wages or working on their own account.

It represents the most comprehensive and authoritative international definition of minimum age for admission to employment.
It is also innovative in that it provides for a progressive and flexible approach to the problem, particularly for developing countries.

The ratifying State undertakes to pursue a national policy designed to ensure the effective abolition of child labour and to raise progressively, the minimum age for admission to employment or work to a level consistent with the fullest physical and mental development of young persons.
Minimum Age Convention, 1973 The ‘Minimum Age Convention’ or the ‘Convention concerning Minimum Age for Admission to Employment’ was adopted on 26 June 1973 by the General Conference of the International Labour Organisation at its fifty-eighth session.

The Convention entered into force on 19 June 1976, in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention.

Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (ILO Convention No.


138) The ‘Minimum Age’ ILO standard is aimed at ensuring the effective abolition of child labour and raising progressively, “the minimum age for admission to employment or work to a level consistent with the fullest physical and mental development of young persons”.
(Article 1) Entry into force: 19 June 1976 in accordance with Article 12 Parties: 161 India has not ratified the Convention This landmark Convention applies to all economic sectors and to all working children, whether they are employed for wages or working on their own account.

It represents the most comprehensive and authoritative international definition of minimum age for admission to employment.
It is also innovative in that it provides for a progressive and flexible approach to the problem, particularly for developing countries.

the effective abolition of child The ratifying State undertakes to pursue a national policy designed to ensure to raise progressively, the minimum age for admission to employment or work to a level consistent with the fullest physical and mental development of young persons.
labour and A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 243 The Convention provides that the minimum age to be specified in conformity with the Convention shall not be less than the age of completion compulsory of schooling and, in any case, shall not be less than 15 years.
Article 2(4) however, states that developing countries or a “Member whose economy and educational facilities are insufficiently developed” may, after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned, where such exist, initially specify a minimum age of 14 years.

The minimum age shall not be less than 18 years—or 16 years under certain conditions, for any type of employment or work which is likely to jeopardize the “health, safety or morals” of young persons.
The Convention provides that limited categories of employment or work may be excluded from its application where special and substantial problems of application can arise.
A member State whose administrative economy insufficiently facilities developed may initially limit the and are scope of application of this Convention, which shall, however, be applicable as a minimum to the following [Article 5(3)]: • Mining and Quarrying; • Manufacturing; Construction; Electricity; Gas and water; Sanitary services; Transport; • • • • • • • Storage and communication; Plantations and other agricultural undertakings mainly producing for commercial purposes, but excluding family and small- scale holdings producing for local consumption and not regularly employing hired workers.
Article 10 of the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 states that the Convention is a revision of the following Conventions: Minimum Age (Industry) Convention, 1919; Minimum Age (Sea) Convention, 1920; Minimum Age (Agriculture) Convention, 1921; Minimum Age (Trimmers and Stokers) Convention, 1921; Minimum Age (Non-Industrial Employment) Convention, 1932; Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised), 1936; Minimum Age (Industry) Convention (Revised), 1937; Minimum Age (Non-Industrial Employment) Convention (Revised), 1937; Minimum Age (Fishermen) Convention, 1959; and, Minimum age (Underground Work) Convention, 1965 The Convention does not apply to work done in schools for general, vocational or technical education or in other training institutions.
Likewise, subject to certain conditions, apprentices of more than 14 years of age are not covered by the Convention (Article 6).

Under the provisions of the Convention (Article 7), young persons of 13 to 15 Key Points of the Convention Each State that ratifies the Convention undertakes to pursue a National Policy to ensure the effective abolition of child labour.
Declaration of minimum to admission age employment or work for After consultation with organizations of employers and workers, the competent may allow authority exceptions individual in cases in a very few areas, but not to the basic rules.
The employment of young persons from the age of 16 years may be authorized, consultation with after organizations of employers and workers, the condition that their health, safety, and morals are fully protected; and they have received adequate specific instruction or vocational relevant the training branch of activity.
on in young Light work is work which is not likely to be harmful to the health or development of the persons concerned and is not such as to prejudice their attendance at school or participation in vocational orientation or training programs.

244 National Human Rights Commission, India Key Points of the Convention Each State that ratifies the Convention undertakes to pursue a National Policy to ensure the effective abolition of child labour.
Declaration of minimum age for admission to employment or work After consultation with organizations of employers and workers, the competent authority may allow exceptions in individual cases in a very few areas, but not to the basic rules.
The employment of young persons from the age of 16 years may be authorized, after consultation with organizations of employers and workers, on the condition that their health, safety, and morals are fully protected; and they have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training in the relevant branch of activity.
Light work is work which is not likely to be harmful to the health or development of the young persons concerned and is not such as to prejudice their attendance at school or participation in vocational orientation or training programs.

The Convention provides that the minimum age to be specified in conformity with the Convention shall not be less than the age of completion of compulsory schooling and, in any case, shall not be less than 15 years.
Article 2(4) however, states that developing countries or a “Member whose economy and educational facilities are insufficiently developed” may, after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned, where such exist, initially specify a minimum age of 14 years.

The minimum age shall not be less than 18 years—or 16 years under certain conditions, for any type of employment or work which is likely to jeopardize the “health, safety or morals” of young persons.
The Convention provides that limited categories of employment or work may be excluded from its application where special and substantial problems of application can arise.
A member State whose economy facilities and are administrative insufficiently developed may initially limit the scope of application of this Convention, which shall, however, be applicable as a minimum to the following [Article 5(3)]: • Mining and Quarrying; • Manufacturing; Construction; • Electricity; • Gas and water; • Sanitary services; • Transport; • Storage and communication; • Plantations and other agricultural undertakings mainly • producing for commercial purposes, but excluding family and small- scale holdings producing for local consumption and not regularly employing hired workers.
Article 10 of the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 states that the Convention is a revision of the following Conventions: Minimum Age (Industry) Convention, 1919; Minimum Age (Sea) Convention, 1920; Minimum Age (Agriculture) Convention, 1921; Minimum Age (Trimmers and Stokers) Convention, 1921; Minimum Age (Non-Industrial Employment) Convention, 1932; Minimum Age (Sea) Convention (Revised), 1936; Minimum Age (Industry) Convention (Revised), 1937; Minimum Age (Non-Industrial Employment) Convention (Revised), 1937; Minimum Age (Fishermen) Convention, 1959; and, Minimum age (Underground Work) Convention, 1965 The Convention does not apply to work done in schools for general, vocational or technical education or in other training institutions.
Likewise, subject to certain conditions, apprentices of more than 14 years of age are not covered by the Convention (Article 6).

Under the provisions of the Convention (Article 7), young persons of 13 to 15 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 245 years of age who have not yet finished their compulsory schooling— may be permitted to carry out light work of certain types and under certain conditions to be determined by a “competent authority”.
Developing countries may substitute the ages 12 and 14 for the ages 13 and 15 [Article 7(4)].

Minimum Age Convention, 1973 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Ratification Status The Convention is a revision of several other conventions for workers in specific areas (See Box below).

Upon entry into force, some of these conventions were closed for ratification and becoming a party to the Minimum Age Convention automatically the denunciation of the older ones.
resulted in Antigua and Barbuda Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Central African Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo date 07:04:2010 16:02:1998 30:04:1984 13:06:2001 17:03:1983 11:11:1996 27:01:2006 18:09:2000 19:05:1992 31:10:2001 04:01:2000 03:05:1979 19:04:1988 06:03:2000 11:06:2001 11:06:1997 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 28:06:2001 17:06:2011 23:04:1980 11:02:1999 19:07:2000 23:08:1999 13:08:2001 07:02:2011 28:06:2000 21:03:2005 01:02:1999 28:04:1999 02:02:2001 17:03:2004 26:11:1999 20:06:2001 11:06:1976 07:02:2003 08:10:1991 07:03:1975 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 246 National Human Rights Commission, India years of age who have not yet finished their compulsory schooling— may be permitted to carry out light work of certain types and under certain conditions to be determined by a “competent authority”.
Developing countries may substitute the ages 12 and 14 for the ages 13 and 15 [Article 7(4)].

The Convention is a revision of several other conventions for workers in specific areas (See Box below).

Upon entry into force, some of these conventions were closed for ratification and becoming a party to the Minimum Age Convention automatically resulted in the denunciation of the older ones.
Minimum Age Convention, 1973 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Democratic Republic of the Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Ratification date 07:04:2010 16:02:1998 30:04:1984 13:06:2001 17:03:1983 11:11:1996 27:01:2006 18:09:2000 19:05:1992 31:10:2001 04:01:2000 03:05:1979 19:04:1988 06:03:2000 11:06:2001 11:06:1997 02:06:1993 05:06:1997 28:06:2001 17:06:2011 23:04:1980 11:02:1999 19:07:2000 23:08:1999 13:08:2001 07:02:2011 28:06:2000 21:03:2005 01:02:1999 28:04:1999 02:02:2001 17:03:2004 26:11:1999 20:06:2001 11:06:1976 07:02:2003 08:10:1991 07:03:1975 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 247 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Cyprus Albania Czech Republic Algeria Denmark Angola Djibouti Antigua and Barbuda Dominica Argentina Dominican Republic Armenia Ecuador Austria Egypt Azerbaijan El Salvador Bahamas Equatorial Guinea Barbados Eritrea Belarus Estonia Belgium Ethiopia Belize Fiji Benin Finland Plurinational State of Bolivia France Bosnia and Herzegovina Gabon Botswana Gambia Brazil Georgia Brunei Darussalam Germany Bulgaria Ghana Burkina Faso Greece Burundi Grenada Cambodia Guatemala Cameroon Guinea-Bissau Cape Verde Guinea Central African Republic Guyana Chad Haiti Chile Honduras China Hungary Colombia
 Iceland Comoros Indonesia Congo Iraq Democratic Republic of the Congo Ireland Costa Rica Israel Côte d'Ivoire Italy Croatia Jamaica Cuba Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Ratification date 07:04:2010 02:10:1997 16:02:1998 26:04:2007 30:04:1984 13:11:1997 13:06:2001 14:06:2005 17:03:1983 27:09:1983 11:11:1996 15:06:1999 27:01:2006 19:09:2000 18:09:2000 09:06:1999 19:05:1992 23:01:1996 31:10:2001 12:06:1985 04:01:2000 22:02:2000 03:05:1979 15:03:2007 19:04:1988 27:05:1999 06:03:2000 03:01:2003 11:06:2001 13:01:1976 11:06:1997 13:07:1990 02:06:1993 25:10:2010 05:06:1997 04:09:2000 28:06:2001 23:09:1996 17:06:2011 08:04:1976 23:04:1980 06:06:2011 11:02:1999 14:03:1986 19:07:2000 14:05:2003 23:08:1999 27:04:1990 13:08:2001 05:03:2009 07:02:2011 06:06:2003 28:06:2000 15:04:1998 21:03:2005 03:06:2009 01:02:1999 09:06:1980 28:04:1999 28:05:1998 02:02:2001 06:12:1999 17:03:2004 07:06:1999 26:11:1999 13:02:1985 20:06:2001 22:06:1978 11:06:1976 21:06:1979 07:02:2003 28:07:1981 08:10:1991 13:10:2003 07:03:1975 05:06:2000 23:03:1998 18:05:2001 09:04:1979 17:06:2009 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 248 National Human Rights Commission, India Republic of Korea Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 17:11:1991 Republic of Moldova Latvia
 Lebanon Lesotho Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Netherlands Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Papua New Guinea Russian Federation 28:01:1999 15:11:1999 31:03:1992 13:06:2005 02:06:2006 10:06:2003 14:06:2001 19:06:1975 22:06:1998 24:03:1977 31:05:2000 19:11:1999 09:09:1997 11:03:2002 09:06:1988 03:12:2001 30:07:1990 21:09:1999 16:12:2002 03:06:2006 06:01:2000 16:06:2003 15:11:2000 30:05:1997 14:09:1976 02:11:1981 04:12:1978 02:10:2002 08:07:1980 21:07:2005 06:07:2006 31:10:2000 02:06:2000 03:03:2004 13:11:2002 04:06:1998 22:03:1978 20:05:1998 03:01:2006 19:11:1975 03:05:1979 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Dominican Republic Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati 02:10:1997 26:04:2007 13:11:1997 14:06:2005 27:09:1983 15:06:1999 19:09:2000 09:06:1999 23:01:1996 12:06:1985 22:02:2000 15:03:2007 27:05:1999 03:01:2003 13:01:1976 13:07:1990 25:10:2010 04:09:2000 23:09:1996 08:04:1976 06:06:2011 14:03:1986 14:05:2003 27:04:1990 05:03:2009 06:06:2003 15:04:1998 03:06:2009 09:06:1980 28:05:1998 06:12:1999 07:06:1999 13:02:1985 22:06:1978 21:06:1979 28:07:1981 13:10:2003 05:06:2000 23:03:1998 18:05:2001 09:04:1979 17:06:2009 ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Minimum Age Convention, 1973 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Republic of Korea Albania Kuwait Algeria Kyrgyzstan Angola Lao People's Democratic Republic Antigua and Barbuda Latvia Argentina Lebanon Armenia Lesotho Austria Libya Azerbaijan Lithuania Bahamas Luxembourg Barbados The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Belarus Madagascar Belgium Malawi Belize Malaysia Benin Mali Plurinational State of Bolivia Malta Bosnia and Herzegovina Mauritania Botswana Mauritius Brazil Republic of Moldova Brunei Darussalam Mongolia Bulgaria Montenegro Burkina Faso Morocco Burundi Mozambique Cambodia Namibia Cameroon Nepal Cape Verde Netherlands Central African Republic Nicaragua Chad Niger Chile Nigeria China Norway Colombia Oman Comoros Pakistan Congo Panama Democratic Republic of the Congo Papua New Guinea Costa Rica Paraguay Côte d'Ivoire Peru Croatia Philippines Cuba Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Russian Federation Ratification date 07:04:2010 28:01:1999 16:02:1998 15:11:1999 30:04:1984 31:03:1992 13:06:2001 13:06:2005 17:03:1983 02:06:2006 11:11:1996 10:06:2003 27:01:2006 14:06:2001 18:09:2000 19:06:1975 19:05:1992 22:06:1998 31:10:2001 24:03:1977 04:01:2000 17:11:1991 03:05:1979 31:05:2000 19:04:1988 19:11:1999 06:03:2000 09:09:1997 11:06:2001 11:03:2002 11:06:1997 09:06:1988 02:06:1993 03:12:2001 05:06:1997 30:07:1990 28:06:2001 21:09:1999 17:06:2011 16:12:2002 23:04:1980 03:06:2006 11:02:1999 06:01:2000 19:07:2000 16:06:2003 23:08:1999 15:11:2000 13:08:2001 30:05:1997 07:02:2011 14:09:1976 28:06:2000 02:11:1981 21:03:2005 04:12:1978 01:02:1999 02:10:2002 28:04:1999 08:07:1980 02:02:2001
 21:07:2005 17:03:2004 06:07:2006 26:11:1999 31:10:2000 20:06:2001 02:06:2000 11:06:1976 03:03:2004 07:02:2003 13:11:2002 08:10:1991 04:06:1998 07:03:1975 22:03:1978 20:05:1998 03:01:2006 19:11:1975 03:05:1979 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 249 Minimum Age Convention, 1973 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Rwanda Albania Saint Kitts and Nevis Algeria Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Angola Samoa Antigua and Barbuda San Marino Argentina Sao Tome and Principe Armenia Senegal Austria Serbia Azerbaijan Seychelles Bahamas Sierra Leone Barbados Singapore Belarus Slovakia Belgium Slovenia Belize South Africa Benin Spain Plurinational State of Bolivia Sri Lanka Bosnia and Herzegovina Sudan Botswana Swaziland Brazil Sweden Brunei Darussalam Switzerland Bulgaria Syrian Arab Republic Burkina Faso Tajikistan Burundi Tanzania United Republic of Cambodia Thailand Cameroon Togo Cape Verde Trinidad and Tobago Central African Republic Tunisia Chad Turkey Chile Uganda China Ukraine Colombia United Arab Emirates Comoros United Kingdom Congo Uruguay Democratic Republic of the Congo Uzbekistan Costa Rica Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Côte d'Ivoire Viet Nam Croatia Yemen Cuba Zambia Zimbabwe Ratification date
 07:04:2010 15:04:1981 16:02:1998 03:06:2005 30:04:1984 25:07:2006 13:06:2001 29:10:2008 17:03:1983 01:02:1995 11:11:1996 04:05:2005 27:01:2006 15:12:1999 18:09:2000 24:11:2000 19:05:1992 07:03:2000 31:10:2001 10:06:2011 04:01:2000 07:11:2005 03:05:1979 29:09:1997 19:04:1988 29:05:1992 06:03:2000 30:03:2000 11:06:2001 16:05:1977 11:06:1997 11:02:2000 02:06:1993 07:03:2002 05:06:1997 23:10:2002 28:06:2001 23:04:1990 17:06:2011 17:08:1999 23:04:1980 18:09:2001 11:02:1999 26:11:1993 19:07:2000 16:12:1998 23:08:1999 11:05:2004 13:08:2001 16:03:1984 07:02:2011 03:09:2004 28:06:2000 19:10:1995 21:03:2005 30:10:1998 01:02:1999 25:03:2003 28:04:1999 03:05:1979 02:02:2001 02:10:1998 17:03:2004 07:06:2000 26:11:1999 02:06:1977 20:06:2001 06:03:2009 11:06:1976 15:07:1987 07:02:2003 24:06:2003 08:10:1991 15:06:2000 07:03:1975 09:02:1976 06:06:2000 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified 250 National Human Rights Commission, India Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 The ‘Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour’, also known as the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, was adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 1999 as ILO Convention No 182.
Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 (ILO Convention No.

182) The Convention aims to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

Entry into force: 19 November 2000 Parties: 174 India has not ratified the Convention.

The Convention requires each Member which ratifies it to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency.
For the purposes of this Convention, the term ‘child’ applies to all persons under the age of 18.

Child labour has been broadly described by the International Labour Organization as work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to their physical and mental development.
Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tome and Principe Samoa San Marino Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Thailand Togo Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Syrian Arab Republic Tanzania United Republic of Trinidad and Tobago United Arab Emirates United Kingdom Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela 15:04:1981 03:06:2005 25:07:2006 29:10:2008 01:02:1995 04:05:2005 15:12:1999 24:11:2000 07:03:2000 10:06:2011 07:11:2005 29:09:1997 29:05:1992 30:03:2000 16:05:1977 11:02:2000 07:03:2002 23:10:2002 23:04:1990 17:08:1999 18:09:2001 26:11:1993 16:12:1998 11:05:2004 16:03:1984 03:09:2004 19:10:1995 30:10:1998 25:03:2003 03:05:1979 02:10:1998 07:06:2000 02:06:1977 06:03:2009 15:07:1987 24:06:2003 15:06:2000 09:02:1976 06:06:2000 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified concerning Convention the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 The ‘Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour’, also known as the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, was adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 1999 as ILO Convention No 182.
Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 (ILO Convention No.

182) The Convention aims to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour.

Entry into force: 19 November 2000 Parties: 174 India has not ratified the Convention.

The Convention requires each Member which ratifies it to take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency.
For the purposes of this Convention, the term ‘child’ applies to all persons under the age of 18.

Child labour has been broadly described by the International Labour Organization as work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to their physical and mental development.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 251 What is Child Labour?
This Convention goes hand in hand with the Minimum Age Convention of 1973, and together they remain the fundamental instruments on child labour.

India however, has not ratified either of the ILO Conventions to Child Labour.
According to the ILO, Child labour refers to work that: related is them mentally, immediate into account to school by obliging opportunity school; leave prematurely; or physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children; and interferes with their schooling: by depriving them of the to attend by requiring them to combine to attempt school attendance with excessively and heavy work.
its most extreme The Governing Body of the International Labour Office effective felt the that the worst elimination of forms of child labour would require and action, comprehensive taking the importance of free basic education and the need to the remove children concerned from all such work and to provide for rehabilitation their and social integration while addressing the needs of their families.
It was recognized that child labour is to a great extent caused by poverty and that the long-term solution lies in sustained economic growth leading to social progress, in particular poverty alleviation and universal education.
The Governing Body itself based this Convention on the Convention on the Rights of the Child adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 20 November 1989, and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, it In involves children being enslaved, separated families, exposed to serious hazards and illnesses and/or left to fend for themselves on the streets of large cities – all of this often at a very early age.
forms, from their long 252 National Human Rights Commission, India adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 86th Session in 1998.
Worst Forms of Child Labour as defined by the Convention Article 3 of the Convention identifies the worst forms of child labour as follows: (a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such It also recognized that some of the worst forms of child labour are covered by other international instruments, in particular, the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, and the United Nations Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and as the sale and trafficking of Practices Similar to Slavery, 1956. children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment Yet, they decided upon the adoption of certain proposals with regard to child labour in the form of children for use in armed of an international Convention at conflict; (b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances; (c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties; (d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.
their 87th Session, held in Geneva on June 1st, 1999.

It has been ratified by 174 countries, not including India (Source: ILO Website).

Unlike the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No.

138), this Convention contains no “flexibility clauses”, and makes no distinction between developed and developing countries.

The Convention applies to all girls and boys under the age of 18.
This Convention goes hand in hand with the Minimum Age Convention of 1973, and together they remain the fundamental adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 86th Session in 1998.

What is Child Labour?

instruments on child labour.

India however, has not According to the ILO, Child labour ratified either of the ILO refers to work that: Conventions related to is mentally, physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children; and Child Labour.
The Governing Body of the International Labour Office interferes with their schooling: felt that the effective by depriving them of the elimination of the worst opportunity to attend school; leave by obliging them to school prematurely; or by requiring them to attempt to combine forms of child labour would require immediate and comprehensive action, taking into account the importance of free basic education and the need to school attendance with remove the children excessively long and heavy work.
In its most extreme forms, it involves children being enslaved, separated from their families, exposed to serious hazards and concerned from all such work and to provide for their rehabilitation and social integration while addressing the needs of their illnesses and/or left to fend for families.

themselves on the streets of large It was recognized that child cities – all of this often at a very early age.
labour is to a great extent caused by poverty and that the long-term solution lies in sustained economic growth leading to social progress, in particular poverty alleviation and universal education.
The Governing Body itself based this Convention on the Convention on the Rights of the Child adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 20 November 1989, and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, Worst Forms of Child Labour as defined by the Convention Article 3 of the Convention identifies the worst forms of child labour as follows: (a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of and children, debt bondage serfdom or forced and including compulsory forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; labour, (b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances; (c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties; (d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.
the United It also recognized that some of the worst forms of child labour are covered by other international instruments, the in particular, Forced Labour Convention, 1930, Nations and Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Institutions and Trade, and Practices Similar to Slavery, 1956.

Yet, the they decided upon adoption of certain proposals with regard to child labour in the form of an international Convention at their 87th Session, held in Geneva on June 1st, 1999.
It has been ratified by 174 countries, not including ILO Website).

(Source: India contains Unlike the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No.

138), this Convention no “flexibility clauses”, and makes no distinction between developed and developing countries.

The Convention applies to all girls and boys under the age of 18.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 253 Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Ratification date 07:04:2010 02:08:2001 09:02:2001 13:06:2001 16:09:2002 05:02:2001 02:01:2006 19:12:2006 04:12:2001 30:03:2004 14:06:2001 23:03:2001 12:03:2001 23:10:2000 31:10:2000 08:05:2002 06:03:2000 06:11:2001 06:06:2003 05:10:2001 03:01:2000 02:02:2000 09:06:2008 28:07:2000 25:07:2001 11:06:2002 14:03:2006 05:06:2002 06:06:2000 23:10:2001 28:06:2000 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified 254 National Human Rights Commission, India Democratic Republic of the Congo Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Dominican Republic Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana 06:11:2000 17:07:2000 08:08:2002 28:01:2005 17:03:2004 23:08:2002 20:06:2001 10:09:2001 07:02:2003 17:07:2001 27:11:2000 19:06:2001 14:08:2000 28:02:2005 04:01:2001 15:11:2000 19:09:2000 06:05:2002 12:10:2000 13:08:2001 24:09:2001 02:09:2003 17:04:2002 17:01:2000 11:09:2001 28:03:2001 03:07:2001 24:07:2002 18:04:2002 13:06:2000 06:11:2001 14:05:2003 11:10:2001 26:08:2008 06:06:2003 15:01:2001 ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Country Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Ratification Status Antigua and Barbuda Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria Angola Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Plurinational State of Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic date 07:04:2010 02:08:2001 09:02:2001 13:06:2001 16:09:2002 05:02:2001 02:01:2006 19:12:2006 04:12:2001 30:03:2004 14:06:2001 23:03:2001 12:03:2001 23:10:2000 31:10:2000 08:05:2002 06:03:2000 06:11:2001 06:06:2003 05:10:2001 03:01:2000 02:02:2000 09:06:2008 28:07:2000 25:07:2001 11:06:2002 14:03:2006 05:06:2002 06:06:2000 23:10:2001 28:06:2000 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified Afghanistan Chad Albania Chile Algeria China Angola Colombia Antigua and Barbuda Comoros Argentina Congo Armenia Democratic Republic of the Congo Australia Costa Rica Austria Côte d'Ivoire Azerbaijan Croatia Bahamas Cyprus Bahrain Czech Republic Bangladesh Denmark Barbados Djibouti Belarus Dominica Belgium Dominican Republic Belize Ecuador Benin Egypt
 Plurinational State of Bolivia El Salvador Bosnia and Herzegovina Equatorial Guinea Botswana Estonia Brazil Ethiopia Brunei Darussalam Fiji Bulgaria Finland Burkina Faso France Burundi Gabon Cambodia Gambia Cameroon Georgia Canada Germany Cape Verde Ghana Central African Republic Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea-Bissau Guinea Guyana Ratification date 07:04:2010 06:11:2000 02:08:2001 17:07:2000 09:02:2001 08:08:2002 13:06:2001 28:01:2005 16:09:2002 17:03:2004 05:02:2001 23:08:2002 02:01:2006 20:06:2001 19:12:2006 10:09:2001 04:12:2001 07:02:2003 30:03:2004 17:07:2001 14:06:2001 27:11:2000 23:03:2001 19:06:2001 12:03:2001 14:08:2000 23:10:2000 28:02:2005 31:10:2000 04:01:2001 08:05:2002 15:11:2000 06:03:2000 19:09:2000 06:11:2001 06:05:2002 06:06:2003 12:10:2000 05:10:2001 13:08:2001 03:01:2000 24:09:2001 02:02:2000 02:09:2003 09:06:2008 17:04:2002 28:07:2000 17:01:2000 25:07:2001 11:09:2001 11:06:2002 28:03:2001 14:03:2006 03:07:2001 05:06:2002 24:07:2002 06:06:2000 18:04:2002 23:10:2001 13:06:2000 28:06:2000 06:11:2001 14:05:2003 11:10:2001 26:08:2008 06:06:2003 15:01:2001 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 255 Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Haiti Albania Honduras Algeria Hungary Angola
 Iceland Antigua and Barbuda Indonesia Argentina The Islamic Republic of Iran Armenia Iraq Australia Ireland Austria Israel Azerbaijan Italy Bahamas Jamaica Bahrain Japan Bangladesh Jordan Barbados Kazakhstan Belarus Kenya Belgium Kiribati Belize Republic of Korea Benin Kuwait Plurinational State of Bolivia Kyrgyzstan Bosnia and Herzegovina Lao People's Democratic Republic Botswana Latvia Brazil Lebanon Brunei Darussalam Lesotho Bulgaria Liberia Burkina Faso Libya Burundi Lithuania Cambodia Luxembourg Cameroon The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Canada Madagascar Cape Verde Malawi Central African Republic Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Ratification date 07:04:2010 19:07:2007 02:08:2001 25:10:2001 09:02:2001 20:04:2000 13:06:2001 29:05:2000 16:09:2002 28:03:2000 05:02:2001 08:05:2002 02:01:2006 09:07:2001 19:12:2006 20:12:1999 04:12:2001 15:03:2005 30:03:2004 07:06:2000 14:06:2001 13:10:2003 23:03:2001 18:06:2001 12:03:2001 20:04:2000 23:10:2000 26:02:2003 31:10:2000 07:05:2001 08:05:2002 17:06:2009 06:03:2000 29:03:2001 06:11:2001 15:08:2000 06:06:2003 11:05:2004 05:10:2001 13:06:2005 03:01:2000 02:06:2006 02:02:2000 11:09:2001 09:06:2008 14:06:2001 28:07:2000 02:06:2003 25:07:2001 04:10:2000 11:06:2002 29:09:2003 14:03:2006 21:03:2001 05:06:2002 30:05:2002 06:06:2000 04:10:2001 23:10:2001 19:11:1999 28:06:2000 10:11:2000 14:07:2000 15:06:2001 03:12:2001 08:06:2000 30:06:2000 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified Ratified 256 National Human Rights Commission, India Republic of Moldova Papua New Guinea Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Rwanda Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Russian Federation Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tome and Principe 14:06:2002 26:02:2001 03:06:2006 26:01:2001 16:06:2003 15:11:2000 03:01:2002 14:02:2002 14:06:2001 06:11:2000 23:10:2000 02:10:2002 21:12:2000 11:06:2001 11:10:2001 31:10:2000 02:06:2000 07:03:2001 10:01:2002 28:11:2000 09:08:2002 15:06:2000 30:05:2000 13:12:2000 25:03:2003 23:05:2000 12:10:2000 06:12:2000 04:12:2001 30:06:2008 15:03:2000 04:05:2005 08:10:2001 01:06:2000 10:07:2003 28:09:1999 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified The Islamic Republic of Iran Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Republic of Korea Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland Indonesia Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico 19:07:2007 25:10:2001 20:04:2000 29:05:2000 28:03:2000 08:05:2002 09:07:2001 20:12:1999 15:03:2005 07:06:2000 13:10:2003 18:06:2001 20:04:2000 26:02:2003 07:05:2001 17:06:2009 29:03:2001 15:08:2000 11:05:2004 13:06:2005 02:06:2006 11:09:2001 14:06:2001 02:06:2003 04:10:2000 29:09:2003 21:03:2001 04:10:2001 19:11:1999 10:11:2000 14:07:2000 15:06:2001 03:12:2001 08:06:2000 30:06:2000 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 30:05:2002 Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Republic of Moldova Albania Mongolia Algeria Montenegro Angola Morocco Antigua and Barbuda Mozambique Argentina Namibia Armenia Nepal Australia Netherlands Austria New Zealand Azerbaijan Nicaragua Bahamas Niger Bahrain Nigeria Bangladesh Norway Barbados Oman Belarus Pakistan Belgium Panama Belize Papua New Guinea Benin Paraguay Plurinational State of Bolivia Peru Bosnia and Herzegovina Philippines Botswana Poland Brazil Portugal Brunei Darussalam Qatar Bulgaria Romania Burkina Faso Russian Federation Burundi Rwanda Cambodia Saint Kitts and Nevis Cameroon Saint Lucia Canada Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Cape Verde Samoa Central African Republic San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Ratification date 07:04:2010 14:06:2002 02:08:2001 26:02:2001 09:02:2001 03:06:2006 13:06:2001 26:01:2001 16:09:2002 16:06:2003 05:02:2001 15:11:2000 02:01:2006 03:01:2002 19:12:2006 14:02:2002 04:12:2001 14:06:2001 30:03:2004 06:11:2000 14:06:2001 23:10:2000 23:03:2001 02:10:2002 12:03:2001 21:12:2000 23:10:2000 11:06:2001 31:10:2000 11:10:2001 08:05:2002 31:10:2000 06:03:2000 02:06:2000 06:11:2001 07:03:2001 06:06:2003 10:01:2002 05:10:2001 28:11:2000 03:01:2000 09:08:2002 02:02:2000 15:06:2000 09:06:2008 30:05:2000 28:07:2000 13:12:2000 25:07:2001 25:03:2003 11:06:2002 23:05:2000 14:03:2006 12:10:2000 05:06:2002 06:12:2000 06:06:2000 04:12:2001 23:10:2001 30:06:2008 28:06:2000 15:03:2000 04:05:2005 08:10:2001 01:06:2000 10:07:2003 28:09:1999 Status ratified ratified
 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 257 Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, 1999 COUNTRY-WISE RATIFICATION STATUS (Source: ILO Website) Country Afghanistan Sierra Leone Albania Singapore Algeria Slovakia Angola Slovenia Antigua and Barbuda South Africa Argentina Spain Armenia Sri Lanka Australia Sudan Austria Suriname Azerbaijan Swaziland Bahamas Sweden Bahrain Switzerland Bangladesh Syrian Arab Republic Barbados Tajikistan Belarus Tanzania United Republic of Belgium Thailand Belize Timor-Leste Benin Togo Plurinational State of Bolivia Trinidad and Tobago Bosnia and Herzegovina Tunisia Botswana Turkey Brazil Turkmenistan Brunei Darussalam Uganda Bulgaria Ukraine Burkina Faso United Arab Emirates Burundi United Kingdom Cambodia United States Cameroon Uruguay Canada Uzbekistan Cape Verde Vanuatu Central African Republic Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Ratification date 07:04:2010 10:06:2011 02:08:2001 14:06:2001 09:02:2001 20:12:1999 13:06:2001 08:05:2001 16:09:2002 07:06:2000 05:02:2001 02:04:2001 02:01:2006 01:03:2001 19:12:2006 07:03:2003 04:12:2001 12:04:2006 30:03:2004 23:10:2002 14:06:2001 13:06:2001 23:03:2001 28:06:2000 12:03:2001 22:05:2003 23:10:2000 08:06:2005 31:10:2000 12:09:2001 08:05:2002 16:02:2001 06:03:2000 16:06:2009 06:11:2001 19:09:2000 06:06:2003
 23:04:2003 05:10:2001 28:02:2000 03:01:2000 02:08:2001 02:02:2000 15:11:2010 09:06:2008 21:06:2001 28:07:2000 14:12:2000 25:07:2001 28:06:2001 11:06:2002 22:03:2000 14:03:2006 02:12:1999 05:06:2002 03:08:2001 06:06:2000 24:06:2008 23:10:2001 28:08:2006 28:06:2000 26:10:2005 19:12:2000 15:06:2000 10:12:2001 11:12:2000 Status ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified 258 National Human Rights Commission, India Constitutional Provisions on Human Rights & Implementation of International Law The Constitution of India is based on the principles of liberty, equality, fraternity and justice.
The provisions of the Constitution manifest great respect for human dignity, commitment to equality and non-discrimination and concern for the weaker sections of society.

Further, the Constitution makes it mandatory for the Government to protect and promote freedoms, and to assure to every citizen, a decent standard of living.
The Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III and Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Part IV of the Indian Constitution, together aim to establish political, economic and social democracy and justice in the country.
The Right to Life, Right to Equality, Right to Freedom, Right against Exploitation, Cultural and Educational Rights, Right to Constitutional Remedies, and special provisions relating to certain sections of the Indian population, contained in the Constitution, are some of the provisions that guarantee to each citizen, certain fundamental freedoms and rights.

The Directive Principles of State Policy are in the form of instructions or guidelines to the governments at the center as well as states.
Though these principles are non-justiciable, they are fundamental to the governance of the country.

The idea of Directive Principles, borrowed from the Irish Republic, was incorporated into the Indian Constitution to provide positive directions to government at all levels to contribute to the establishment and realization of social and economic justice within the country.
International Treaties and Constitutional Provisions The Constitution of India does not lay down any express provisions to deal with the implementation of international treaties and conventions to which India may be a State Party.
It neither makes any emphatic reference to the status of International Law within the Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Tanzania United Republic of Trinidad and Tobago Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Turkmenistan Tunisia Turkey Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela 10:06:2011 14:06:2001 20:12:1999 08:05:2001 07:06:2000 02:04:2001 01:03:2001 07:03:2003 12:04:2006 23:10:2002 13:06:2001 28:06:2000 22:05:2003 08:06:2005 12:09:2001 16:02:2001 16:06:2009 19:09:2000 23:04:2003 28:02:2000 02:08:2001 15:11:2010 21:06:2001 14:12:2000 28:06:2001 22:03:2000 02:12:1999 03:08:2001 24:06:2008 28:08:2006 26:10:2005 19:12:2000 15:06:2000 10:12:2001 11:12:2000 ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified ratified Constitutional Provisions on Human Rights & Implementation of International Law The Constitution of India is based on the principles of liberty, equality, fraternity and justice.
The provisions of the Constitution manifest great respect for human dignity, commitment to equality and non-discrimination and concern for the weaker sections of society.

Further, the Constitution makes it mandatory for the Government to protect and promote freedoms, and to assure to every citizen, a decent standard of living.
The Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III and Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Part IV of the Indian Constitution, together aim to establish political, economic and social democracy and justice in the country.
The Right to Life, Right to Equality, Right to Freedom, Right against Exploitation, Cultural and Educational Rights, Right to Constitutional Remedies, and special provisions relating to certain sections of the Indian population, contained in the Constitution, are some of the provisions that guarantee to each citizen, certain fundamental freedoms and rights.

The Directive Principles of State Policy are in the form of instructions or guidelines to the governments at the center as well as states.
Though these principles are non-justiciable, they are fundamental to the governance of the country.

The idea of Directive Principles, borrowed from Indian Constitution to provide positive directions to government at all levels to contribute to the establishment and realization of social and economic justice within the country.
Irish Republic, was incorporated into the the International Treaties and Constitutional Provisions The Constitution of India does not lay down any express provisions to deal with the implementation of international treaties and conventions to which India may be a State Party.
It neither makes any emphatic reference to the status of International Law within the A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 259 country’s domestic legal system nor does it specifically obligate or authorize the judiciary to draw upon International Law.
The basic provisions of the Constitution of India relevant for consideration of inter-relationship with interaction and International Law are as follows: its Article 51(c) [Promotion of International Peace and Security] The basic provision of the Constitution of India, by virtue of implementable through which municipal laws of India is Article 51 (c), which reads as under: law becomes international 51.
The State shall endeavour to— (c) Foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organized peoples with one another Article 73 [Extent of Executive Power of the Union] Under Article 73, the executive power of the Union extends to all matters in respect of which the Indian Parliament may make laws and to the exercise of all powers that accrue to the Government of India from any International Treaty or Agreement.
It is pertinent to note that executive power has to be exercised in accordance with Constitution and the laws.
Article 73(1) reads as under: (1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the 73. executive power of the Union shall extend— (a) To the matters with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws; and (b) To the exercise of such rights, authority and jurisdiction as are exercisable by the Government of India by virtue of any treaty or agreement: Provided that the executive power referred to in sub- clause (a) shall not, save as expressly provided in this Constitution or in any law made by Parliament, extend in any State to matters with respect to which the Legislature of the State has also power to make laws.
260 National Human Rights Commission, India Article 253 [Legislation for Giving Effect to International Agreements] Article 253 confers powers on the Indian Parliament to make any law for the whole or any part of the country to give effect to any International Treaty, Agreement, Convention or decision.
Though the power to sign and ratify an international treaty lies with the Executive, the implementation of such treaties falls under the domain of Parliament as explicitly provided under Article 253, which reads as follows: 253.
Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter, Parliament has power to make any law for the whole or any part of the territory of India for implementing any treaty, agreement or convention with any other country or countries or any decision made at any international conference, association or other body.
The Government of India has executive power to enter into and implement international treaties under Article 253 read with Entry 14 of List I (Union List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution.
Entry 14 of the Union List reads as under: “Entering into treaties, agreements and conventions with Foreign Countries.” Article 260 [Jurisdiction of the Union in Relation to Territories outside India] Article 260, read in conjunction with Entry 16 (Foreign Jurisdiction) of the Union List contained in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, provides that the Government of India may, by treaty or agreement with another country, exercise some extra-territorial jurisdiction in the territory of that country and ‘undertake any executive, legislative or judicial functions vested in the government of such territory”.
The Article clarifies that every such agreement shall be subject to and governed by any law relating to the exercise of foreign country’s domestic legal system nor does it specifically obligate or Article 253 [Legislation for Giving Effect to International authorize the judiciary to draw upon International Law.
Agreements] The basic provisions of the Constitution of India relevant for consideration of its interaction and inter-relationship with International Law are as follows: Article 51(c) [Promotion of International Peace and Security] The basic provision of the Constitution of India, by virtue of which international law becomes implementable through municipal laws of India is Article 51 (c), which reads as under: 51.
The State shall endeavour to— (c) Foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organized peoples with one another Article 73 [Extent of Executive Power of the Union] Under Article 73, the executive power of the Union extends to all matters in respect of which the Indian Parliament may make laws and to the exercise of all powers that accrue to the Government of India from any International Treaty or Agreement.
It is pertinent to note that executive power has to be exercised in accordance with Constitution and the laws.

Article 73(1) reads as under: 73.
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the executive power of the Union shall extend— (a) To the matters with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws; and (b) To the exercise of such rights, authority and jurisdiction as are exercisable by the Government of India by virtue of any treaty or agreement: Provided that the executive power referred to in sub- clause (a) shall not, save as expressly provided in this Constitution or in any law made by Parliament, extend in any State to matters with respect to which the Legislature of the State has also power to make laws.
Article 253 confers powers on the Indian Parliament to make any law for the whole or any part of the country to give effect International Treaty, Agreement, Convention or to any decision.

Though the power to sign and ratify an international treaty lies with the Executive, the implementation of such treaties falls under the domain of Parliament as explicitly provided under Article 253, which reads as follows: 253.
Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter, Parliament has power to make any law for the whole or any part of the territory of India for implementing any treaty, agreement or convention with any other country or countries or any decision made at any international conference, association or other body.
The Government of India has executive power to enter into and implement international treaties under Article 253 read with Entry 14 of List I (Union List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution.
Entry 14 of the Union List reads as under: “Entering into treaties, agreements and conventions with Foreign Countries.” Article 260 [Jurisdiction of the Union in Relation to Territories outside India] Article 260, read in conjunction with Entry 16 (Foreign Jurisdiction) of the Union List contained in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, provides that the Government of India may, by treaty or agreement with another country, exercise some extra-territorial jurisdiction in the territory of that country and ‘undertake any executive, legislative or judicial functions vested in the government of such territory”.
The Article clarifies that every such agreement shall be subject to and governed by any law relating to the exercise of foreign A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 261 jurisdiction for the time being in force.

Article 260 reads as follows: 260.


The Government of India may by agreement with the Government of any territory not being part of the territory of judicial India undertake any executive, functions vested in the Government of such territory, but every such agreement shall be subject to, and governed by, any law relating to the exercise of foreign jurisdiction for the time being in force.
legislative or for laws and international It is pertinent to note that Article 51 enshrines one of the fundamental Directive Principles of State policy (that is, “foster treaty obligations”) respect embodied in Part IV of the Constitution.
Directive Principles, according to Article 37 of the Indian Constitution, although not law, are nevertheless enforceable through the court of fundamental in the governance of the country and there is a non-obligatory duty on the part of the State to apply these principles in the formulation of laws.

The non-justiciability of Article 51 therefore, does not imply that the Government can abjure its obligations set out in the international treaty to which it is a state party.
Further, the judiciary is at liberty to interpret India’s obligations under international law into the municipal laws of the country in pronouncing its decision in a case concerning issues of international law.

International Treaties and the Indian Judiciary Wherever necessary, Indian courts are empowered to refer to and draw upon International Conventions as an external aid for the construction of a national legislation.
There are several instances in which the Indian Courts have made reference to India’s obligations under various international treaties.

262 National Human Rights Commission, India Judicial interpretation of Article 51(c) Article 51 has been relied upon by Courts to hold that various International Covenants, Treaties etcetera, particularly those to which India is a party or signatory, become part of Domestic Law in so far as there is no conflict between the two.
The Supreme Court for instance, in the Visakha vs. State of Rajasthan case took recourse to International Convention for the purpose of the construction of domestic law.
The Court observed as follows: In the absence of domestic law occupying the field to formulate effective measures to check the evil of sexual harassment of working women at all work places, the contents of International Conventions and norms are significant for the purpose of interpretation of the guarantee of gender equality, right to work with human dignity in Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and the safeguards against sexual harassment implicit therein.
Any international convention not inconsistent with the fundamental rights and in harmony with its spirit must be read into those provisions to enlarge the meaning and content thereof, to promote the object of the Constitutional guarantee.

Obligations arising under international agreements or treaties are not, by their own force, binding in Indian domestic law.

Appropriate legislative or executive action has to be taken to bring them into force.
Although not self-executing under Indian law, implementation of a treaty does not require fresh legislative or executive action if existing administrative regulations or statutory or constitutional provisions permit the implementation of the treaty in question.

jurisdiction for the time being in force.

Article 260 reads as follows: 260.


The Government of India may by agreement with the Government of any territory not being part of the territory of India undertake any executive, legislative or judicial functions vested in the Government of such territory, but every such agreement shall be subject to, and governed by, any law relating to the exercise of foreign jurisdiction for the time being in force.
It is pertinent to note that Article 51 enshrines one of the fundamental Directive Principles of State policy (that is, “foster respect for international laws and treaty obligations”) embodied in Part IV of the Constitution.
Directive Principles, according to Article 37 of the Indian Constitution, although not enforceable through the court of law, are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and there is a non-obligatory duty on the part of the State to apply these principles in the formulation of laws.

The non-justiciability of Article 51 therefore, does not imply that the Government can abjure its obligations set out in the international treaty to which it is a state party.
Further, the judiciary is at liberty to interpret India’s obligations under international law into the municipal laws of the country in pronouncing its decision in a case concerning issues of international law.

International Treaties and the Indian Judiciary Wherever necessary, Indian courts are empowered to refer to and draw upon International Conventions as an external aid for the construction of a national legislation.
There are several instances in which the Indian Courts have made reference to India’s obligations under various international treaties.

Judicial interpretation of Article 51(c) Article 51 has been relied upon by Courts to hold that various International Covenants, Treaties etcetera, particularly those to which India is a party or signatory, become part of Domestic Law in so far as there is no conflict between the two.
The Supreme Court for instance, in the Visakha vs. State of Rajasthan case took recourse to International Convention for the purpose of the construction of domestic law.
The Court observed as follows: In the absence of domestic law occupying the field to formulate effective measures to check the evil of sexual harassment of working women at all work places, the contents of International Conventions and norms are significant for the purpose of interpretation of the guarantee of gender equality, right to work with human dignity in Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and the safeguards against sexual harassment implicit therein.
Any international the fundamental rights and in harmony with its spirit must be read into those provisions to enlarge the meaning and content thereof, to promote the object of the Constitutional guarantee.

inconsistent with convention not Obligations arising under international agreements or treaties are not, by their own force, binding in Indian domestic law.

Appropriate legislative or executive action has to be taken to bring them into force.
Although not self-executing under Indian law, implementation of a treaty does not require fresh legislative or executive action if existing administrative regulations or statutory or constitutional provisions permit the implementation of the treaty in question.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 263 NHRC, India and International Conventions Section 12(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) mandates the National Human Rights Commission of India to “study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation”.

this carries out function primarily The NHRC through recommendations to and discussions with the concerned Ministries of the Central Government.
The NHRC uses this power to ensure that draft bills conform to the international human rights standards that have been accepted by the Government of India.

It supplements this through a host of programmes, conferences, workshops and seminars that raise awareness, such as the workshop it organized in 2009 to highlight the problems faced by, and the steps needed to protect human rights defenders in keeping with best international practice.
In addition to pursuing the case for the signing and ratification of International Human Rights Instruments with the Government of India, the Commission also reviews the domestic laws of the country to ensure the implementation of the International Conventions at the national level and to ensure that domestic laws are in line with international human rights standards.

The Government of India usually sends to the NHRC for its comments, all draft legislation with a human rights component.
The NHRC examines these drafts, where necessary asking experts in the field for their advice, and sends its recommendations to the Government.

Select Committees of Parliament often refer important legislation on human rights issues to the NHRC for its comments and advice.
264 National Human Rights Commission, India Since its inception in 1993, the NHRC has undertaken numerous initiatives with respect to the review of existing domestic laws and implementation of international conventions/treaties and other instruments on human rights, which are outlined in the following sections.
NHRC, India and Review of Domestic Laws in Conformity with International Conventions The NHRC, India has given its views, among others, on the following: Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000 The Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, 2001 (POTO) Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) Protection from Domestic Violence Bill, 2002 Anti-terrorism Legislation and the Rule of Law, 2004 National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2004 Food Safety and Standards Bill, 2005 Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005 Right to Education Bill, 2005 The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 2007 Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007 Prevention of Torture Bill, 2009 Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010 NHRC, India and International Conventions Section 12(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) mandates the National Human Rights Commission of India to “study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation”.
The NHRC carries out this function primarily through recommendations to and discussions with the concerned Ministries of the Central Government.

The NHRC uses this power to ensure that draft bills conform to the international human rights standards that have been accepted by the Government of India.
It supplements this through a host of programmes, conferences, workshops and seminars that raise awareness, such as the workshop it organized in 2009 to highlight the problems faced by, and the steps needed to protect human rights defenders in keeping with best international practice.
In addition to pursuing the case for the signing and ratification of International Human Rights Instruments with the Government of India, the Commission also reviews the domestic laws of the country to ensure the implementation of the International Conventions at the international human rights standards.

The Government of India usually sends to the NHRC for its comments, all draft legislation with a human rights component.
The NHRC examines these drafts, where necessary asking experts in the field for their advice, and sends its recommendations to the Government.

Select Committees of Parliament often refer important legislation on human rights issues to the NHRC for its comments and advice.
Since its inception in 1993, the NHRC has undertaken numerous initiatives with respect to the review of existing domestic laws and implementation of international conventions/treaties and other instruments on human rights, which are outlined in the following sections.
NHRC, India and Review of Domestic Laws in Conformity with International Conventions The NHRC, India has given its views, among others, on the following: Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA) Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000 The Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, 2001 (POTO) Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) Protection from Domestic Violence Bill, 2002 Anti-terrorism Legislation and the Rule of Law, 2004 national level and to ensure that domestic laws are in line with National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2004 Food Safety and Standards Bill, 2005 Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005 Right to Education Bill, 2005 The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 2007 Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2007 Prevention of Torture Bill, 2009 Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 265 / Implementation of International Conventions Treaties and Other Instruments PROTOCOLS TO THE CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD The Commission in 2000-2001 recommended that the Optional Protocols I and II, dealing respectively with the involvement of children in armed conflict and the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, be adopted by the Government of India.
Following this, the Department of Women and Child Development informed the Commission that it had circulated the Draft Note for the Cabinet to the concerned Ministries and Departments, including the Ministry of Home Affairs, for their comments and views, following which the Government approved the signing and ratification of the aforesaid two Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Further, the Ministry of External Affairs communicated to the Commission that the Government of India had signed the above two Optional Protocols on 15.11.2004.

The persistent efforts of the NHRC, India finally yielded rich dividends when it was informed by the Ministry of External Affairs that the Government of India had ratified both the Optional Protocols.
UN CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF REFUGEES, 1951 AND ITS 1967 PROTOCOL In 1997, the Commission initiated a dialogue with senior officers of the Ministry of External Affairs requesting them to examine afresh the possibility of India becoming party to the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol on this subject.
The Ministry of External Affairs subsequently informed the Commission that the matter would be re-examined in consultation with other concerned Ministries/Departments.

The Commission recommended that the Ministry of External Affairs 266 National Human Rights Commission, India constitute a small group of experts to look into the matter expeditiously.
The Commission was strongly of the view that there was a need for India to develop a national policy and possibly a National Law, fully in consonance with the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol.

The Commission has continued to take suo motu cognizance of news items highlighting the plight of Sri Lankan refugees in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and elsewhere.
In one such case during the period 1999-2000, based on a report of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, an NGO, the Commission examined allegations of human rights violations of 56 refugees held in a Special Camp in Vellore.

While concluding its proceedings in the case, the Commission resolved to pursue the general issue relating to the enactment of a national legislation relating to the status of refugees.
Subsequently, the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India sought the Commission’s views and comments on the Model National Law on Refugees, prepared by Justice Shri P.N.

Bhagwati in his capacity as Chairman of the ‘Eminent Persons Group’ set up by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

The Commission considered this issue in consultation with experts in the field and thereafter, set up an Expert Committee on Refugees.
The Expert Committee was requested to go through the Model National Law on Refugees and give its comments thereon to the Commission.

After detailed discussions, comments on the Model National Law and other general aspects as well as specific issues to be addressed in this regard, were forwarded to the MHA.

Since then, the Commission has continued to engage the concerned Ministries towards the enactment of a national law on refugee protection.
Based on detailed exchange of views with the highest echelons of the Government, the Commission has asked the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of External Affairs to formulate Implementation of International Conventions / Treaties and Other Instruments PROTOCOLS TO THE CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD The Commission in 2000-2001 recommended that the Optional Protocols I and II, dealing respectively with the involvement of children in armed conflict and the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, be adopted by the Government of India.
Following this, the Department of Women and Child Development informed the Commission that it had circulated the Draft Note for the Cabinet to the concerned Ministries and Departments, including the Ministry of Home Affairs, for their comments and views, following which the Government approved the signing and ratification of the aforesaid two Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Further, the Ministry of External Affairs communicated to the Commission that the Government of India had signed the above two Optional Protocols on 15.11.2004.

The persistent efforts of the NHRC, India finally yielded rich dividends when it was informed by the Ministry of External Affairs that the Government of India had ratified both the Optional Protocols.
UN CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF REFUGEES, 1951 AND ITS 1967 PROTOCOL In 1997, the Commission initiated a dialogue with senior officers of the Ministry of External Affairs requesting them to examine afresh the possibility of India becoming party to the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol on this subject.
The Ministry of External Affairs subsequently informed the Commission that the matter would be re-examined in consultation with other concerned Ministries/Departments.

The Commission recommended that the Ministry of External Affairs constitute a small group of experts to look into the matter expeditiously.
The Commission was strongly of the view that there was a need for India to develop a national policy and possibly a National Law, fully in consonance with the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol.

The Commission has continued to take suo motu cognizance of news items highlighting the plight of Sri Lankan refugees in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and elsewhere.
In one such case during the period 1999-2000, based on a report of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, an NGO, the Commission examined allegations of human rights violations of 56 refugees held in a Special Camp in Vellore.

While concluding its proceedings in the case, the Commission resolved to pursue the general issue relating to the enactment of a national legislation relating to the status of refugees.
Subsequently, the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India sought the Commission’s views and comments on the Model National Law on Refugees, prepared by Justice Shri P.N.

Bhagwati in his capacity as Chairman of the ‘Eminent Persons Group’ set up by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

The Commission considered this issue in consultation with experts in the field and thereafter, set up an Expert Committee on Refugees.
The Expert Committee was requested to go through the Model National Law on Refugees and give its comments thereon to the Commission.

After detailed discussions, comments on the Model National Law and other general aspects as well as specific issues to be addressed in this regard, were forwarded to the MHA.

Since then, the Commission has continued to engage the concerned Ministries towards the enactment of a national law on refugee protection.
Based on detailed exchange of views with the highest echelons of the Government, the Commission has asked the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of External Affairs to formulate A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 267 necessary proposals and send them to the Commission.

The Commission has since been consistently pursuing the matter with the Government.
1977 PROTOCOLS ADDITIONAL TO THE 1949 GENEVA CONVENTIONS Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions provides for new rules on international armed conflict and Protocol II develops international humanitarian law on non-international armed conflict.

In response to the Commission’s request for comments on both the Protocols, the MEA cited the changing nature of armed conflict and the need to hold detailed consultations with other agencies in this regard.
The Commission has urged the Government of India to reconsider the issue of accession to the 1977 Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva the Conventions and continues Government.
the matter with to pursue CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT, 1984 The Commission has persistently pressed the Government of India to ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Punishment or Treatment, which was signed by India on 14 October 1997 on the recommendation of the Commission.
It has been a matter of great disappointment to the Commission that the process of ratification has been inordinately delayed and that this delay has sent an ambiguous message regarding the commitment of the Government to respect the provisions of this Convention, despite the fact that Article 21 of the Indian Constitution already covers this area effectively.

As observed by the Commission earlier, the Right against Torture has been judicially recognised by the Apex Court as a Fundamental Right.
268 National Human Rights Commission, India The Commission was informed that an inter-ministerial meeting on this question had been held in July 2000 and directions were issued to expedite work relating to the amendment of the existing legislation to facilitate the process of ratification.

Concerned over the delay in ratification of the Convention, the Commission took up the matter with the Ministry of External Affairs in August 2003.
In response, the Commission was informed that the draft Cabinet Note on ratification of the Convention against Torture had been forwarded for examination by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which would pilot the necessary procedures for an eventual ratification.

The Commission thereafter, took up the matter with the Ministry of Home Affairs in October 2003, January 2004, May 2005, and again in September 2005.
The MHA informed the Commission in September 2005 that the MEA had constituted an Inter-Ministerial Group under the Chairmanship of AS (UN) to look into the question of early ratification.

Thereafter, in January 2006, the MEA informed the Commission that the Inter-Ministerial Group had agreed that the L&T Division of the MEA would take the lead to prepare a draft enabling legislation for MHA to pilot the ratification process including the legislation to be enacted.
Subsequently, the Commission conveyed its comments on the draft bill in this regard to the MHA.

While India is yet to ratify the Convention, the National Human Rights Commission has since been pursuing the matter of the ratification of the treaty with the MHA.
CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, 2006 The Commission played an important role in the drafting of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2006.

In response to the invitation by the General Assembly Resolution 57/229 to make available to the Ad Hoc Committee suggestions and necessary proposals and send them to the Commission.
The Commission has since been consistently pursuing the matter with the Government.

CONVENTIONS 1977 PROTOCOLS ADDITIONAL TO THE 1949 GENEVA Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions provides for new rules on international armed conflict and Protocol II develops international humanitarian law on non-international armed conflict.
In response to the Commission’s request for comments on both the Protocols, the MEA cited the changing nature of armed conflict and the need to hold detailed consultations with other agencies in this regard.

The Commission has urged the Government of India to reconsider the issue of accession to the 1977 Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and continues to pursue the matter with the Government.
1984 CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT, The Commission has persistently pressed the Government of India to ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Punishment or Treatment, which was signed by India on 14 October 1997 on the recommendation of the Commission.
It has been a matter of great disappointment to the Commission that the process of ratification has been inordinately delayed and that this delay has sent an ambiguous message regarding the commitment of the Government to respect the provisions of this Convention, despite the fact that Article 21 of the Indian Constitution already covers this area effectively.

As observed by the Commission earlier, the Right against Torture has been judicially recognised by the Apex Court as a Fundamental Right.
The Commission was informed that an inter-ministerial meeting on this question had been held in July 2000 and directions were issued to expedite work relating to the amendment of the existing legislation to facilitate the process of ratification.

Concerned over the delay in ratification of the Convention, the Commission took up the matter with the Ministry of External Affairs in August 2003.
In response, the Commission was informed that the draft Cabinet Note on ratification of the Convention against Torture had been forwarded for examination by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which would pilot the necessary procedures for an eventual ratification.

The Commission thereafter, took up the matter with the Ministry of Home Affairs in October 2003, January 2004, May 2005, and again in September 2005.
Inter-Ministerial Group under The MHA informed the Commission in September 2005 that the MEA had constituted an the Chairmanship of AS (UN) to look into the question of early ratification.

Thereafter, in January 2006, the MEA informed the Commission that the Inter-Ministerial Group had agreed that the L&T Division of the MEA would take the lead to prepare a draft enabling legislation for MHA to pilot the ratification process including the legislation to be enacted.
Subsequently, the Commission conveyed its comments on the draft bill in this regard to the MHA.

While India is yet to ratify the Convention, the National Human Rights Commission has since been pursuing the matter of the ratification of the treaty with the MHA.
CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, 2006 The Commission played an important role in the drafting of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2006.
In response to the invitation by the General Assembly Resolution 57/229 to make available to the Ad Hoc Committee suggestions and A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 269 possible elements to be considered for a treaty on the theme of disability, and, in particular the invitation of the UN Ad-Hoc Committee their participation in its future sessions, the Commission took a number of steps.
to National Human Rights Institutions for justice, well being and citizenship, Since treaty elaboration provides a unique opportunity to raise the standards of social the Commission encouraged the active participation of Government of India in the treaty elaboration process.

The Commission held a series of meetings with senior officers of the Ministries of External Affairs and Social Justice and Empowerment.
They were also invited to participate in the international meeting of National Human Rights Institutions at New Delhi in May 2003.

The Commission notes with satisfaction that the Government of India deputed a delegation to the second meeting of the UN Ad Hoc Committee and also contributed actively to the Working Group.
The NHRC jointly hosted an International Workshop of National Institutions from the Asia Pacific Region and Commonwealth Countries at New Delhi between 26th – 29th May 2003 in collaboration with the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF), the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the British Council.
The participants of this workshop: Strongly affirmed the need for the development of a comprehensive and integral Convention; Stressed that the Convention should be a ‘rights-based’ instrument built on international human rights norms and standards and social justice.
It should be informed by the overarching principle that all persons with disabilities, without exception, are entitled to the full benefit and enjoyment of all fundamental human rights and freedoms on the basis of equality, dignity and without discrimination 270 National Human Rights Commission, India Further stressed that the situation of all disability groups and the diverse conditions related to gender, race, colour, age, ethnicity and other considerations must be taken into account when elaborating the Convention.
Based on the common understanding of the National Human Rights Institutions regarding the nature, type, scope, purpose and key elements of a disability convention, the Commission submitted a proposal to the UN Ad Hoc Committee in its second session at New York in June 2003.

Subsequent to the international meeting of NHRIs at New Delhi, the Commission provided inputs to a series of regional meetings and seminars convened by United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific (UNESCAP).
The expert group meeting in June 2003 at Bangkok harmonized a proposal, which heavily draws on the report of international meeting at New Delhi.

Similarly, the Special Rapporteur of the NHRC on Disability serviced the Women’s Workshop of ESCAP (18th – 22nd August 2003), which outlined a set of recommendations for strengthening the gender dimension in the proposed disability Convention.
She also contributed to another Expert Group Meeting under the aegis of the UNESCAP held in October 2003, which evolved a concrete text of the Convention.

In November 2003, the Commission participated in the inter- governmental seminar jointly hosted by Government of China and ESCAP.

In this seminar certain contentious issues pending from the earlier meetings were resolved, which included the issue of the right to development vis-à-vis rights-based development.
The provision of international cooperation and monitoring mechanisms, both international and national, were also thrashed out and the text fine- tuned.
The Commission not only shared its expertise with the Asia Pacific Disability Forum (APDF), but also mobilized support to facilitate the possible elements to be considered for a treaty on the theme of disability, and, in particular the invitation of the UN Ad-Hoc Committee to National Human Rights Institutions for their participation in its future sessions, the Commission took a number of steps.
Since treaty elaboration provides a unique opportunity to raise the standards of social justice, well being and citizenship, the Commission encouraged the active participation of Government of India in the treaty elaboration process.

The Commission held a series of meetings with senior officers of the Ministries of External Affairs and Social Justice and Empowerment.

They were also invited to participate in the international meeting of National Human Rights Institutions at New Delhi in May 2003.
The Commission notes with satisfaction that the Government of India deputed a delegation to the second meeting of the UN Ad Hoc Committee and also contributed actively to the Working Group.
The NHRC jointly hosted an International Workshop of National Institutions from the Asia Pacific Region and Commonwealth Countries at New Delhi between 26th – 29th May 2003 in collaboration with the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF), the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the British Council.
The participants of this workshop: Strongly affirmed the need for the development of a comprehensive and integral Convention; Stressed that the Convention should be a ‘rights-based’ instrument built on international human rights norms and standards and social justice.
It should be informed by the overarching principle that all persons with disabilities, without exception, are entitled to the full benefit and enjoyment of all fundamental human rights and freedoms on the basis of equality, dignity and without discrimination Further stressed that the situation of all disability groups and the diverse conditions related to gender, race, colour, age, ethnicity and other considerations must be taken into account when elaborating the Convention.
Based on the common understanding of the National Human Rights Institutions regarding the nature, type, scope, purpose and key elements of a disability convention, the Commission submitted a proposal to the UN Ad Hoc Committee in its second session at New York in June 2003.

Subsequent to the international meeting of NHRIs at New Delhi, the Commission provided inputs to a series of regional meetings and seminars convened by United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific (UNESCAP).
The expert group meeting in June 2003 at Bangkok harmonized a proposal, which heavily draws on the report of international meeting at New Delhi.

Similarly, the Special Rapporteur of the NHRC on Disability serviced the Women’s Workshop of ESCAP (18th – 22nd August 2003), which outlined a set of recommendations for strengthening the gender dimension the proposed disability Convention.
She also contributed to another Expert Group Meeting under the aegis of the UNESCAP held in October 2003, which evolved a concrete text of the Convention.

in In November 2003, the Commission participated in the inter- governmental seminar jointly hosted by Government of China and ESCAP.

In this seminar certain contentious issues pending from the earlier meetings were resolved, which included the issue of the right to development vis-à-vis rights-based development.
The provision of international cooperation and monitoring mechanisms, both international and national, were also thrashed out and the text fine- tuned.

The Commission not only shared its expertise with the Asia Pacific Disability Forum (APDF), but also mobilized support to facilitate the A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 271 the Convention by the Government of India, which ratified the said Convention on 1 October 2007.
Other Initiatives CHAIR ON HUMAN RIGHTS AT THE NLSIU, BANGALORE The Commission has established a Chair on Human Rights at the National Institute of Human Rights (NIHR) in the premises of the National Law School of India University, Bangalore.

The NIHR was set up recognising the growing demands of human rights education and research at the national level.
In the past, the Commission has sought the views of the Institute on the pros and cons of ratification by India of the following international human rights instruments: First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on and Political Rights Civil and Political Rights International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Additionally, the NHRC also conducts training programmes for judicial officers in collaboration with the NIHR.
The NIHR recently published a Handbook for Judicial Officers in collaboration with the NHRC.

participation of the nominee of APDF in the Working Group, which met between 5-16 January 2004 at the UN Headquarters in New York.

The APDF approached the Commission for assistance of its Special Rapporteur on Disability in the UN Working Group for harmonizing the draft text based on proposals received by the UN Ad Hoc Committee.
The Commission was pleased to make available the services of its Special Rapporteur on Disability for the purpose.

Keeping in view the rapid pace of treaty elaboration and the effort of UN to invite views on the draft text compiled by the working group, the Commission decided to support the process by convening consultative workshops involving disability organizations, experts and representatives of Central and State Governments.
These workshops were very useful in promoting awareness about the Treaty elaboration process and achievements made by the UN Ad hoc Committee and Working Group thus far.

On the other hand it provided opportunities for critical review of the draft convention on the theme of disability with an ultimate objective to suggest improvements taking into account the realities of persons with disabilities in India and the overall economic, social and cultural conditions of the country.
The Commission is of the firm view that a binding instrument on the theme of disability in international law would give “status, authority and visibility” to disability issues which cannot be achieved through the process of reform of existing international instruments and monitoring mechanisms.
It also recognizes that by tailoring the existing rights to the specific circumstances of people with disabilities, the treaty would enable the State Parties to understand their obligations in clear terms and it would set clear goals for the development of disability-inclusive systems and processes.
Following the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Commission recommended the ratification of 272 National Human Rights Commission, India participation of the nominee of APDF in the Working Group, which met between 5-16 January 2004 at the UN Headquarters in New York.

The APDF approached the Commission for assistance of its Special Rapporteur on Disability in the UN Working Group for harmonizing the draft text based on proposals received by the UN Ad Hoc Committee.
The Commission was pleased to make available the services of its Special Rapporteur on Disability for the purpose.

Keeping in view the rapid pace of treaty elaboration and the effort of UN to invite views on the draft text compiled by the working group, the Commission decided to support the process by convening consultative workshops involving disability organizations, experts and representatives of Central and State Governments.
These workshops were very useful in promoting awareness about the Treaty elaboration process and achievements made by the UN Ad hoc Committee and Working Group thus far.

On the other hand it provided opportunities for critical review of the draft convention on the theme of disability with an ultimate objective to suggest improvements taking into account the realities of persons with disabilities in India and the overall economic, social and cultural conditions of the country.
The Commission is of the firm view that a binding instrument on the theme of disability in international law would give “status, authority and visibility” to disability issues which cannot be achieved through the process of reform of existing international instruments and monitoring mechanisms.
It also recognizes that by tailoring the existing rights to the specific circumstances of people with disabilities, the treaty would enable the State Parties to understand their obligations in clear terms and it would set clear goals for the development of disability-inclusive systems and processes.
Following the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Commission recommended the ratification of the Convention by the Government of India, which ratified the said Convention on 1 October 2007.

Other Initiatives CHAIR ON HUMAN RIGHTS AT THE NLSIU, BANGALORE The Commission has established a Chair on Human Rights at the National Institute of Human Rights (NIHR) in the premises of the National Law School of India University, Bangalore.
The NIHR was set up recognising the growing demands of human rights education and research at the national level.
In the past, the Commission has sought the views of the Institute on the pros and cons of ratification by India of the following international human rights instruments: First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their Families Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Additionally, the NHRC also conducts training programmes for judicial officers in collaboration with the NIHR.
The NIHR recently published a Handbook for Judicial Officers in collaboration with the NHRC.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 273 Review of Domestic Legislation concerning Civil, Political, Social, Economic and Cultural Rights TERRORIST AND DISRUPTIVE ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT (TADA) In the short period since its inception, the Commission directed its attention to starting an in-depth study of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), a task in which it enlisted the assistance of the Law Commission of India.
This, it believed was important since the TADA touched on three most sensitive areas: (i) the Constitution (ii) India’s treaty obligations, especially under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and (iii) the determination to preserve and protect human rights despite the lethal impact of terrorism.

The Commission considered the TADA to be “incompatible with [India’s] cultural traditions, legal history and treaty obligations”.
Subsequently, the Act was not revived following its expiry on 23 May 1995.

Yet the problem persisted with thousands of undertrials incarcerated under provisions of the Act in various State prisons, as did the danger that they would be forgotten once the Act lapsed.
The NHRC accordingly, submitted the information at its disposal to the Supreme Court of India which on 27 February 1996 gave detailed directions on how to deal with questions of bail in respect of TADA cases, following which there was a sharp decrease in the number of undertrials held under the Act.

The Commission continued to monitor the situation and remained in touch with the competent authorities at the Centre and in States in respect of the TADA undertrials.
ARMED FORCES (SPECIAL POWERS) ACT (AFSPA) The Commission had received representations from various civil liberties groups in respect of the AFSPA, in particular, concerns regarding Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the Act, which the representations 274 National Human Rights Commission, India argued conferred vast and sweeping powers to the Armed Forces.
It thus, took a decision to seek to be impleaded in the proceedings pending before the Supreme Court in respect of the Act and to assist the Court by placing the Commission’s views before it on the issues that had arisen in that connection.
Prior to doing so, the Commission considered that it would be useful to arrange a free and frank discussion with those principally concerned on the constitutional and legal issues involved and also on the practical problems faced both by the armed forces and by the citizenry in the areas where the Act was being applied.
Accordingly, such a discussion was held on 13 May 1997, attended by senior officers of the Armed Forces, the Secretaries of the Defence and Home Ministries, eminent jurists and others who could throw light on the subject, including leading academics and representatives of NGOs.
The views of the Commission were, thereafter, placed before the Supreme Court with the permission of the latter, and the position was taken, inter alia, that the Act lacked temporal and spatial limitations and that it bestowed draconian powers that could be exercised by non-commissioned officers on the basis of their subjective satisfaction.
By its order of 27 November 1997, the Supreme Court held that a declaration under Section 3 of the Act designating any area as disturbed (thereby giving special powers to non-commissioned officers and other officers above this rank) has to be for a limited duration and that there should be a periodic review of the declaration before the expiry of 6 months.

It further gave several other directions in respect of the AFSPA aimed at checking its unfettered and sweeping reach and powers.
The Commission then recommended that the concerned Ministries issue carefully formulated guidelines to all concerned personnel of the Armed Forces and Para-military Forces, based on the orders of the Supreme Court.
Review of Domestic Legislation concerning Civil, Political, Social, Economic and Cultural Rights TERRORIST AND DISRUPTIVE ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT (TADA) In the short period since its inception, the Commission directed its attention to starting an in-depth study of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), a task in which it enlisted the assistance of the Law Commission of India.
This, it believed was important since the TADA touched on three most sensitive areas: (i) the Constitution (ii) India’s treaty obligations, especially under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and (iii) the determination to preserve and protect human rights despite the lethal impact of terrorism.

The Commission considered the TADA to be “incompatible with [India’s] cultural traditions, legal history and treaty obligations”.
Subsequently, the Act was not revived following its expiry on 23 May 1995.

Yet the problem persisted with thousands of undertrials incarcerated under provisions of the Act in various State prisons, as did the danger that they would be forgotten once the Act lapsed.
The NHRC accordingly, submitted the information at its disposal to the Supreme Court of India which on 27 February 1996 gave detailed directions on how to deal with questions of bail in respect of TADA cases, following which there was a sharp decrease in the number of undertrials held under the Act.

The Commission continued to monitor the situation and remained in touch with the competent authorities at the Centre and in States in respect of the TADA undertrials.
ARMED FORCES (SPECIAL POWERS) ACT (AFSPA) The Commission had received representations from various civil liberties groups in respect of the AFSPA, in particular, concerns regarding Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the Act, which the representations argued conferred vast and sweeping powers to the Armed Forces.
It thus, took a decision to seek to be impleaded in the proceedings pending before the Supreme Court in respect of the Act and to assist the Court by placing the Commission’s views before it on the issues that had arisen in that connection.
Prior to doing so, the Commission considered that it would be useful to arrange a free and frank discussion with those principally concerned on the constitutional and legal issues involved and also on the practical problems faced both by the armed forces and by the citizenry in the areas where the Act was being applied.
Accordingly, such a discussion was held on 13 May 1997, attended by senior officers of the Armed Forces, the Secretaries of the Defence and Home Ministries, eminent jurists and others who could throw light on the subject, including leading academics and representatives of NGOs.
The views of the Commission were, thereafter, placed before the Supreme Court with the permission of the latter, and the position was taken, inter alia, that the Act lacked temporal and spatial limitations and that it bestowed draconian powers that could be exercised by non-commissioned officers on the basis of their subjective satisfaction.
By its order of 27 November 1997, the Supreme Court held that a declaration under Section 3 of the Act designating any area as disturbed (thereby giving special powers to non-commissioned officers and other officers above this rank) has to be for a limited duration and that there should be a periodic review of the declaration before the expiry of 6 months.

It further gave several other directions in respect of the AFSPA aimed at checking its unfettered and sweeping reach and powers.
The Commission then recommended that the concerned Ministries issue carefully formulated guidelines to all concerned personnel of the Armed Forces and Para-military Forces, based on the orders of the Supreme Court.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 275 PREVENTION OF TERRORISM BILL, 2000 The Commission considered it essential to examine the Draft Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000 which the Law Commission of India had submitted together with the 173rd Report to the Government of India.
The Commission did so in the exercise of its functions under Section 12 of the PHR Act, 1993, of which clauses (d), (f) and (j) were particularly relevant.
These functions require the inter alia, to review the safeguards provided by or Commission, under the Constitution or any law for the time being in force for the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation, study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation, and such other functions as it may consider essential for the promotion of human rights.
In drafting its opinion on the Bill, the NHRC considered the following issues: Is there any need for the enactment of a new law?
If yes, then the kind of new law which needs to be enacted The Commission was of the opinion that “it is the considered unanimous opinion of the Commission that there is no need to enact the new law (Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000) and, therefore, the need did not arise to answer the other question.” In its opinion, the Commission noted that the Draft Bill set out the kind of actions, which are proposed to be dealt with under the Bill.
These actions, the Commission pointed out, are substantially taken care of under existing laws such as the following: Indian Penal Code, 1860 Arms Act, 1959 Explosives Act, 1884 Explosive Substances Act, 1908 Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and, 276 National Human Rights Commission, India Suppression of Unlawful Activities against the Safety of Civil Aviation Act, 1982 Additionally, there were at least four Preventive Detention Acts enacted by the Union of India: National Security Act, 1980 Prevention of Black Marketeering and Maintenance of Supplies Act, 1980 1988, and, Prevention of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 Further, there were a number of Preventive Detention Acts enacted by various States.
The Commission was of the view that between these legal measures, all the ‘terrorist acts’ contemplated under the new Bill appeared to be covered.

If necessary, the Indian Penal Code or any provisions of any other Act could be amended to cover any specific action, which might not have been covered.

The punishments provided under these Acts could also be increased where necessary.

However, there was no need to have a separate new Bill for the purpose of creating new offenses.
On the avowed justification for the proposed new law, namely, that: (i) it was difficult to secure convictions under the criminal justice system, and (ii) that trials were delayed and hence, there was need for special courts, the Commission observed that the main problem facing the country related to proper investigation of crimes, efficient prosecution of criminal trials and delays in adjudication and punishment in the courts.
However, these problems could not be resolved by enacting laws that do away with the legal safeguards, which are designed to prevent innocent persons from being prosecuted and punished.
Nor could the problem be solved by providing for a different and more drastic procedure for prosecution of certain crimes, for making confessions PREVENTION OF TERRORISM BILL, 2000 Suppression of Unlawful Activities against the Safety of Civil The Commission considered it essential to examine the Draft Aviation Act, 1982 Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000 which the Law Commission of India had submitted together with the 173rd Report to the Government of India.
The Commission did so in the exercise of its functions under Section 12 of the PHR Act, 1993, of which clauses (d), (f) and (j) were particularly relevant.
These functions require the Commission, inter alia, to review the safeguards provided by or under the Constitution or any law for the time being in force for the protection of human rights and recommend measures for their effective implementation, study treaties and other international instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective implementation, and such other functions as it may consider essential for the promotion of human rights.
In drafting its opinion on the Bill, the NHRC considered the following issues: Is there any need for the enactment of a new law?
If yes, then the kind of new law which needs to be enacted The Commission was of the opinion that “it is the considered unanimous opinion of the Commission that there is no need to enact the new law (Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000) and, therefore, the need did not arise to answer the other question.” In its opinion, the Commission noted that the Draft Bill set out the kind of actions, which are proposed to be dealt with under the Bill.
These actions, the Commission pointed out, are substantially taken care of under existing laws such as the following: Indian Penal Code, 1860 Arms Act, 1959 Explosives Act, 1884 Explosive Substances Act, 1908 Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and, Additionally, there were at least four Preventive Detention Acts enacted by the Union of India: National Security Act, 1980 Prevention of Black Marketeering and Maintenance of Supplies Act, 1980 Prevention of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988, and, Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 Further, there were a number of Preventive Detention Acts enacted by various States.
The Commission was of the view that between these legal measures, all the ‘terrorist acts’ contemplated under the new Bill appeared to be covered.

If necessary, the Indian Penal Code or any provisions of any other Act could be amended to cover any specific action, which might not have been covered.

The punishments provided under these Acts could also be increased where necessary.

However, there was no need to have a separate new Bill for the purpose of creating new offenses.
On the avowed justification for the proposed new law, namely, that: (i) it was difficult to secure convictions under the criminal justice system, and (ii) that trials were delayed and hence, there was need for special courts, the Commission observed that the main problem facing the country related to proper investigation of crimes, efficient prosecution of criminal trials and delays in adjudication and punishment in the courts.
However, these problems could not be resolved by enacting laws that do away with the legal safeguards, which are designed to prevent innocent persons from being prosecuted and punished.
Nor could the problem be solved by providing for a different and more drastic procedure for prosecution of certain crimes, for making confessions A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 277 before the police admissible in evidence, contrary to the provisions of the Evidence Act, for raising the presumption of guilt as set out in the Bill, and creating special Courts.
These provisions would seriously affect human rights guaranteed under the Constitution and violate as understood basic principles of internationally.
To strengthen the criminal justice system, the Commission suggested three stages at which remedial measures needed to be taken urgently by the Government: jurisprudence criminal Investigation Prosecution Trial The Commission held that unless the root problems were addressed, adopting draconian laws would only lead to their grave misuse, as had been the case with the previous TADA law.
The Commission also pointed out that the Bill would hinder rather than enhance the effective international instruments on human rights and would not be in consonance with many provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which India is a State Party.

treaties and other implementation of The Commission observed, however, that one area where a suitable law needs to be enacted related to the financing of terrorism.
It suggested that the Government frame appropriate legislation in this connection in the light of the International Convention on this subject.

Concluding, the Commission stated that the proposed Bill, if enacted, would have the ill effect of providing unintentionally a strong weapon capable of gross misuse and violation of human rights, which must be avoided particularly in view of the experience of the misuse in the recent past of TADA and earlier of MISA of the emergency days.
The Commission thus, recommended that a new law based on the Draft Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000 be not enacted.

It asserted that such a course is consistent with our country’s determination to combat and triumph over terrorism in a manner also consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights.
278 National Human Rights Commission, India PREVENTION OF TERRORISM ACT, 2002 (POTA) The Commission noted that a wide spectrum of opinion in the country was increasingly concerned at the manner in which the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) [which replaced the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) of 2001] was being applied.

This however, came as no surprise as the Commission had forewarned of its probable consequences.
The apprehensions of the Commission in respect of the probable abuse of the provisions of the Act and the violation of human rights had, unfortunately, proven to be well- founded.

Reports from a number of States, extensively carried in the media, pointed to the frequently arbitrary and discriminatory use of the Act and the damage done to the fundamental rights of citizens of the country, young and old alike.
The Commission had been carefully monitoring the application of the Act and had consistently insisted that more safeguards were required in the Act to prevent its misuse.

The Commission received complaints of alleged misuse or abuse of provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

The constitutional validity of POTA was challenged in the Supreme Court of India in the People’s Union for Civil Liberties & Another Vs. Union of India (2003 (10) SCALE 967).
Although the Supreme Court of India dismissed the petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, it held that mere support to a banned terrorist organization was not sufficient for prosecution under POTA.

Criminal intention must be proven.

The Supreme Court also moderated Section 21 of POTA, which dealt with offences relating to the support given to terrorist organizations, which was cast in a manner that virtually invited gross abuse.
Similarly, it reduced the rigour of Section 49(7) of the Act by holding that an accused under the POTA could seek bail even before the expiry of the one-year period.

before the police admissible in evidence, contrary to the provisions of Bill, and creating special Courts.

These provisions would seriously affect human rights guaranteed under the Constitution and violate basic principles of criminal jurisprudence as understood internationally.
To strengthen the criminal justice system, the Commission suggested three stages at which remedial measures needed to be taken urgently by the Government: Investigation Prosecution Trial The Commission held that unless the root problems were addressed, adopting draconian laws would only lead to their grave misuse, as had been the case with the previous TADA law.
The Commission also pointed out that the Bill would hinder rather than enhance the effective implementation of treaties and other international instruments on human rights and would not be in consonance with many provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which India is a State Party.

The Commission observed, however, that one area where a suitable law needs to be enacted related to the financing of terrorism.
It suggested that the Government frame appropriate legislation in this connection in the light of the International Convention on this subject.

Concluding, the Commission stated that the proposed Bill, if enacted, would have the ill effect of providing unintentionally a strong weapon capable of gross misuse and violation of human rights, which must be avoided particularly in view of the experience of the misuse in the recent past of TADA and earlier of MISA of the emergency days.
The Commission thus, recommended that a new law based on the Draft Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000 be not enacted.

It asserted that such a course is consistent with our country’s determination to combat and triumph over terrorism in a manner also consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights.
the Evidence Act, for raising the presumption of guilt as set out in the PREVENTION OF TERRORISM ACT, 2002 (POTA) The Commission noted that a wide spectrum of opinion in the country was increasingly concerned at the manner in which the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) [which replaced the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) of 2001] was being applied.

This however, came as no surprise as the Commission had forewarned of its probable consequences.
The apprehensions of the Commission in respect of the probable abuse of the provisions of the Act and the violation of human rights had, unfortunately, proven to be well- founded.

Reports from a number of States, extensively carried in the media, pointed to the frequently arbitrary and discriminatory use of the Act and the damage done to the fundamental rights of citizens of the country, young and old alike.
The Commission had been carefully monitoring the application of the Act and had consistently insisted that more safeguards were required in the Act to prevent its misuse.

The Commission received complaints of alleged misuse or abuse of provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

The constitutional validity of POTA was challenged in the Supreme Court of India in the People’s Union for Civil Liberties & Another Vs. Union of India (2003 (10) SCALE 967).
Although the Supreme Court of India dismissed the petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, it held that mere support to a banned terrorist organization was not sufficient for prosecution under POTA.

Criminal intention must be proven.

The Supreme Court also moderated Section 21 of POTA, which dealt with offences relating to the support given to terrorist organizations, which was cast in a manner that virtually invited gross abuse.
Similarly, it reduced the rigour of Section 49(7) of the Act by holding that an accused under the POTA could seek bail even before the expiry of the one-year period.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 279 On its part, the Commission firmly maintained view that a proper balance between the need and the remedy required respect for the principles of necessity and proportionality.
While it was necessary to combat terrorism, counter terrorism could not be used as an excuse to suspend all the rules of international law and domestic civil liberties.

The need was for combating and triumphing over terrorism in a manner consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights.

For its part, the Commission continued to monitor the implementation of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 with great care.

The Act was repealed in 2004.


REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLES ACT, 1951 After the announcement has made that elections would be held for the eleventh Lok Sabha, the Commission received a petition seeking its intervention to permit under trial prisoners to exercise their franchise.

The Commission gave consideration to this petition.
It noted that, under section 62(5) of the Representation of People Act 1951, no person shall vote at any election if he is confined in prison, whether under a sentence of imprisonment or transportation or otherwise, or is in the lawful custody of the police.

The Commission further noted the view of the Supreme Court as expressed in the Mahendra Kumar Shastri vs. Union of India (AIR SC 1983, page 299) that confirmed the reasonableness of this provision.
In the light of this, the Commission advised the petitioner to seek his redress either in court, or through appropriate changes in the law.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, 2000 The Commission undertook an in-depth examination of the Freedom of Information bill, 2000, pursuant to its statutory responsibility under Section 12 (d) of the PHR Act, 1993.
Based on the Commission’s own examination and deliberations, it finalized and sent its comments on the Bill to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for appropriate action.

280 National Human Rights Commission, India The Commission took the view that the title of the bill should be changed from ‘The Freedom of Information Bill’ to ‘The Right to Information Bill’ to make the proposed Bill conform to Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(2) of the Constitution.
The Commission stated that the Bill should be examined in the light of Article 19(1)(a) which guarantees to every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression as a fundamental right and, in particular, that Section 8 of the Bill should be re-examined to ensure that the provisions are within the ambit of permissible restrictions under Article 19(2).
The Commission held that it has been judicially recognized that the right to freedom of speech and expression in Article 19(1)(a) includes the right to acquire information.

The State is not merely under an obligation to respect the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution, but is also under an obligation to operationalise the meaningful exercise of these rights.
Thus, the State is under an obligation not only to respect, but also to ensure conditions in which the right of acquiring information, which is part of the freedom of speech and expression, can be meaningfully and effectively enjoyed.

The question before the Commission therefore, was to assess whether and to what extent the Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 introduced in Parliament in 2000, met these aims and objectives.
The Commission gave its opinion only on the salient features of the Bill, observing that the consideration of details should be undertaken in the light of the basic premise.

CHILD MARRIAGE RESTRAINT ACT, 1929 The widespread persistence of child marriage in certain parts of the country especially in Rajasthan has continued to be of great concern to the Commission.
To curb the practice of child marriage in the country, the Commission had taken the view that the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 should be recast so as to provide for higher penalty for the violations of the provisions of this Act and also to On its part, the Commission firmly maintained view that a proper balance between the need and the remedy required respect for the principles of necessity and proportionality.
While it was necessary to combat terrorism, counter terrorism could not be used as an excuse to suspend all the rules of international law and domestic civil liberties.

The need was for combating and triumphing over terrorism in a manner consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights.

For its part, the Commission continued to monitor the implementation of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 with great care.

The Act was repealed in 2004.


REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLES ACT, 1951 After the announcement has made that elections would be held for the eleventh Lok Sabha, the Commission received a petition seeking its intervention to permit under trial prisoners to exercise their franchise.

The Commission gave consideration to this petition.
It noted that, under section 62(5) of the Representation of People Act 1951, no person shall vote at any election if he is confined in prison, whether under a sentence of imprisonment or transportation or otherwise, or is in the lawful custody of the police.

The Commission further noted the view of the Supreme Court as expressed in the Mahendra Kumar Shastri vs. Union of India (AIR SC 1983, page 299) that confirmed the reasonableness of this provision.
In the light of this, the Commission advised the petitioner to seek his redress either in court, or through appropriate changes in the law.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILL, 2000 The Commission undertook an in-depth examination of the Freedom of Information bill, 2000, pursuant to its statutory responsibility under Section 12 (d) of the PHR Act, 1993.
Based on the Commission’s own examination and deliberations, it finalized and sent its comments on the Bill to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for appropriate action.

The Commission took the view that the title of the bill should be changed from ‘The Freedom of Information Bill’ to ‘The Right to Information Bill’ to make the proposed Bill conform to Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(2) of the Constitution.
The Commission stated that the Bill should be examined in the light of Article 19(1)(a) which guarantees to every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression as a fundamental right and, in particular, that Section 8 of the Bill should be re-examined to ensure that the provisions are within the ambit of permissible restrictions under Article 19(2).
The Commission held that it has been judicially recognized that the right to freedom of speech and expression in Article 19(1)(a) includes the right to acquire information.

The State is not merely under an obligation to respect the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution, but is also under an obligation to operationalise the meaningful exercise of these rights.
Thus, the State is under an obligation not only to respect, but also to ensure conditions in which the right of acquiring information, which is part of the freedom of speech and expression, can be meaningfully and effectively enjoyed.

The question before the Commission therefore, was to assess whether and to what extent the Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 introduced in Parliament in 2000, met these aims and objectives.
The Commission gave its opinion only on the salient features of the Bill, observing that the consideration of details should be undertaken in the light of the basic premise.

CHILD MARRIAGE RESTRAINT ACT, 1929 The widespread persistence of child marriage in certain parts of the country especially in Rajasthan has continued to be of great concern to the Commission.
To curb the practice of child marriage in the country, the Commission had taken the view that the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 should be recast so as to provide for higher penalty for the violations of the provisions of this Act and also to A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 281 make the offence cognizable and non-bailable.
Further, it was of the view that a provision should be made in the amended Act to take action against organizers/associations who organize child marriages on a mass-scale.

The Commission requested its Member, Justice Smt.

Sujata V. Manohar, to study the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 and offer comments on it.
Her views on amendment of the Act were discussed in detail in a meeting organized by the Commission on 06 February 2002 at which, among others, the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development was present.

the amendments proposed by Justice Manohar were agreed upon with minor modifications.

The proposals were thereafter placed before a meeting of the Statutory Full Commission held on 3 May 2002, when the proposals were approved.
the meeting, In A copy of the Draft Child Marriage Restraint Bill 2002, as approved by the Statutory Commission, was then sent for information, consideration and appropriate action to the concerned Secretaries of all the State Governments/Union Territories as well as to the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India.
A copy of the Draft Bill was also forwarded for information to the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India.

To discuss the amendments made in the Draft Bill, the Commission convened a meeting on 22.02.2005 under the chairmanship of Dr. Justice A.S. Anand, Chairperson, NHRC.
Meanwhile, the Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice , Government of India informed that it had introduced a new Bill entitled “The Prevention of Child marriage Bill, 2004” in the Rajya Sabha on 20.12.2004.

This Bill, the Legislative Department stated, would repeal the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929, and also that it had taken into 282 National Human Rights Commission, India consideration almost all the amendments/recommendations proposed by the Commission to the new Bill.
Later, in response to an advertisement in the National Herald dated 28.02.2005 inviting memoranda containing the views of individuals/organizations interested in the “Prevention of Child Marriage Bill, 2004”, the Commission wrote a letter to the Secretary, Legislative Department in March 2005 requesting that the following 3 points be referred to the Department related to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice for consideration so that necessary amendments could be further made in the proposed Bill: (i) There was a need to bring the definition of ‘child’ in the proposed Bill in consonance with the definition prescribed for the child in the Convention on the Rights of the Child that had been ratified by the Government of India.
(ii) There was a need to make a statutory provision on compulsory registration of marriages as this would deter communities from indulging in child marriage; and, (iii) Keeping in view the best interest of the child, there was need to modify Section 14 of the proposed Bill.
Further, as one of the suggestions that emanated from the discussion held on 22.02.2005 pertained to the organization of mass-scale awareness programmes/campaigns in order to educate and sensitize people about the demerits of child marriage the Chairperson also wrote to the Minister of Human Resource Development, Government of India and the Chief Ministers/Administrators of all States/Union Territories.
Similarly, the Secretary General of the Commission also wrote to the Secretaries, Ministry of Panchayati Raj and the Department of Women and Child Development as well as to the Chief Secretaries and Secretaries of the Department of Women and Child Development/Social Welfare of all States and Union Territories.

The make the offence cognizable and non-bailable.


Further, it was of the view that a provision should be made in the amended Act to take action against organizers/associations who organize child marriages on a mass-scale.

The Commission requested its Member, Justice Smt.

Sujata V. Manohar, to study the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 and offer comments on it.
Her views on amendment of the Act were discussed in detail in a meeting organized by the Commission on 06 February 2002 at which, among others, the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development was present.

In the meeting, the amendments proposed by Justice Manohar were agreed upon with minor modifications.

The proposals were thereafter placed before a meeting of the Statutory Full Commission held on 3 May 2002, when the proposals were approved.
A copy of the Draft Child Marriage Restraint Bill 2002, as approved by the Statutory Commission, was then sent for information, consideration and appropriate action to the concerned Secretaries of all the State Governments/Union Territories as well as to the Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India.
A copy of the Draft Bill was also forwarded for information to the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India.

To discuss the amendments made in the Draft Bill, the Commission convened a meeting on 22.02.2005 under the chairmanship of Dr. Justice A.S. Anand, Chairperson, NHRC.
Meanwhile, the Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice , Government of India informed that it had introduced a new Bill entitled “The Prevention of Child marriage Bill, 2004” in the Rajya Sabha on 20.12.2004.

This Bill, the Legislative Department stated, would repeal the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929, and also that it had taken into consideration proposed by the Commission to the new Bill.
almost the all amendments/recommendations containing inviting memoranda Later, in response to an advertisement in the National Herald dated 28.02.2005 the views of individuals/organizations interested in the “Prevention of Child Marriage Bill, 2004”, the Commission wrote a letter to the Secretary, Legislative Department in March 2005 requesting that the following 3 points be referred to the Department related to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice for consideration so that necessary amendments could be further made in the proposed Bill: (i) There was a need to bring the definition of ‘child’ in the proposed Bill in consonance with the definition prescribed for the child in the Convention on the Rights of the Child that had been ratified by the Government of India.
(ii) There was a need to make a statutory provision on compulsory registration of marriages as this would deter communities from indulging in child marriage; and, (iii) Keeping in view the best interest of the child, there was need to modify Section 14 of the proposed Bill.
Further, as one of the suggestions that emanated from the discussion held on 22.02.2005 pertained to the organization of mass-scale awareness programmes/campaigns in order to educate and sensitize people about the demerits of child marriage the Chairperson also wrote to the Minister of Human Resource Development, Government of India and the Chief Ministers/Administrators of all States/Union Territories.
Similarly, the Secretary General of the Commission also wrote to the Secretaries, Ministry of Panchayati Raj and the Department of Women and Child Development as well as to the Chief Secretaries and Secretaries of the Department of Women and Child Development/Social Welfare of all States and Union Territories.
The A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 283 NHRC expressed hope that till such time the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 was repealed, states and UTs would continue to educate people at large and save girl children from falling prey to the age-old custom and evil practice of child marriage.

The Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 has since been repealed and replaced by the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

PROTECTION FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BILL 2002 take.


The Protection from Domestic Violence Bill 2002, drafted by the Department of Women and Child Development in consultation with the Ministry of Law, Justice & Company Affairs was introduced in Parliament on 8 March 2002.

Thereafter, the Bill was referred to the Standing Committee of Parliament pertaining to the Ministry of Human Resource Development for further examination and the suggesting of changes, if any, required in the Draft Bill.
After the Standing Committee submitted its report, the Department of Women and Child Development sent a copy of the Draft Bill, along with a copy of the report of the Standing Committee to the Commission for its comments.

The provisions of the Draft Bill and the report containing the recommendations of the Standing Committee were examined carefully by the Commission and its detailed suggestions were forwarded to the Department of Women and Child Development in January 2003.
The Bill was finalized after the receipt of the comments and and views of Commissions, and was finally passed into law on 26 October 2006. concerned Ministries/Departments all REVIEW OF LAWS RELATING TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES The Commission examined the functioning of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and its impact.
Subsequently, a comprehensive set of recommendations was communicated to authorities in the Central and State Governments specifying their obligations under the Persons with Disabilities Act and the action they were expected to Further, the Commission also undertook a preliminary analysis of family laws and civil and criminal procedures, which indicated a certain degree of bias against persons with psychiatric and intellectual disabilities and also those suffering from epilepsy.
For instance, “The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955”, Section 5(2)(a), (b), (c), while specifying the conditions for a valid Hindu Marriage states, “(a) at the time of the marriage, neither party is incapable of giving a valid consent of it in consequence of unsoundness of mind (b) though capable of giving a valid consent has been suffering from mental disorder of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children (c) has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity or epilepsy”.
In Section 12(1), the Act lays down conditions of a voidable marriage, which inter alia includes conditions specified in Section 5(2)(a), (b), (c), referred in the previous para.

The Commission was deeply concerned over the possible misuse of such provisions in the law depriving persons affected by temporary mental illness of their right to enter into marital relations and/or to maintenance.
Similarly, the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act of 1956, Sections 7 and 8 prohibit a person from adopting a child unless the adopter has attained majority and is of sound mind.
The provision of giving children away in adoption on grounds of unsoundness of the mind of the parent under this act, the Commission felt, also needed careful 284 National Human Rights Commission, India NHRC expressed hope that till such time the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 was repealed, states and UTs would continue to educate people at large and save girl children from falling prey to the age-old custom and evil practice of child marriage.
The Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 has since been repealed and replaced by the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

PROTECTION FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BILL 2002 The Protection from Domestic Violence Bill 2002, drafted by the Department of Women and Child Development in consultation with the Ministry of Law, Justice & Company Affairs was introduced in Parliament on 8 March 2002.
Thereafter, the Bill was referred to the Standing Committee of Parliament pertaining to the Ministry of Human Resource Development for further examination and the suggesting of changes, if any, required in the Draft Bill.

After the Standing Committee submitted its report, the Department of Women and Child Development sent a copy of the Draft Bill, along with a copy of the report of the Standing Committee to the Commission for its comments.
The provisions of the Draft Bill and the report containing the recommendations of the Standing Committee were examined carefully by the Commission and its detailed suggestions were forwarded to the Department of Women and Child Development in January 2003.
The Bill was finalized after the receipt of the comments and views of all concerned Ministries/Departments and Commissions, and was finally passed into law on 26 October 2006. REVIEW OF LAWS RELATING TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES The Commission examined the functioning of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 and its impact.
Subsequently, a comprehensive set of recommendations was communicated to authorities in the Central and State Governments specifying their obligations under the Persons with Disabilities Act and the action they were expected to take.

Further, the Commission also undertook a preliminary analysis of family laws and civil and criminal procedures, which indicated a certain degree of bias against persons with psychiatric and intellectual disabilities and also those suffering from epilepsy.
For instance, “The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955”, Section 5(2)(a), (b), (c), while specifying the conditions for a valid Hindu Marriage states, “(a) at the time of the marriage, neither party is incapable of giving a valid consent of it in consequence of unsoundness of mind (b) though capable of giving a valid consent has been suffering from mental disorder of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children (c) has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity or epilepsy”.
In Section 12(1), the Act lays down conditions of a voidable marriage, which inter alia includes conditions specified in Section 5(2)(a), (b), (c), referred in the previous para.

The Commission was deeply concerned over the possible misuse of such provisions in the law depriving persons affected by temporary mental illness of their right to enter into marital relations and/or to maintenance.
Similarly, the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act of 1956, Sections 7 and 8 prohibit a person from adopting a child unless the adopter has attained majority and is of sound mind.
The provision of giving children away in adoption on grounds of unsoundness of the mind of the parent under this act, the Commission felt, also needed careful A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 285 examination in the light of the definition of disability provided in Section 2(t) of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 which stipulates that, “person with disability means a person suffering from not less than forty percent of any disability as certified by a medical authority.” Here the compatibility of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956, Section 9(4), with Section 2(t) of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 needs careful examination since both the Acts have designated separate authorities to decide on the issue of unsoundness of the mind.
Likewise, the Indian Contract Act of 1872 absolved any person of unsound mind from contractual liability.

Since a majority of people having mild to moderate degree of psychiatric and intellectual disability can manage the responsibilities of day-to-day life, this provision the Commission felt, needed to be re-examined.
The Commission has since encouraged and pushed for a systemic review of both substantive and procedural laws to suggest suitable amendments in the light of the advances made in the fields of medicine, technology and rehabilitation, and above all to ensure equal protection and recognition of the rights of persons with disabilities.
FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARD BILL, 2005 The Commission expressed its concern regarding the reported repeal of the Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act (IMS Act) as proposed by its inclusion in Schedule One of the Food Safety and Standard Bill, 2005.

The Chairperson, NHRC in his letter dated 15.03.2005 to the Minister of State, Ministry of Food Processing Industries conveyed the concern of the Commission in this regard.
In particular, he pointed out that the IMS Act is not a routine food law, nor does it have anything in common with the other Acts in the 286 National Human Rights Commission, India repeal list.

It is a special Act to protect, promote and support breastfeeding and it focuses on marketing practices and other practices which interfere with breastfeeding, and thereby jeopardize the well being of the baby and mother.
The Commission observed that the protection of breastfeeding is vital for saving the lives of millions of children in India every year.

The Commission urged the Ministry to keep the above facts in view and take appropriate action in order to protect the “best interests” of children.

It firmly held that the IMS Act should not be repealed.
In response, the Ministry of Food Processing Industries vide their letter dated 18 August 2005 informed the Commission that the Group of Ministers had decided that IMS Act would not be repealed but only amended so as to substitute reference to the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act with reference to the proposed Bill.
NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES (NDPS) ACT, 1985 Upon receipt of numerous petitions alleging prolonged and unreasonable detention under the NDPS Act, the Commission undertook an examination of the provisions of that Act.

The Commission’s interest in this subject was heightened by its visit to jails where, not infrequently, those held under the Act clamoured for the attention and intervention of the Commission.
An exchange of views was, accordingly, initiated by the Commission with the Ministry of Finance with the purpose of expediting trials.

The Commission is gratified that the Ministry of Finance has framed a set of proposals for amending the Act to achieve this end and to introduce a system of better graded punishment.
As the Commission has concluded that there was an inadequacy of courts to deal with NDPS cases, it made specific proposals suggesting that the numbers of such courts be increased in certain States/Union Territories.
examination in the light of the definition of disability provided in Section 2(t) of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 which stipulates that, “person with disability means a person suffering from not less than forty percent of any disability as certified by a medical authority.” Here the compatibility of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956, Section 9(4), with Section 2(t) of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 needs careful examination since both the Acts have designated separate authorities to decide on the issue of unsoundness of the mind.
Likewise, the Indian Contract Act of 1872 absolved any person of unsound mind from contractual liability.

Since a majority of people having mild to moderate degree of psychiatric and intellectual disability can manage the responsibilities of day-to-day life, this provision the Commission felt, needed to be re-examined.
The Commission has since encouraged and pushed for a systemic review of both substantive and procedural laws to suggest suitable amendments in the light of the advances made in the fields of medicine, technology and rehabilitation, and above all to ensure equal protection and recognition of the rights of persons with disabilities.
FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARD BILL, 2005 The Commission expressed its concern regarding the reported repeal of the Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act (IMS Act) as proposed by its inclusion in Schedule One of the Food Safety and Standard Bill, 2005.

The Chairperson, NHRC in his letter dated 15.03.2005 to the Minister of State, Ministry of Food Processing Industries conveyed the concern of the Commission in this regard.
In particular, he pointed out that the IMS Act is not a routine food law, nor does it have anything in common with the other Acts in the repeal list.

It is a special Act to protect, promote and support breastfeeding and it focuses on marketing practices and other practices which interfere with breastfeeding, and thereby jeopardize the well being of the baby and mother.

The Commission observed that the protection of breastfeeding is vital for saving the lives of millions of children in India every year.
The Commission urged the Ministry to keep the above facts in view and take appropriate action in order to protect the “best interests” of children.

It firmly held that the IMS Act should not be repealed.
In response, the Ministry of Food Processing Industries vide their letter dated 18 August 2005 informed the Commission that the Group of Ministers had decided that IMS Act would not be repealed but only amended so as to substitute reference to the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act with reference to the proposed Bill.
NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES (NDPS) ACT, 1985 Upon receipt of numerous petitions alleging prolonged and unreasonable detention under the NDPS Act, the Commission undertook an examination of the provisions of that Act.

The Commission’s interest in this subject was heightened by its visit to jails where, not infrequently, those held under the Act clamoured for the attention and intervention of the Commission.
An exchange of views was, accordingly, initiated by the Commission with the Ministry of Finance with the purpose of expediting trials.

The Commission is gratified that the Ministry of Finance has framed a set of proposals for amending the Act to achieve this end and to introduce a system of better graded punishment.
As the Commission has concluded that there was an inadequacy of courts to deal with NDPS cases, it made specific proposals suggesting that the numbers of such courts be increased in certain States/Union Territories.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 287 The second important amendment pertains to the Commission and its officers’ right to visit any jail or other institution under the control of the State government.
Hitherto, the Commission was required as per the PHR Act, to intimate in advance to the State Government before visiting such facilities.

With this amendment to Section 12(f) of the Act, the provision of prior intimation was done away with.
Thirdly, under Section 18 of the principal Act dealing with steps to be taken after inquiry, the following provisions were inserted by the amendment: (i) To make payment of compensation or damages to the complainant or to the victim or the members his family as the Commission may consider necessary.

(ii) To initiate proceedings for prosecution or such other suitable action as the Commission may deem fit against the concerned person or persons.

(iii) To take such further action as it may think fit.
The fourth important amendment pertains to the composition of the State Human Rights Commissions.

As per the principal Act, the State Commission shall consist of a Chairperson and four Members [Section 21(2)].
With the amendment to this Section, the State Commission would now consist of a Chairperson who has been a Chief Justice of a High Court and one Member who is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court or District Judge in the State with a minimum of 7 years experience as District Judge; one Member to be appointed from amongst persons having knowledge of, or practical experience in matters relating to human rights.

The Commission noted with satisfaction that its recommendations contributed to a positive effect.
Whereas in April 1995 there were 48 courts dealing with NDPS cases, by 31 March 1996 the number of such courts had increased to 95.

The Commission nevertheless recommended that more courts should be designated to deal exclusively with NDPS cases.

Furthermore, it held that in certain States such as Uttar Pradesh where there is an absence or serious shortage of special courts dealing with NDPS cases, such courts need to be established or augmented.
PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT, 1993 The Commission had referred a proposal to the Government, in March 2000, for amendments to the statute.

As reiterated over the years, the Commission was of the considered view that the amendments, as proposed by the Commission, were necessary to ensure the independence and effectiveness of the Commission in the fulfillment of its mandate.
The Government of India finally notified the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006 that came into force on 23 November 2006.

Though the amendments carried out by the Government of India to the PHR Act, 1993, fell short of its recommendations and expectations, it however, felt that a small step in the right direction had been taken by the Government to remove certain lacunae in the Act.
One of the important amendments carried out by the Government of India in the PHR Act, 1993, pertains to the Section 13 of the principal Act, wherein after sub-section (5), a new sub-section (6), was inserted.
The inserted sub-section provides for ‘Where the Commission considers it necessary or expedient so to do, it may, by order, transfer any complaint filed or pending before it to the State Commission of the State from which the complaint arises, for disposal in accordance with the provision of the Act.’ 288 National Human Rights Commission, India The Commission noted with satisfaction that its recommendations contributed to a positive effect.
Whereas in April 1995 there were 48 courts dealing with NDPS cases, by 31 March 1996 the number of such courts had increased to 95.

The Commission nevertheless recommended that more courts should be designated to deal exclusively with NDPS cases.

Furthermore, it held that in certain States such as Uttar Pradesh where there is an absence or serious shortage of special courts dealing with NDPS cases, such courts need to be established or augmented.
PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ACT, 1993 The Commission had referred a proposal to the Government, in March 2000, for amendments to the statute.

As reiterated over the years, the Commission was of the considered view that the amendments, as proposed by the Commission, were necessary to ensure the independence and effectiveness of the Commission in the fulfillment of its mandate.
The Government of India finally notified the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006 that came into force on 23 November 2006.

Though the amendments carried out by the Government of India to the PHR Act, 1993, fell short of its recommendations and expectations, it however, felt that a small step in the right direction had been taken by the Government to remove certain lacunae in the Act.
One of the important amendments carried out by the Government of India in the PHR Act, 1993, pertains to the Section 13 of the principal Act, wherein after sub-section (5), a new sub-section (6), was inserted.
The inserted sub-section provides for ‘Where the Commission considers it necessary or expedient so to do, it may, by order, transfer any complaint filed or pending before it to the State Commission of the State from which the complaint arises, for disposal in accordance with the provision of the Act.’ The second important amendment pertains to the Commission and its officers’ right to visit any jail or other institution under the control of the State government.
Hitherto, the Commission was required as per the PHR Act, to intimate in advance to the State Government before visiting such facilities.

With this amendment to Section 12(f) of the Act, the provision of prior intimation was done away with.
Thirdly, under Section 18 of the principal Act dealing with steps to be taken after inquiry, the following provisions were inserted by the amendment: (i) (ii) To make payment of compensation or damages to the complainant or to the victim or the members his family as the Commission may consider necessary.

To initiate proceedings for prosecution or such other suitable action as the Commission may deem fit against the concerned person or persons.

(iii) To take such further action as it may think fit.
The fourth important amendment pertains to the composition of the State Human Rights Commissions.

As per the principal Act, the State Commission shall consist of a Chairperson and four Members [Section 21(2)].
With the amendment to this Section, the State Commission would now consist of a Chairperson who has been a Chief Justice of a High Court and one Member who is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court or District Judge in the State with a minimum of 7 years experience as District Judge; one Member to be appointed from amongst persons having knowledge of, or practical experience in matters relating to human rights.
A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 289 DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS ACCEDE/ACCESSION: ‘Accession’ is an act by which a State signifies its agreement to be legally bound by the terms of a particular treaty.

It has the same legal effect as ratification, but is not preceded by an act of signature.

The formal procedure for accession varies according to the national legislative requirements of the State.
To accede to a human rights treaty, the appropriate national organ of a State – Parliament, Senate, the Crown, Head of State or Government, or a combination of these – follows its domestic approval procedures and makes a formal decision to be a party to the treaty.

Then, the instrument of accession, a formal sealed letter referring to the decision and signed by the State’s responsible authority, is prepared and deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General in New York.
ADOPTION: ‘Adoption’ is the formal act by which the form and content of a proposed treaty text are established.

Treaties negotiated within an international organization like the United Nations are usually adopted by a resolution of a representative organ of the organization whose membership more or less corresponds to the potential participation in the treaty in question (the United Nations General Assembly, for example).
legal instruments generally include a ARTICLE: International Preamble (stating the reasons for and underlying understandings of the drafters and adopters of the instrument) and a series of ‘articles’, which lay out the obligations of those States choosing to be bound by it and procedural matters involving the treaty.

The term ‘provision’ is often used as an alternative when referring to the content of particular articles.
CHARTER: The term ‘charter’ is used for particularly formal and solemn instruments, such as the treaty founding an international 290 National Human Rights Commission, India organization like the United Nations (‘The Charter of the United Nations’).

CONVENTION: A ‘convention’ is a formal agreement between States.

The generic term ‘convention’ is synonymous with the generic term ‘treaty’.

The term is generally used to refer to formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties.
Conventions are normally open for participation by the international community as a whole, or by a large number of States.

Usually the instruments negotiated under the auspices of an international organization and/or by an organ of an international organization are entitled conventions (e.g.
the Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1989, and the 1951 ILO Convention concerning Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value, adopted by the International Labour Conference).

DECLARATION: The term ‘declaration’ is used for various international instruments.
International human rights declarations are not legally binding; the term is often deliberately chosen to indicate that the parties do not intend to create binding obligations but merely want to declare certain aspirations.

However, while the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights for example was not originally intended to have binding force, its provisions have since gained binding character as customary law.
DEPOSIT: After a treaty has been concluded, the written instruments which provide formal evidence of a State’s consent to be bound are placed in the custody of a depository.

The texts of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocols designated the Secretary-General of the United Nations as their depository.
The depository must accept all notifications and documents related to the treaty, examine whether all formal requirements are met, deposit DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS ACCEDE/ACCESSION: ‘Accession’ is an act by which a State signifies its agreement to be legally bound by the terms of a particular treaty.

It has the same legal effect as ratification, but is not preceded by an act of signature.

The formal procedure for accession varies according to the national legislative requirements of the State.
To accede to a human rights treaty, the appropriate national organ of a State – Parliament, Senate, the Crown, Head of State or Government, or a combination of these – follows its domestic approval procedures and makes a formal decision to be a party to the treaty.

Then, the instrument of accession, a formal sealed letter referring to the decision and signed by the State’s responsible authority, is prepared and deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General in New York.
ADOPTION: ‘Adoption’ is the formal act by which the form and content of a proposed treaty text are established.

Treaties negotiated within an international organization like the United Nations are usually adopted by a resolution of a representative organ of the organization whose membership more or less corresponds to the potential participation in the treaty in question (the United Nations General Assembly, for example).
ARTICLE: International legal instruments generally include a Preamble (stating the reasons for and underlying understandings of the drafters and adopters of the instrument) and a series of ‘articles’, which lay out the obligations of those States choosing to be bound by it and procedural matters involving the treaty.

The term ‘provision’ is often used as an alternative when referring to the content of particular articles.
CHARTER: The term ‘charter’ is used for particularly formal and solemn instruments, such as the treaty founding an international organization like the United Nations (‘The Charter of the United Nations’).

CONVENTION: A ‘convention’ is a formal agreement between States.

The generic term ‘convention’ is synonymous with the generic term ‘treaty’.

The term is generally used to refer to formal multilateral treaties with a broad number of parties.
Conventions are normally open for participation by the international community as a whole, or by a large number of States.

Usually the instruments negotiated under the auspices of an international organization and/or by an organ of an international organization are entitled conventions (e.g.
the Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1989, and the 1951 ILO Convention concerning Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value, adopted by the International Labour Conference).

‘declaration’ is used for various DECLARATION: The term international instruments.
International human rights declarations are not legally binding; the term is often deliberately chosen to indicate that the parties do not intend to create binding obligations but merely want to declare certain aspirations.

However, while the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights for example was not originally intended to have binding force, its provisions have since gained binding character as customary law.
DEPOSIT: After a treaty has been concluded, the written instruments which provide formal evidence of a State’s consent to be bound are placed in the custody of a depository.

The texts of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and its Optional Protocols designated the Secretary-General of the United Nations as their depository.
The depository must accept all notifications and documents related to the treaty, examine whether all formal requirements are met, deposit A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 291 them, register the treaty and notify all relevant acts to the parties concerned.

ENTRY INTO FORCE: A treaty does not enter into force when it is adopted.
Typically, the provisions of the treaty determine the date on which the treaty enters into force, often at a specified time following its ratification or accession by a fixed number of states.

For example, the Convention on the Rights of the Child entered into force on 2 September 1990—the 30th day following the deposit of the 20th State’s instrument of ratification or accession.

A treaty enters into force for those states which gave the required consent.
MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING: A memorandum of understanding is an international instrument of a less formal kind.

It often sets out operational arrangements under a framework international agreement.

It is also used for the regulation of technical or detailed matters.

It is typically in the form of a single instrument and does not require ratification.

They are entered into either by States or International Organizations.
The United Nations usually concludes memoranda of understanding with Member States in order to organize its peacekeeping operations or to arrange UN Conferences.

The United Nations also concludes memoranda of understanding on cooperation with other international organizations.

OPTIONAL PROTOCOL: The term ‘protocol’ is used for an additional legal instrument that complements and add to a treaty.
A protocol may be on any topic relevant to the original treaty and is used either to further address something in the original treaty, address a new or emerging concern or add a procedure for the operation and enforcement of the treaty—such as adding an individual complaints procedure.

A protocol is ‘optional’ because it is not automatically binding on States that have already ratified the original treaty; States must independently ratify or accede to a 292 National Human Rights Commission, India protocol.
The Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child concern the involvement of children in armed conflict and the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

PARTIES: The term ‘parties’ refers to States and other entities with treaty-making capacity which have expressed their consent to be bound by a treaty and where the treaty is in force for such States and entities.
RATIFY/RATIFICATION: ‘Ratification’ is an act by which a State signifies an agreement to be legally bound by the terms of a particular treaty.

To ratify a treaty, the State first signs it and then fulfils its own national legislative requirements.

Once the appropriate national organ of the country – Parliament, Senate, the Crown, Head of State or Government, or a combination of these – follows domestic constitutional procedures and makes a formal decision to be a party to the treaty.
The instrument of ratification, a formal sealed letter referring to the decision and signed by the State’s responsible authority, is then prepared and deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General in New York.

RESERVATION: ‘Reservation’ to a Treaty refers to a formal declaration by a State Party that it does not accept as binding on itself a certain part or parts of the concerned Treaty.
SIGNATURE: ‘Signature’ of a treaty is an act by which a State provides a preliminary endorsement of the instrument.

Signing does not create a binding legal obligation but does demonstrate the State’s intent to examine the treaty domestically and consider ratifying it.

While signing does not commit a State to ratification, it does oblige the State to refrain from acts that would defeat or undermine the treaty’s objective and purpose.
them, register the treaty and notify all relevant acts to the parties concerned.

ENTRY INTO FORCE: A treaty does not enter into force when it is adopted.

Typically, the provisions of the treaty determine the date on which the treaty enters into force, often at a specified time following its ratification or accession by a fixed number of states.
For example, the Convention on the Rights of the Child entered into force on 2 September 1990—the 30th day following the deposit of the 20th State’s instrument of ratification or accession.

A treaty enters into force for those states which gave the required consent.

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING: A memorandum of understanding is an international instrument of a less formal kind.

It often sets out operational arrangements under a framework international agreement.
It is also used for the regulation of technical or detailed matters.

It is typically in the form of a single instrument and does not require ratification.

They are entered into either by States or International Organizations.

The United Nations usually concludes memoranda of understanding with Member States in order to organize its peacekeeping operations or to arrange UN Conferences.

The United Nations also concludes memoranda of understanding on cooperation with other international organizations.
OPTIONAL PROTOCOL: The term ‘protocol’ is used for an additional legal instrument that complements and add to a treaty.

A protocol may be on any topic relevant to the original treaty and is used either to further address something in the original treaty, address a new or emerging concern or add a procedure for the operation and enforcement of the treaty—such as adding an individual complaints procedure.
A protocol is ‘optional’ because it is not automatically binding on States that have already ratified the original treaty; States must independently ratify or accede to a protocol.

The Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child concern the involvement of children in armed conflict and the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.
PARTIES: The term ‘parties’ refers to States and other entities with treaty-making capacity which have expressed their consent to be bound by a treaty and where the treaty is in force for such States and entities.

RATIFY/RATIFICATION: ‘Ratification’ is an act by which a State signifies an agreement to be legally bound by the terms of a particular treaty.

To ratify a treaty, the State first signs it and then fulfils its own national legislative requirements.
Once the appropriate national organ of the country – Parliament, Senate, the Crown, Head of State or Government, or a combination of these – follows domestic constitutional procedures and makes a formal decision to be a party to the treaty.

The instrument of ratification, a formal sealed letter referring to the decision and signed by the State’s responsible authority, is then prepared and deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General in New York.
‘Reservation’ to a Treaty refers to a formal RESERVATION: declaration by a State Party that it does not accept as binding on itself a certain part or parts of the concerned Treaty.

SIGNATURE: ‘Signature’ of a treaty is an act by which a State provides a preliminary endorsement of the instrument.

Signing does not create a binding legal obligation but does demonstrate the State’s intent to examine the treaty domestically and consider ratifying it.
While signing does not commit a State to ratification, it does oblige the State to refrain from acts that would defeat or undermine the treaty’s objective and purpose.

A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 293 STATE PARTY: A ‘State party’ to a treaty is a country that has ratified or acceded to that particular treaty, and is therefore legally bound by the provisions in the instrument.
ABBREVIATIONS International Conventions TREATY: A ‘treaty’ is a formally concluded and ratified agreement between States.

The term is used generically to refer to instruments binding at international law, concluded between international entities (States or organizations).
Under the Vienna Conventions on the Law of Treaties, a treaty must be (1) a binding instrument, which means that the contracting parties intended to create legal rights and duties; (2) concluded by states or international organizations with treaty- making power; (3) governed by international law and (4) in writing.
CAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women Convention on the Rights of the Child Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ICPAPED International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance ICRMW International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families Treaty Bodies Committee against Torture Committee on Enforced Disappearances CEDAW Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights CRC CRPD ICCPR ICERD CAT CED CERD CESCR 294 National Human Rights Commission, India STATE PARTY: A ‘State party’ to a treaty is a country that has ratified or acceded to that particular treaty, and is therefore legally bound by the provisions in the instrument.
ABBREVIATIONS International Conventions TREATY: A ‘treaty’ is a formally concluded and ratified agreement between States.

The term is used generically to refer to instruments binding at international law, concluded between international entities (States or organizations).
Under the Vienna Conventions on the Law of Treaties, a treaty must be (1) a binding instrument, which means that the contracting parties intended to create legal rights and duties; (2) concluded by states or international organizations with treaty- making power; (3) governed by international law and (4) in writing.
CAT CEDAW CRC CRPD ICCPR ICERD ICESCR ICPAPED ICRMW Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women Convention on the Rights of the Child Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families Treaty Bodies CAT CED CEDAW CERD CESCR Committee against Torture Committee on Enforced Disappearances Committee on against Women the Elimination of Discrimination Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 295 CMW CRC CRPD HRC Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Committee on the Rights of the Child Asia and the Pacific Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund Human Rights Committee UT Union Territory Other Abbreviations APF Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions ECOSOC United Nations Economic and Social Council GOI ICRC ILO MEA MHA NGO NHRC NHRI NIHR OHCHR PHRA SHRC Government of India International Committee of the Red Cross International Labour Organization Ministry of External Affairs Ministry of Home Affairs Non-governmental Organization National Human Rights Commission National Human Rights Institution National Institute of Human Rights Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 State Human Rights Commission 296 National Human Rights Commission, India CMW Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families Committee on the Rights of the Child UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund Human Rights Committee UT Union Territory CRC CRPD HRC GOI ICRC ILO MEA MHA NGO NHRC NHRI NIHR PHRA SHRC Other Abbreviations APF Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions ECOSOC United Nations Economic and Social Council Government of India International Committee of the Red Cross International Labour Organization Ministry of External Affairs Ministry of Home Affairs Non-governmental Organization National Human Rights Commission National Human Rights Institution National Institute of Human Rights Human Rights Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 State Human Rights Commission OHCHR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 297 Bibliography Agarwal, Sunil Kumar.
“Implementation of International Law in India: Role of Judiciary.” Presented at Dean Maxwell & Isle Cohen Doctoral Seminar in International Law.

Faculty of Law, McGill University.

http://oppenheimer.mcgill.ca/IMG/pdf/SK_Agarwal.pdf Gernigon, Bernard, Alberto Odero and Horacio Guido.

“ILO principles concerning collective bargaining.” 2000. International Labour Review, Vol.

139 (2000), No.

1.

“Civil and Political Rights: The Human Rights Committee.” Fact Sheet No.

15 (Rev.1).

OHCHR.
15 (Rev.1).

OHCHR.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet15rev.1en.pdf df “Definition of Key Terms Used in the UN Treaty Collection”.

UN Treaty Collection Website.

http://treaties.un.org/pages/Overview.aspx?path=overview/definition/page1 _en.xml#agreements “Economic, social and cultural rights: Legal entitlements rather than charity.” 10 December Release.

UN http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/C5486C42747EC60BC1 25751B005B08B3?opendocument Press 2008.
“Eliminating the worst forms of child labour: A practical guide to ILO Convention No.

182.” 2002. International Labour Organization and Inter- Parliamentary Union.

http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/ipec/publ/ipu_2002_gb_web.p df “Forced Labour”.

May 2008. International Trade Union Confederation.

http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/guide_forced_labour_EN.pdf “Handbook on the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.” UNICEF.

Innocenti Research Centre.


http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/optional_protocol_eng.pdf 298 National Human Rights Commission, India “Human Rights Explained: The International Bill of Rights.” Fact sheet 5.

Australian Human Rights Commission.

http://www.hreoc.gov.au/education/hr_explained/5_international.html “Introduction to the Convention on the Rights of the Child: Definition of key terms”.

UNICEF.
UNICEF.

http://www.unicef.org/crc/files/Definitions.pdf “Monitoring the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.” Professional Training Series No.

17.

2010.

OHCHR.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Disabilities_training_17EN.p “Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: A Manual for Prevention”.

2005.
2005.

Inter-American Institute for Human Rights (IIHR) and Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT).

“Simple Guide to the UN Treaty Bodies.” International Service for Human Rights.

ishr_simple_guide_to_the_un_treaty_bodies.pdf “The United Nations Human Rights Treaty System: An introduction to the core human rights treaties and the treaty bodies.” Fact Sheet No.

30.

OHCHR.

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/docs/OHCHR-FactSheet30.pdf “The New Core International Human Rights Treaties.” 2007.
OHCHR.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/newCoreTreatiesen.pdf “The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” World Health Organisation.

http://www.who.int/hhr/Civil_political_rights.pdf “The UN Treaty Monitoring Bodies and Migrant Workers: A Samizdat.” 2007. http://www.december18.net/sites/default/files/The_UN_Treaty_Monitoring_ Bodies_and_Migrant_Workers_a_Samizdat.pdf Bibliography Agarwal, Sunil Kumar.
“Implementation of International Law in India: Role of Judiciary.” Presented at Dean Maxwell & Isle Cohen Doctoral Seminar in International Law.

Faculty of Law, McGill University.

http://oppenheimer.mcgill.ca/IMG/pdf/SK_Agarwal.pdf Gernigon, Bernard, Alberto Odero and Horacio Guido.

“ILO principles concerning collective bargaining.” 2000. International Labour Review, Vol.

139 (2000), No.

1.

(Rev.1).

OHCHR.

Collection Website.


_en.xml#agreements “Civil and Political Rights: The Human Rights Committee.” Fact Sheet No.

15 http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FactSheet15rev.1en.pdf “Definition of Key Terms Used in the UN Treaty Collection”.

UN Treaty http://treaties.un.org/pages/Overview.aspx?path=overview/definition/page1 “Economic, social and cultural rights: Legal entitlements rather than charity.” 10 December 2008.

UN Press Release.
UN Press Release.

http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/C5486C42747EC60BC1 25751B005B08B3?opendocument “Eliminating the worst forms of child labour: A practical guide to ILO Convention No.

182.” 2002. International Labour Organization and Inter- Parliamentary Union.

df http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/ipec/publ/ipu_2002_gb_web.p “Forced Labour”.

May 2008. International Trade Union Confederation.


http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/guide_forced_labour_EN.pdf “Handbook on the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.” UNICEF.

Innocenti Research Centre.

http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/optional_protocol_eng.pdf “Human Rights Explained: The International Bill of Rights.” Fact sheet 5.

Australian Human Rights Commission.


http://www.hreoc.gov.au/education/hr_explained/5_international.html “Introduction to the Convention on the Rights of the Child: Definition of key terms”.

UNICEF.

http://www.unicef.org/crc/files/Definitions.pdf “Monitoring the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.” Professional Training Series No.

17.

2010.

OHCHR.
17.

2010.

OHCHR.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Disabilities_training_17EN.p df “Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: A Manual for Prevention”.

2005.

Inter-American Institute for Human Rights (IIHR) and Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT).

“Simple Guide to the UN Treaty Bodies.” International Service for Human Rights.
ishr_simple_guide_to_the_un_treaty_bodies.pdf “The United Nations Human Rights Treaty System: An introduction to the core human rights treaties and the treaty bodies.” Fact Sheet No.

30.

OHCHR.

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/docs/OHCHR-FactSheet30.pdf “The New Core International Human Rights Treaties.” 2007.

OHCHR.

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/newCoreTreatiesen.pdf “The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” World Health Organisation.
http://www.who.int/hhr/Civil_political_rights.pdf “The UN Treaty Monitoring Bodies and Migrant Workers: A Samizdat.” 2007. http://www.december18.net/sites/default/files/The_UN_Treaty_Monitoring_ Bodies_and_Migrant_Workers_a_Samizdat.pdf A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 299 “Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: Extra-legal Executions.” United Nations Crime and Justice Information Network http://www.uncjin.org/Standards/Compendium/pt1h.pdf TEXT OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.p International Human Rights Treaties.” “The Core 2006.
OHCHR.

http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/FD41CE646B0C8B3FC1 25741F004AC529-ohchr_may2006.pdf “Undocumented Migrants Have Rights: An Overview of the International Human Rights Framework”.

2007.

Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants.

http://picum.org/picum.org/uploads/file_/Undocumented_Migrants_Have_R ights_1.pdf Walton, Michael.

2 January 2008.
2 January 2008.

“Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death penalty”.

Background Paper 2005/4.

New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties.

“What is the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR?” Fact Sheet No.

4. International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific.

http://www.iwraw-ap.org/documents/OP_to_ICESCR_Advocacy_KitF4.pdf Jagadish S.Halashetti.
“The Status of International Law under the Constitution of India.” Legal Service Network and Law Resources Portal.

http://www.legalindia.in/the-status-of-international-law-under-the- constitution-of-india “Core Labor Standards Handbook.” 2006.

Asian Development Bank and ILO.
http://www2.adb.org/documents/handbooks/core-labor-standards/cls- handbook.pdf United Nations Population Fund Website http://www.unfpa.org/rights/instruments.htm United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/pages/Treaties.aspx?id=4&subid=A&lang=en 300 National Human Rights Commission, India df Rights Rights International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cerd.pdf International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/ccpr.pdf First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/ccpr-one.pdf Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/ccpr-death.pdf International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cescr.pdf Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/docs/a.RES.63.117_en.pdf Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/text/econvention.htm Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/protocol/text.htm Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cat.pdf Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment “Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: Extra-legal Executions.” United Nations Crime and Justice Information Network http://www.uncjin.org/Standards/Compendium/pt1h.pdf “The Core International Human Rights Treaties.” 2006.
OHCHR.

http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/FD41CE646B0C8B3FC1 25741F004AC529-ohchr_may2006.pdf “Undocumented Migrants Have Rights: An Overview of the International Human Rights Framework”.

2007.

Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants.

ights_1.pdf http://picum.org/picum.org/uploads/file_/Undocumented_Migrants_Have_R Walton, Michael.

2 January 2008.
2 January 2008.

“Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death penalty”.

Background Paper 2005/4.

New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties.

“What is the Optional Protocol to the ICESCR?” Fact Sheet No.

4. International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific.

http://www.iwraw-ap.org/documents/OP_to_ICESCR_Advocacy_KitF4.pdf Jagadish S.Halashetti.
“The Status of International Law under the Constitution of India.” Legal Service Network and Law Resources Portal.

http://www.legalindia.in/the-status-of-international-law-under-the- constitution-of-india “Core Labor Standards Handbook.” 2006.

Asian Development Bank and ILO.
http://www2.adb.org/documents/handbooks/core-labor-standards/cls- handbook.pdf United Nations Population Fund Website http://www.unfpa.org/rights/instruments.htm United Nations Treaty Collection Website http://treaties.un.org/pages/Treaties.aspx?id=4&subid=A&lang=en TEXT OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.p df International Convention on Discrimination http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cerd.pdf the Elimination of All Forms of Racial International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/ccpr.pdf First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/ccpr-one.pdf Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/ccpr-death.pdf International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cescr.pdf Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/docs/a.RES.63.117_en.pdf Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/text/econvention.htm Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/protocol/text.htm Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cat.pdf Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 301 http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cat-one.pdf http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Convention on the Rights of the Child http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc.pdf Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958
 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc-conflict.pdf Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc-sale.pdf Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/disabilities-op.pdf International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cmw.pdf Minimum Age Convention, 1973 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Convention Rights http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml Persons with the on of Disabilities International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/disappearance-convention.pdf Forced Labour Convention, 1930 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C029 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 302 National Human Rights Commission, India http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cat-one.pdf http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Convention on the Rights of the Child http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc.pdf Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Minimum Age Convention, 1973 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Worst Forms of
Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc-conflict.pdf Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc-sale.pdf Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/disabilities-op.pdf International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cmw.pdf Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/disappearance-convention.pdf Forced Labour Convention, 1930 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C029 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/convdisp1.htm Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 A Handbook on International Human Rights Convention 303