Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 563 entities
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 66d
- Paragraph text
- [One of the biggest challenges in relation to basic income is to move beyond its chameleon-like character. There are many versions of it, and each is supported by a diverse array of actors, precisely because they see different attractions in the concept. To assess the utility and acceptability of basic income from a human rights perspective, it is helpful to identify the main categories of motivation.] The right to work, either in the sense of promoting full employment for the community or of the individual being able to choose satisfying work;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- The income is “basic” in the sense that it is designed to guarantee a “floor” on which every recipient can stand. Because people’s needs are highly individualized and context-dependent, the amount that any specific individual requires will depend on factors such as local housing and living costs, the person’s health status, and whether there is any form of support network in place. But in its pure form, basic income would generally be assumed to be a uniform amount, which does not reflect those differentials. There are, however, different versions of the concept that envisage adjusting the amount over time, providing less money for children and more for the elderly, or adjusting for geography. The basis on which the floor is calculated and the amount to be paid will, of course, vary greatly from one country to another. Thus, while a national referendum on basic income in Switzerland proposed a payment of SwF 2,500 per month per adult, a South African initiative envisages a grant of US$15 per person per month, indexed to inflation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 31b
- Paragraph text
- [While the present report has thus far addressed a more or less generic approach to basic income, the reality is that there are a great many variations on the theme and that trying to distinguish them from one another, and then from other social protection schemes, is a major challenge. Following the analysis of David Piachaud, it is helpful to divide the various proposals into four different types:] A partial basic income is limited, such as to a particular group of recipients. For example, the Netherlands and New Zealand both have universal basic pensions, under which all persons above a certain age receive an income without means testing.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- 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. 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. 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. 3
- Paragraph text
- The fundamental values of the international human rights system are under attack in new and diverse ways in 2017. While competing explanations have been proffered, one that is included in most lists is that there is a rapidly growing sense of economic insecurity afflicting large segments of many societies. There is an increasing feeling of being exposed, vulnerable, overwhelmed and helpless, and of being systematically marginalized, both economically and socially. This situation, which previously seemed to be a fate reserved only for those living in low-income countries or in extreme poverty in high- and middle-income countries, now afflicts not just the unemployed and the underemployed, but also the precariously employed and those likely to be rendered unemployed in the foreseeable future as a result of various developments. Many of these individuals previously enjoyed a modicum of security and respect and felt that they had a stake in the overall system of government. As the new insecurity has ballooned and affected ever-greater numbers, many mainstream political parties have either remained oblivious, or have offered solutions that have only exacerbated the problems, further undermining faith in electoral democracy.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- All
- 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. 15
- Paragraph text
- A full basic income is considered a universal entitlement that is automatically paid ex ante to all in a society, regardless of income, wealth, age and gender. It does not require means testing and is not restricted to specific categories of recipients. This idea is troubling to many, who question why the “haves” should receive as much as the “have nots”. Common responses are that any form of means testing to determine eligibility requires a large and inefficient bureaucracy to evaluate claims, creates a burden on disadvantaged people to prove their financial need, stigmatizes the target group, and undermines the freedom to not work — as compared to means-tested welfare that is reduced as people work and earn more. One option for retaining universality but responding to this unfairness critique is a progressive taxation system that effectively takes back much of the basic income payment from high earners. Some challenge the viability of that approach in a world in which elite tax avoidance and evasion schemes are rife.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- All of these motivations are persuasive on their own terms, but unless they are integrally linked to the last category the likelihood is that what will emerge will be another strategy designed to promote productivity and efficiency, but without concern for the far more fundamental goals.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- In support of the view that specific recognition is not required, it might be argued that if a treaty envisages such recognition, it would say so explicitly. Thus treaties dealing with torture, genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity call not just for legislative recognition of the norm, but also for explicit criminalization of particular conduct. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women unequivocally requires States parties "to embody the principle of the equality of men and women in their national constitutions or other appropriate legislation" (art. 2 (a)). It further obliges them "to ensure, through law and other appropriate means, the practical realization of this principle."
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Men
- Women
- 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. 10
- Paragraph text
- During the Cold War years, deep ideological divisions ensured that economic and social rights were given very limited attention. It was not until 1987 that the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was established by the Economic and Social Council, a development that certainly helped to trigger considerable progress. Partly as a result, 171 States proclaimed at the World Conference on Human Rights in 1993 that: All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated. The international community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 12
- Paragraph text
- Some will contest this assessment, while others will suggest that the difference in attention and in the practical legal recognition accorded to the two sets of rights - civil and political rights on one hand, and economic, social and cultural rights on the other - does not really matter. In fact, it matters a great deal, and for a number of reasons. The most basic is philosophical, in the sense that it is agreed that the two sets of rights are indispensable elements in enabling individuals to live dignified and fulfilling lives. It is also important for doctrinal reasons. The equal status of the rights recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reflects a hard-fought ideological and political compromise, not only between capitalist and communist approaches in the 1940s, but between continuing differences in perception over what societies should value most and the terms of the social contract between the State and its inhabitants. It is the glue that has held the package together and the understanding that enables the reconciliation of otherwise starkly competing visions. It reflects the need to achieve an equilibrium among goals that will inevitably always be in tension with one another. Whether the equal importance of the two sets of rights can also be demonstrated empirically is a matter over which economists and others have long duelled, and instrumentalist arguments continue to be heavily relied upon in making the case for goals such as gender equality. But, regardless of the conclusions that might emerge from such research, the validity of the underlying principle cannot be held hostage to the uncertainties of empirical analyses.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- 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. 27
- Paragraph text
- Nonetheless, aside from the clear position that the relevant Committee has taken in its general comments, it is difficult to understand how the obligations to "recognize" the rights, and to "guarantee" non-discrimination, could possibly be achieved in the absence of targeted legislative or equivalent measures. As stated in the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, the general principle is that States shall, as required under international law, ensure that their domestic law is consistent with their international legal obligations by, inter alia, incorporating norms of international human rights law into their domestic law, or otherwise implementing them in their domestic legal system. The key element here is the recognition of the norm itself, not merely the adoption of measures that are pertinent to the subject-matter of the norm.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- 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. 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. 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. 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
The UN responsibility for the cholera outbreak in Haiti 2016, para. 83
- Paragraph text
- First and foremost, there should be an apology and an acceptance of responsibility in the name of the Secretary-General.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- The framework of legal recognition that underpins the approach adopted in the present report by no means exhausts the range of approaches that are and should be used in the promotion of economic and social rights. Campaigns to educate both rights holders and professionals, empower community groups, facilitate local-level activism or enable monitoring are all part of the expansive toolbox for economic and social rights activism. As has been cautioned: Unless all participants in [economic and social rights] litigation are conscious of the institutional limitations of the courts and consider the possibility that the particular claim may be more effectively addressed through another forum such as advocacy or community mobilisation, there will be the ever-present danger of untimely or inappropriate resort to litigation, and judgments that impede rather than facilitate transformation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- More sustained and meaningful attention to economic and social rights is also increasingly recognized as an indispensable component of effective and comprehensive counter-terrorism strategies in many contexts. The Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism has consistently drawn attention to the extent to which societies characterized by economic, social, political and educational exclusion are often breeding, or recruitment, grounds for terrorism. And the Secretary-General included in his Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Extremism a lack of socioeconomic opportunities, as well as marginalization and discrimination, among the conditions conducive to violent extremism.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 56
- Paragraph text
- One of the most encouraging developments in recent years in relation to economic and social rights has been the growth of specialist NGOs at the international, national and, especially, local levels working to promote either economic and social rights in general or specific rights such as those relating to health, housing, education, water, gender equality, disability and ageing.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Health
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Older persons
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 11
- Paragraph text
- In addition to highlighting the intrinsic linkages among all rights, the principal significance of this bold assertion was to signal that economic, social and cultural rights are as important as civil and political rights and must be accorded equal attention. And the past quarter of a century has indeed seen a great number of important initiatives, especially in sectoral areas such as the right to housing, the right to food, the right to health and the right to water, and more consistent tribute being rendered to the principle of indivisibility. But acceptance in law and in practice of the idea that economic and social rights are actually human rights, with the set of clear legal consequences that this entails, rather than a set of concerns synonymous with development or social progress, remains marginal. This marginality manifests itself in the work of United Nations human rights bodies, in both the theory and practice of the great majority of States, in the work of many of the most prominent civil society groups focusing on human rights, in the interests and priorities of scholars and commentators and, perhaps most counter-intuitively, even in the work of most international agencies promoting poverty alleviation and social development. As a result, the principal of indivisibility continues to be honoured more in the breach than in the observance.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- In considering which institutions are most likely to be best placed to promote knowledge and understanding of economic and social rights at the domestic level, two types of actors seem most relevant. The first being the government agencies that are responsible for making and implementing policy in the relevant sectors. Thus, government ministries dealing with education, social protection, health, nutrition and so on might be expected to take the lead in promoting a rights-based understanding. This is not to argue, as is sometimes suggested in the literature on rights-based approaches to development, that everything these ministries do should be guided by and seen through the lens of human rights. Nonetheless, one might expect the ministry of education, for example, to acknowledge that there is a right to education and to spell out what that means in specific policy terms. While it is well beyond the scope of this report to explore how common such an approach is among sectoral ministries in most countries, it can be said by way of generalization that the phenomenon is not common. There are some indications that the health sector might be moving more in that direction under the impetus of the movement for universal health coverage. Similarly, social security is increasingly seen in terms of the right to social security as a result of the Social Protection Floor Initiative.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The UN responsibility for the cholera outbreak in Haiti 2016, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- The present report is not the appropriate context in which to spell out in detail what remains to be done to right the wrongs that have occurred. But it is possible to sketch in broad outline the principal steps that are required.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Marginality of economic and social rights 2016, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- Human rights are often expressed with great brevity and little or no elaboration as to their content or corresponding obligations. The relevant treaties simply recognize that there is a right to life, a right to social security or a right to recognition as a person before the law. But the assumption underpinning this approach is that institutions will be created and will help to develop the normative content of the relevant right, promote its implementation and facilitate its realization. In Spanish, the term institucionalidad is sometimes used to denote the institutional arrangements that are needed to underpin the rule of law and human rights. Where no institutions are designated to take the lead in implementing a particular human right, the likelihood is that little will be done to treat it as a human right per se. This is especially the case 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
Extreme inequality and human rights 2015, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- The World Bank has also been active on this front. In its Annual Report 2014 it noted that "rising inequality in many countries is harmful to economic stability and the sustainability of growth, but well-designed policies can reduce inequality without hurting growth". In January 2015, the Bank's Chief Economist suggested that the "deep and pervasive inequality that exists today can only be condemned". He recalled that the annual income of the world's 50 wealthiest people was close to the total income of the poorest 1 billion, a figure that he characterized as "a collective failure". He called for the consideration of "policies and interventions to curb such extreme inequality", which he said must be done "not only out of a sense of justice, but also because, in a world afflicted with such extreme disparities, its poorest residents lose their voice, even when they have the right to vote. Extreme inequality is, ultimately, an assault on democracy."
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph