Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 304 entities
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 72
- Paragraph text
- Fourth, the implications for gender equality from growing economic insecurity are almost unremittingly negative. It remains true that “the average woman’s career remains shorter, more disrupted and less remunerative than the average man’s”, and the consequences flow through into social security and related arrangements. Proponents of women’s human rights need to become more involved in debates over social protection and basic income.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Gender
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Women
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- The neoliberal policies encapsulated in the 1980s-era Washington Consensus can be seen, especially in retrospect, to have greatly exacerbated economic insecurity, whether or not that was the intent. The State was assumed to be intrinsically inefficient and corruption-prone, and this led to constant pressure to shrink all those parts of it that provided social and basic economic services to the populace, while vindicating and reinforcing the State in its role as the regulator facilitating and legitimizing the privatization of the economy. Social security and social protection was transformed, including through the explicit policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, into a minimalist notion of “social safety nets” designed to avoid the very worst outcomes and make the State look beneficent while empowering officials dedicated to devising ever more efficient “targeting” mechanisms and to rooting out overinclusion while playing down underinclusion. The objectives of promoting tax reform and prudent fiscal policies turned into a race to the bottom to set the lowest individual and corporate tax rates, attracting businesses through expensive exemptions, turning a blind eye to illegal or unconscionably evasive tax practices, and eliminating estate taxes and other measures that would bring about even minimal redistribution. Privatization was promoted even in relation to what were once seen as basic State functions, such as prisons, education and security. In some States, even the justice system has been partly privatized, whether through onerous court fees for the poor or the channelling of consumer and other complaints into private arbitration.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- Under the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202), States should establish and maintain social protection floors ensuring that, at a minimum, “over the life cycle, all in need have access to essential health care and to basic income security which together secure effective access to goods and services defined as necessary at the national level”. This comprises essential health care, including maternity care, and basic income security for children, for active-age adults in cases of sickness, unemployment, maternity and disability, and for older persons. These goals may be achieved through any of the following schemes: universal benefit, social insurance, social assistance, negative income tax, public employment and employment support.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Older persons
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 8e
- Paragraph text
- [The present report is premised on the view that the human rights movement needs to address and respond to the fundamental changes that are taking place in economic and social structures at the national and global levels. These include, among others:] The ascent of a new neoliberal agenda, which involves further fetishization of low tax rates, demonization of the administrative State, deregulation as a matter of principle, and the privatization of remaining State responsibilities in the social sector, risks leaving the State in no position to protect or promote social rights meaningfully.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- As for similarities, some existing non-contributory programmes in developed countries are already close to the concept of basic income. Many European countries, for example, have universal child-benefit systems that transfer cash to parents with few, if any, conditions attached and that are paid from public funds to all parents with children of a certain age, even if benefit levels might vary according to the number of children or the income of the parents. The main difference between basic income and such programmes appears to be that the latter restrict payments to specific groups such as children or the elderly.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 74
- Paragraph text
- Sixth, and most important, the debates over social protection floors and basic income need to be brought together. They have thus far been kept largely separate, in a counterproductive and ultimately self-defeating way. It is true that there are points of divergence between the two concepts, but they have vastly more potential if their synergies are recognized, rather than being ignored. Among the differences are the following: (a) the social protection floor mostly draws on experience in developing countries, while basic income advocates tend to emphasize developed countries; (b) social protection floors aim to guarantee both income security and access to essential social services, while basic income schemes only guarantee income; (c) the concept of basic income security is broader than basic income cash transfers, since it also includes in-kind transfers; (d) social protection floors focus not only on achieving social guarantees for all, but also on gradually implementing higher standards; (e) social protection floors are not viewed as alternatives to social insurance institutions, while some basic income proponents aim to replace existing social insurance institutions; and (f) the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202) is premised upon human rights, unlike most basic income schemes. But the proponents of the two approaches have an immense amount in common, and if it is recognized that basic income is not an idea that can be achieved in a single leap, there could be no better and more elaborate and widely supported programme than that for the social protection floor.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- Internationally, social protection floors have been promoted in the context of the Social Protection Floor Initiative, launched in 2009. This initiative culminated in the 2011 report by the Social Protection Floor Advisory Group (the “Bachelet report”) and in the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202). And Sustainable Development Goal 1 advocates “appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- Basic income is thus not at odds with social protection floors, with universality being a key assumption of both. While basic income proponents have suggested that the reference to “basic income security” in recommendation No. 202 is a much broader concept than their idea of basic income, they see social protection floors as a “significant step toward basic income by legitimizing the idea of basic income security as an essential ingredient for human development”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- But how would these expenditures be paid for? Piachaud notes that a full basic income that “replaces social security is far more costly than social security, and this has to be paid for from higher taxes on all incomes with far-reaching economic consequences”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- Whereas many aspects of existing social protection systems flow to the household, basic income would go directly to each individual. Some proposals do, however, diverge from this principle and envisage reduced payments which take account of the overall family or household situation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- Second, the right to work, the right to social security, and above all the right to an adequate standard of living need to be given a prominent place on the human rights community’s agenda. If these rights are marginalized, the overall agenda will become increasingly less relevant to the most pressing and urgent questions of the day.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 65
- Paragraph text
- This is where the basic income debate comes in. A focus on social protection more broadly defined might be a more propitious entry point to tackle these issues. Governments remain centrally responsible for ensuring appropriate levels of social protection within their borders, they have a self-interest in promoting stability and economic security, and they control the resources needed.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- Finally, a simulation for the region of Catalonia, in Spain, suggests that a basic annual income of €7,968 for those aged over 18 and of €1,594 for minors would require a 49.57 per cent flat tax rate and extra financing of €7 billion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- Because of the relative inactivity of these other actors, studies of economic and social rights accountability have focused overwhelmingly on the courts and on the extent to which the increasing constitutional recognition noted above has enabled them to play an active role in upholding economic and social rights. It is open to question whether this emphasis accurately reflects the main trends in economic and social rights accountability or whether it is due more to the lawyers' preference for studying courts. It might also be linked to the determination of economic and social rights proponents in the era of post-Cold War constitutional revitalization to respond to the often heard, but highly reductionist, proposition that "if one is to talk meaningfully of rights, one has to discuss what can be enforced through the judicial process". In response, economic and social rights proponents have sought legitimacy by seeking to demonstrate that economic and social rights resemble civil and political rights, at least in this key respect.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 63
- Paragraph text
- A conception of human rights that implicitly accepts a radical hierarchical distinction between the two sets of rights - civil and political rights, and economic, social and cultural rights - is one that is fundamentally incompatible with international human rights law. Just as importantly, it offers no solution to the increasingly urgent challenges posed by radical and growing inequality and widespread material deprivation in a world of plenty. The economic and social rights agenda is thus too important, and its neglect has too many powerfully negative implications for the overall human rights enterprise, for it to be marginalized by mainstream actors and left to a handful of specialist groups to struggle to give it the place that law and justice demand.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- However, in the 50 years since the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were adopted, extensive experience has been gained at both the international and national level, which enables us to identify the key ingredients in successful approaches to the recognition and implementation of human rights obligations. Three are of particular salience in relation to economic and social rights: (a) the need to accord legal recognition to the rights; (b) the need for appropriate institutional arrangements to promote and facilitate realization of the rights; and (c) the need for measures that promote governmental accountability. This can be termed the recognition, institutionalization and accountability framework, or the RIA framework, and its implications for economic and social rights are considered below.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- In monitoring civil and political rights, both the Human Rights Council and the treaty bodies have played a crucial role in encouraging States to focus on the recognition, institutionalization and accountability dimensions of those rights. It is much less clear, however, that they have played a comparable role in relation to economic and social rights. While the Council addresses economic and social rights in many different contexts, and especially through the work of its special procedures, perhaps the best indication of its approach can be gleaned from the universal periodic review process. In terms of the work of the treaty bodies, the most important in this context is the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The approach adopted with regard to recognition, institutionalization and accountability in each of these settings is examined briefly below.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- Because of its universality and its integrated approach to the human rights agenda, the universal periodic review process is an especially important indicator of governmental concerns and priorities. A thorough review of the operation of the process since its inception raises concern about both the quantity and quality of economic, social and cultural rights-related recommendations. Only one out of five recommendations adopted have been specifically concerned with economic, social and cultural rights. Only 11 per cent of the recommendations put forward by the regional group that have made, by far, the most recommendations overall dealt with economic, social and cultural rights. For other regions, the figures were 20 to 30 per cent. Even more problematic, two thirds of the recommendations relating to economic, social and cultural rights called for only general action, as opposed to any specific outcome. These results are consistent with the Special Rapporteur’s own survey, which indicated that up and including the twenty-second session of the Human Rights Council, 1,031 economic and social rights-related recommendations had been made. Of these, over 20 per cent called for ratification of the Covenant or the Optional Protocol, or withdrawal of reservations made at the time of ratification. Thirty-three recommendations called for greater cooperation with United Nations bodies working on economic, social and cultural rights; 182 called for legislative action on one or more specific economic and social rights, but almost none of these focused on specific legislative recognition of economic and social rights as human rights. Only 13, or 1.26 per cent, of the relevant recommendations specifically requested a State to take measures to guarantee the status of economic, social and cultural rights through constitutional amendments, enactment of legislation or by giving national courts jurisdiction to provide remedies for economic and social rights violations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 58
- Paragraph text
- When constitutions are being rewritten, the major NGOs are vocal in calling for the inclusion of civil and political rights, but rarely mention economic and social rights. When transitional justice mechanisms are being shaped, their concerns focus overwhelmingly on civil and political rights, even though many such violations go hand in hand with economic and social rights violations, and the measures required to bring reconciliation and justice would need to incorporate economic and social rights dimensions if they are to be comprehensive as well as designed to avoid non-repetition. Instead, those issues are most likely to be characterized as development concerns.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- The problem is that, unless the basic building blocks of recognition, institutionalization and accountability are in place, it is highly unlikely that other more sophisticated techniques are going to be effective. It is difficult to imagine less fertile ground for many such initiatives than contexts in which economic and social rights remain unrecognized as rights, where the relevant institutions are not working effectively to promote economic and social rights as rights and where there is little or no concept of economic and social rights accountability in place. It is hoped, of course, that these new techniques, developed and promoted externally, can compensate for, or even overcome, the inhospitable domestic environment within which they will eventually have to be implemented. But again, there would seem to be a strong element of wishful thinking in the expectation that States that have not been able or willing to put the foundations of economic and social rights in place, will be likely to implement even more demanding and sophisticated techniques for monitoring and promoting economic and social rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- States' obligations under human rights treaties are described in different ways in different treaties. In civil and political rights contexts, the obligation is to respect and to ensure, whereas economic, social and cultural rights standards reflect an obligation to recognize the rights and take steps to realize them progressively. In spelling out those obligations, international bodies and commentators have commonly identified duties to protect, respect and fulfil.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- It has been suggested that "countries are choosing social rights constitutionalism over other ways to promote well-being and the fulfilment of basic human needs". A systematic and detailed study of economic and social rights in national constitutions provides detailed evidence to support this optimistic assessment; 195 constitutions were examined with a view to identifying which of 16 separate economic and social rights were recognized and, where they were recognized, whether the constitutions classified them as justiciable or aspirational (such as directive principles of State policy). Over 90 per cent of the Constitutions recognized at least one economic and social right. In around 70 per cent of the Constitutions, at least one economic and social right was explicitly justiciable and around 25 per cent of them recognized 10 or more justiciable economic and social rights. In order of frequency, the justiciable rights concerned education, trade unions, health care, social security, child protection and environmental protection. The study found that those six rights appear in over half of all Constitutions.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- The second type of institutional actor that could be expected to play a key role in promoting economic and social rights is national human rights institutions, of which there are now almost 120. In 1998, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights called upon national human rights institutions to take a more active role in the promotion of economic and social rights. The most detailed scholarly study of those institutions yet undertaken concludes that, if they "can be faulted as a group for one thing, it is an insufficient challenge to the material conditions that perpetuate human rights violations". Specialist studies indicate that while a handful of such institutions have devoted significant attention to economic and social rights, the vast majority have not. The reasons cited include absent or restrictive mandates, lack of expertise, lack of resources, absence of political support and the complexity of the issues. The bottom line is that few of these "institutions are producing regular, comprehensive reports on ESC rights fulfilment in their countries".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- If the recognition, institutionalization and accountability building blocks were solidly in place in many countries, it would follow that the main focus of advocacy efforts to promote a higher level of real-life enjoyment of economic and social rights should be elsewhere. It may be that this assumption explains why so many of those working to promote economic and social rights, whether through the United Nations or regional organizations or at the national level, have now turned their attention to matters such as developing new methodologies for measuring compliance with the Covenant, exploring new and much more detailed indicators, working out how such indicators can be disaggregated to take account of a wide range of specific factors - such as gender, age, ethnicity and social origin -, identifying means by which to ensure that decision-making processes are transparent and participatory, and developing more detailed normative guidelines, recommendations, principles and other such instruments that elaborate upon or seek to operationalize governmental obligations in relation to economic and social rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- The principle of accountability provides the overarching rationale for the establishment of an international human rights regime. It operates at two levels. One involves State accountability to the international community, which has been promoted through the creation of monitoring mechanisms such as the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the universal periodic review process, and through regional mechanisms. The other involves ensuring that governments are accountable to their citizens and other rights holders. The right to a remedy is recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law has attached particular importance to developing an understanding of the right to adequate, effective, prompt and appropriate remedies, including reparations. Remedies have also been highlighted in transitional justice contexts. In relation to economic, social and cultural rights, the Committee on those rights has stated in its general comment No. 9 that "appropriate means of redress, or remedies, must be available to any aggrieved individual or group, and appropriate means of ensuring governmental accountability must be put in place" (para. 2).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- It is essential for the proponents of economic and social rights to acknowledge the deeply rooted nature of the continuing strong resistance to the very concept of economic and social rights as human rights. The adoption of more resolutions and the holding of more meetings should not be permitted to conceal this fact. The reality is that governments have not accidentally overlooked the significance of the recognition, institutionalization and accountability (RIA) framework. On the contrary, the widespread failure to ensure that these three building blocks are in place in relation to economic and social rights is the principal symptom of the resistance. Proponents of economic and social rights need to acknowledge and tackle this deeper political reality rather than sailing merrily along as though there is widespread and basic agreement on economic and social rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights contains three principal types of obligation. The first, and the most consistently ignored or underestimated, is the obligation to recognize each of the particular rights. The second is to take steps through all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of legislative measures. The third is the obligation to "guarantee" the exercise of the relevant rights without discrimination.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- Many human rights proponents seem to prefer not to engage in these debates for fear that doing so would be a lost cause and that economic and social rights would be discredited or disowned rather than just marginalized or neglected. But that strategy leads to the same result in practical terms, except that the illusion is maintained that economic and social rights are an integral, even indivisible, part of the overall human rights framework.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- In terms of the obligation to recognize, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has noted that, in many instances, legislation is highly desirable and in some cases may even be indispensable. It subsequently added that, although the precise method by which Covenant rights are given effect in national law is a matter for each State party to decide, the means used should be appropriate in the sense of producing results which are consistent with the full discharge of its obligations by the State party.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- Closely linked to this loss of legitimacy is a loss of credibility in the eyes of rights holders. The second-class status of economic and social rights has deeply negative consequences for the potential of the human rights movement to gain the widespread support that it needs in order to establish its credibility in the eyes of the literally billions of people whose fundamental needs continue to be of only minor relevance to the core human rights agenda. The fact that the movement is subject to powerful challenges at the global level is due in significant part to the perception that its overriding preoccupations do little or nothing to address the most abiding and pressing challenges confronted by a large part of humanity.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph