From: harelb@math.cornell.edu (misc.activism.progressive co-moderator)
Subject: The Decline of America: Addendum on Human Rights Treaties
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: daemon@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: misc.activism.progressive on UseNet ; ACTIV-L@UMCVMB
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 03:59:42 GMT

The Decline of America: Addendum on Human Rights Treaties


    "The U.S. did not, however, take the necessary steps to allow the
    far more frequently used individual complaint procedure -- doing
    so requires signing the Optional Protocol to the Covenant.

    "The reservations package includes"

    criminal procedure: the U.S. reserves the right to execute
    juveniles and to treat them as adults in exceptional circumstances

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[One might imagine the bitter sarcastic comments of hte pundits were
Iran or the fomer Soviet Union to have "ratified" a convention on
human rights excluding certain cruelties but adding a "reservations
package" including saying they are allowed to do this anyway "in
exceptional circumstances" --HB]
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



A recent item in this series noted that the U.S. was the only western
industrial nation which had NOT ratified at least two of the three 
treaties:

    Actions of various nations on the International Covenant on
    Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant
    on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the
    United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
    Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1991.

It turns out the just one month before the book We're Number One was
published, the Senate finally ratified ICCPR. Now this woudl still
put us below 14 other nations which have ratified all three; and that
would be putting aside all of the delays and provisions added to
previous treaties (e.g. shameful foot-dragging by Bush admin. against
Convention against Torture -- how else can you support regimes which
practice government-run "death-squads" (which the Free Press pretends
to believe are run by extremists outside the government ..
documentation of the facts by email to harelb@math.cornell.edu)
because they are good for U.S. corporations' profits unlike "leftists"
regimes which pass labor-protection laws, land reform, etc).

However, it turns out that even this understates the situtation. In
this "What We Say Goes" world, the powerful make the rules in the
international arena, and basically do as they please.

--Harel Barzilai


******************************************************************
From: Hilary Naylor <hnaylor> 
Subject: US Senate ratifies ICCPR 
****************************************************************** 
/* Written  4:07 pm  Sep 30, 1992 by hnaylor in cdp:ai.general */ 
/* ---------- "US Senate ratifies ICCPR" ---------- */ 
U.S. SENATE RATIFIES U.N. COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS 
******************************************************************
by Naomi Roht-Arriaza 
Board of Directors, Human Rights Advocates 
P.O. Box 5675, Berkeley, CA 94705 

With little fanfare, on April 2 the United States senate gave its 
advice and consent to US ratification of the United Nations 
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.  The Covenant was opened 
for signature in 1966, and had been presented for ratification by 
the Carter Administration in 1978.  No action was taken at that 
time; the incoming Reagan administration refused to ask for 
ratification of the Covenant.  The Bush Administration reopened 
the process of ratification of human rights treaties, starting 
with the Genocide Convention in 1986 and the Convention Against 
Torture in 1990. 

U.S. ratification of the Covenant increases the visibility and 
credibility of the global human rights reporting and monitoring 
process, and may encourage other countries to ratify.  The U.S. 
will be subject to periodic reporting under Article 40 under 
which it must submit reports to the Human Rights Committee (an 
initial report next year, and then every five years).  The 
Committee, made up of human rights experts, may question U.S. 
officials on the report and make general comments.  The U.S. also 
accepted the competence of the Committee to receive interstate 
complaints that it is not fulfilling its obligations.  The 
interstate complaint procedure has not to date been used.  The 
U.S. did not, however, take the necessary steps to allow the far 
more frequently used individual complaint procedure -- doing so 
requires signing the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. 

On the other hand, the package of reservations, understandings, 
declarations and provisos attached tot he ratification means 
practically no changes in current U.S. state or federal law.  
Indeed, the only change contemplated is that, while the U.S. 
reserves the right to execute young people under 18 years old, it 
may no longer execute pregnant women. 

The reservations package includes a general proviso that the 
substantive articles of the Covenant  are not self-executing 
(i.e. they require implementing legislation before they can be 
enforced in U.S. courts).  In addition, the package covers: 

- free speech and association: the Covenant requires states to 
prohibit war propaganda and "advocacy of national, racial or 
religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, 
hostility or violence."  The U.S. will not apply this provision 
to the extent it conflicts with constitutional provisions 
allowing such advocacy. 

- cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment: as with the Torture 
Convention, the reservation applied to the prohibition only to 
the extent required by the constitution; 

- criminal procedure: the U.S. reserves the right to execute 
juveniles and to treat them as adults in exceptional 
circumstances.  In addition., understanding would avoid any 
changes in U.S. law regarding limitations on the right to 
counsel, on the right of a defendant to compel witnesses, on the 
"separate sovereign" doctrine of double jeopardy allowing trial 
by both the federal government and the state for the same 
conduct, and on pretrial detention. 

- compensation for official wrongdoing: the Covenant provides for 
compensation for victims of unlawful arrest or detention or a 
miscarriage of justice.  The U.S. interprets this to mean only 
that a civil suit must be available as a remedy. 

- discrimination: the Covenant prohibits discrimination on a wide 
range of grounds.  Some of these, like race, are subject to 
strict scrutiny under U.S. law,. while others are subject to the 
much lower rational basis standard.  The U.S. understands that 
discrimination on the enumerated bases is permitted "when such 
distinctions are, at minimum, rationally related to a legitimate 
governmental objective." 

The effect of the reservations package is to preclude any change, 
however minimal, in current U.S. law.  Scholars and human rights 
organizations have long argued that such sweeping reservations 
are both unnecessary and unwise, setting an unfortunate precedent 
for other countries.  In addition, reservations to non-derogable 
articles of the Covenant, like those relating to the right to 
life (Article 6), may be incompatible with the object and purpose 
of the treaty and thus be inadmissible.*  Moreover, once the 
treaty is ratified with this set of reservations and 
understandings, those reservations and understandings become the 
authoritative interpretation of the rights at issue in U.S. 
courts, replacing what may be a more expansive definition of the 
rights at issue existing under customary law.  Indeed, some human 
rights scholars now believe it is preferable for the U.S. not to 
ratify human rights treaties at all than to ratify them with the 
current package of conditions. 
_______________ 
* A 1984 Advisory Opinion on similar provisions of the American 
Convention on Human Rights held that a reservation designed to 
enable a State to suspend a non-derogable fundamental right (like 
the right to life) must be deemed incompatible with the object 
and purpose of the []Convention...Advisory Opinion on 
Restrictions to the Death Penalty, I.A. Ct. H.R., OC3/83, ser. A, 
No. 3, para. 61, reprinted in 23 I.L.M. 320 (1984). 

Reprinted by permission from _Human Rights Advocates Newsletter_ 
July 1992. 

******************************************************************

To: rrk@hoqaa.att.com
In-reply-to: Richard R Koch's message of Wed, 30 Sep 92 17:57:34 EDT <9209302205.AA12579@poly.math.cornell.edu>
Subject: The Decline of America: USA #1 in NOT Ratifying Human Rights Treaties
--text follows this line--
   Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 17:57:34 EDT
   From: rrk@hoqaa.att.com (Richard R Koch)
   Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive,alt.activism,alt.politics.elections,bit.listserv.politics
   Organization: AT&T

   The US Senate ratified the ICCPR earlier this year. I never noticed
   anything about it in the New York Times only recently discovered
   this is a Human Rights Watch Newsletter

   Richard Koch

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive