Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 36 entities
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 13d
- Paragraph text
- [In those provisions of the Covenant that are not listed in article 4, paragraph 2, there are elements that in the Committee's opinion cannot be made subject to lawful derogation under article 4. Some illustrative examples are presented below.] As confirmed by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, deportation or forcible transfer of population without grounds permitted under international law, in the form of forced displacement by expulsion or other coercive means from the area in which the persons concerned are lawfully present, constitutes a crime against humanity. The legitimate right to derogate from article 12 of the Covenant during a state of emergency can never be accepted as justifying such measures.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- Measures derogating from the provisions of the Covenant must be of an exceptional and temporary nature. Before a State moves to invoke article 4, two fundamental conditions must be met: the situation must amount to a public emergency which threatens the life of the nation, and the State party must have officially proclaimed a state of emergency. The latter requirement is essential for the maintenance of the principles of legality and rule of law at times when they are most needed. When proclaiming a state of emergency with consequences that could entail derogation from any provision of the Covenant, States must act within their constitutional and other provisions of law that govern such proclamation and the exercise of emergency powers; it is the task of the Committee to monitor the laws in question with respect to whether they enable and secure compliance with article 4. In order that the Committee can perform its task, States parties to the Covenant should include in their reports submitted under article 40 sufficient and precise information about their law and practice in the field of emergency powers.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
Article 9: Liberty and security of person 2014, para. 65
- Paragraph text
- Article 9 is not included in the list of non-derogable rights of article 4, paragraph 2, of the Covenant, but there are limits on States parties' power to derogate. States parties derogating from normal procedures required under article 9 in circumstances of armed conflict or other public emergency must ensure that such derogations do not exceed those strictly required by the exigencies of the actual situation. Derogating measures must also be consistent with a State party's other obligations under international law, including provisions of international humanitarian law relating to deprivation of liberty, and non-discriminatory. The prohibitions against taking of hostages, abductions or unacknowledged detention are therefore not subject to derogation.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
The right to the highest attainable standard of health (Art. 12) 2000, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases (art. 12.2 (c)) requires the establishment of prevention and education programmes for behaviour-related health concerns such as sexually transmitted diseases, in particular HIV/AIDS, and those adversely affecting sexual and reproductive health, and the promotion of social determinants of good health, such as environmental safety, education, economic development and gender equity. The right to treatment includes the creation of a system of urgent medical care in cases of accidents, epidemics and similar health hazards, and the provision of disaster relief and humanitarian assistance in emergency situations. The control of diseases refers to States' individual and joint efforts to, inter alia, make available relevant technologies, using and improving epidemiological surveillance and data collection on a disaggregated basis, the implementation or enhancement of immunization programmes and other strategies of infectious disease control.
- Body
- Committee on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2000
Paragraph
The right to social security (Art. 9) 2007, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- States parties are also obliged to provide the right to social security when individuals or a group are unable, on grounds reasonably considered to be beyond their control, to realize that right themselves, within the existing social security system with the means at their disposal. States parties will need to establish non-contributory schemes or other social assistance measures to provide support to those individuals and groups who are unable to make sufficient contributions for their own protection. Special attention should be given to ensuring that the social security system can respond in times of emergency, for example during and after natural disasters, armed conflict and crop failure.
- Body
- Committee on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Humanitarian
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2007
Paragraph
Article 6: The right to life 1982, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- The Committee observes that war and other acts of mass violence continue to be a scourge of humanity and take the lives of thousands of innocent human beings every year. Under the Charter of the United Nations the threat or use of force by any State against another State, except in exercise of the inherent right of self-defence, is already prohibited. The Committee considers that States have the supreme duty to prevent wars, acts of genocide and other acts of mass violence causing arbitrary loss of life. Every effort they make to avert the danger of war, especially thermonuclear war, and to strengthen international peace and security would constitute the most important condition and guarantee for the safeguarding of the right to life. In this respect, the Committee notes, in particular, a connection between article 6 and article 20, which states that the law shall prohibit any propaganda for war (para. 1) or incitement to violence (para. 2) as therein described.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1982
Paragraph
The right to adequate food (Art. 11) 1999, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- Despite the fact that the international community has frequently reaffirmed the importance of full respect for the right to adequate food, a disturbing gap still exists between the standards set in article 11 of the Covenant and the situation prevailing in many parts of the world. More than 840 million people throughout the world, most of them in developing countries, are chronically hungry; millions of people are suffering from famine as the result of natural disasters, the increasing incidence of civil strife and wars in some regions and the use of food as a political weapon. The Committee observes that while the problems of hunger and malnutrition are often particularly acute in developing countries, malnutrition, under-nutrition and other problems which relate to the right to adequate food and the right to freedom from hunger, also exist in some of the most economically developed countries. Fundamentally, the roots of the problem of hunger and malnutrition are not lack of food but lack of access to available food, inter alia because of poverty, by large segments of the world's population
- Body
- Committee on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Food & Nutrition
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1999
Paragraph
Implementation of article 14 by States parties 2012, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- A crucial component of the right to redress is the clear acknowledgement by the State party concerned that the reparative measures provided or awarded to a victim are for violations of the Convention, by action or omission. The Committee is therefore of the view that a State party may not implement development measures or provide humanitarian assistance as a substitute for redress for victims of torture or ill-treatment. The failure of a State party to provide the individual victim of torture with redress may not be justified by invoking a State's level of development. The Committee recalls that subsequent governments as well as successor States still have the obligation to guarantee access to the right of redress.
- Body
- Committee against Torture
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 13a
- Paragraph text
- [In those provisions of the Covenant that are not listed in article 4, paragraph 2, there are elements that in the Committee's opinion cannot be made subject to lawful derogation under article 4. Some illustrative examples are presented below.] All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. Although this right, prescribed in article 10 of the Covenant, is not separately mentioned in the list of non-derogable rights in article 4, paragraph 2, the Committee believes that here the Covenant expresses a norm of general international law not subject to derogation. This is supported by the reference to the inherent dignity of the human person in the preamble to the Covenant and by the close connection between articles 7 and 10.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- Not every disturbance or catastrophe qualifies as a public emergency which threatens the life of the nation, as required by article 4, paragraph 1. During armed conflict, whether international or non-international, rules of international humanitarian law become applicable and help, in addition to the provisions in article 4 and article 5, paragraph 1, of the Covenant, to prevent the abuse of a State's emergency powers. The Covenant requires that even during an armed conflict measures derogating from the Covenant are allowed only if and to the extent that the situation constitutes a threat to the life of the nation. If States parties consider invoking article 4 in other situations than an armed conflict, they should carefully consider the justification and why such a measure is necessary and legitimate in the circumstances. On a number of occasions the Committee has expressed its concern over States parties that appear to have derogated from rights protected by the Covenant, or whose domestic law appears to allow such derogation in situations not covered by article 4.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 6
- Paragraph text
- The fact that some of the provisions of the Covenant have been listed in article 4 (paragraph 2), as not being subject to derogation does not mean that other articles in the Covenant may be subjected to derogations at will, even where a threat to the life of the nation exists. The legal obligation to narrow down all derogations to those strictly required by the exigencies of the situation establishes both for States parties and for the Committee a duty to conduct a careful analysis under each article of the Covenant based on an objective assessment of the actual situation.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
The relationship between economic sanctions and respect for economic, social and cultural rights 1997, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- In considering sanctions, it is essential to distinguish between the basic objective of applying political and economic pressure upon the governing élite of the country to persuade them to conform to international law, and the collateral infliction of suffering upon the most vulnerable groups within the targeted country. For that reason, the sanctions regimes established by the Security Council now include humanitarian exemptions designed to permit the flow of essential goods and services destined for humanitarian purposes. It is commonly assumed that these exemptions ensure basic respect for economic, social and cultural rights within the targeted country.
- Body
- Committee on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 1997
Paragraph
The right of the child to freedom from all forms of violence 2011, para. 72h
- Paragraph text
- [Elements to be mainstreamed into national coordinating frameworks. The following elements need to be mainstreamed across the measures (legislative, administrative, social and educational) and stages of intervention (from prevention through to recovery and reintegration):] Resource allocation. Human, financial and technical resources needed across different sectors must be allocated to the maximum extent of available resources. Robust monitoring mechanisms must be developed and implemented to ensure accountability regarding allocation of budgets and their efficient utilization;
- Body
- Committee on the Rights of the Child
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Children
- Year
- 2011
Paragraph
Article 7: Torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment - replaced by GC No. 20 1982, para. 1
- Paragraph text
- In examining the reports of States parties, members of the Committee have often asked for further information under article 7 which prohibits, in the first place, torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The Committee recalls that even in situations of public emergency such as are envisaged by article 4 (1) this provision is non-derogable under article 4 (2). Its purpose is to protect the integrity and dignity of the individual. The Committee notes that it is not sufficient for the implementation of this article to prohibit such treatment or punishment or to make it a crime. Most States have penal provisions which are applicable to cases of torture or similar practices. Because such cases nevertheless occur, it follows from article 7, read together with article 2 of the Covenant, that States must ensure an effective protection through some machinery of control. Complaints about ill-treatment must be investigated effectively by competent authorities. Those found guilty must be held responsible, and the alleged victims must themselves have effective remedies at their disposal, including the right to obtain compensation. Among the safeguards which may make control effective are provisions against detention incommunicado, granting, without prejudice to the investigation, persons such as doctors, lawyers and family members access to the detainees; provisions requiring that detainees should be held in places that are publicly recognized and that their names and places of detention should be entered in a central register available to persons concerned, such as relatives; provisions making confessions or other evidence obtained through torture or other treatment contrary to article 7 inadmissible in court; and measures of training and instruction of law enforcement officials not to apply such treatment.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Families
- Year
- 1982
Paragraph
Article 4: Derogations 1981, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- States parties have generally indicated the mechanism provided in their legal systems for the declaration of a state of emergency and the applicable provisions of the law governing derogations. However, in the case of a few States which had apparently derogated from Covenant rights, it was unclear not only whether a state of emergency had been officially declared but also whether rights from which the Covenant allows no derogation had in fact not been derogated from and further whether the other States parties had been informed of the derogations and of the reasons for the derogations.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 1981
Paragraph
Implementation of article 2 by States parties 2008, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- Article 2, paragraph 2, provides that the prohibition against torture is absolute and non-derogable. It emphasizes that no exceptional circumstances whatsoever may be invoked by a State Party to justify acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction. The Convention identifies as among such circumstances a state of war or threat thereof, internal political instability or any other public emergency. This includes any threat of terrorist acts or violent crime as well as armed conflict, international or non-international. The Committee is deeply concerned at and rejects absolutely any efforts by States to justify torture and ill-treatment as a means to protect public safety or avert emergencies in these and all other situations. Similarly, it rejects any religious or traditional justification that would violate this absolute prohibition. The Committee considers that amnesties or other impediments which preclude or indicate unwillingness to provide prompt and fair prosecution and punishment of perpetrators of torture or ill-treatment violate the principle of non-derogability.
- Body
- Committee against Torture
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2008
Paragraph
Article 14: Administration of justice 1984, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- The provisions of article 14 apply to all courts and tribunals within the scope of that article whether ordinary or specialized. The Committee notes the existence, in many countries, of military or special courts which try civilians. This could present serious problems as far as the equitable, impartial and independent administration of justice is concerned. Quite often the reason for the establishment of such courts is to enable exceptional procedures to be applied which do not comply with normal standards of justice. While the Covenant does not prohibit such categories of courts, nevertheless the conditions which it lays down clearly indicate that the trying of civilians by such courts should be very exceptional and take place under conditions which genuinely afford the full guarantees stipulated in article 14. The Committee has noted a serious lack of information in this regard in the reports of some States parties whose judicial institutions include such courts for the trying of civilians. In some countries such military and special courts do not afford the strict guarantees of the proper administration of justice in accordance with the requirements of article 14 which are essential for the effective protection of human rights. If States parties decide in circumstances of a public emergency as contemplated by article 4 to derogate from normal procedures required under article 14, they should ensure that such derogations do not exceed those strictly required by the exigencies of the actual situation, and respect the other conditions in paragraph 1 of article 14.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1984
Paragraph
Article 6: The right to life 1985, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- While remaining deeply concerned by the toll of human life taken by conventional weapons in armed conflicts, the Committee has noted that, during successive sessions of the General Assembly, representatives from all geographical regions have expressed their growing concern at the development and proliferation of increasingly awesome weapons of mass destruction, which not only threaten human life but also absorb resources that could otherwise be used for vital economic and social purposes, particularly for the benefit of developing countries, and thereby for promoting and securing the enjoyment of human rights for all.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1985
Paragraph
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 8
- Paragraph text
- According to article 4, paragraph 1, one of the conditions for the justifiability of any derogation from the Covenant is that the measures taken do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin. Even though article 26 or the other Covenant provisions related to non-discrimination (articles 2, 3, 14, paragraph 1, 23, paragraph 4, 24, paragraph 1, and 25) have not been listed among the non-derogable provisions in article 4, paragraph 2, there are elements or dimensions of the right to non-discrimination that cannot be derogated from in any circumstances. In particular, this provision of article 4, paragraph 1, must be complied with if any distinctions between persons are made when resorting to measures that derogate from the Covenant.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
The right to water (Art. 11 and 12) 2002, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- The obligation to respect requires that States parties refrain from interfering directly or indirectly with the enjoyment of the right to water. The obligation includes, inter alia, refraining from engaging in any practice or activity that denies or limits equal access to adequate water; arbitrarily interfering with customary or traditional arrangements for water allocation; unlawfully diminishing or polluting water, for example through waste from State-owned facilities or through use and testing of weapons; and limiting access to, or destroying, water services and infrastructure as a punitive measure, for example, during armed conflicts in violation of international humanitarian law
- Body
- Committee on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Water & Sanitation
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2002
Paragraph
The right to adequate food (Art. 11) 1999, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- Violations of the right to food can occur through the direct action of States or other entities insufficiently regulated by States. These include: the formal repeal or suspension of legislation necessary for the continued enjoyment of the right to food; denial of access to food to particular individuals or groups, whether the discrimination is based on legislation or is proactive; the prevention of access to humanitarian food aid in internal conflicts or other emergency situations; adoption of legislation or policies which are manifestly incompatible with pre-existing legal obligations relating to the right to food; and failure to regulate activities of individuals or groups so as to prevent them from violating the right to food of others, or the failure of a State to take into account its international legal obligations regarding the right to food when entering into agreements with other States or with international organizations.
- Body
- Committee on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Food & Nutrition
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 1999
Paragraph
Article 6: The right to life 1985, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- The Committee associates itself with this concern. It is evident that the designing, testing, manufacture, possession and deployment of nuclear weapons are among the greatest threats to the right to life which confront mankind today. This threat is compounded by the danger that the actual use of such weapons may be brought about, not only in the event of war, but even through human or mechanical error or failure.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1985
Paragraph
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- The issues of when rights can be derogated from, and to what extent, cannot be separated from the provision in article 4, paragraph 1, of the Covenant according to which any measures derogating from a State party's obligations under the Covenant must be limited "to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation". This condition requires that States parties provide careful justification not only for their decision to proclaim a state of emergency but also for any specific measures based on such a proclamation. If States purport to invoke the right to derogate from the Covenant during, for instance, a natural catastrophe, a mass demonstration including instances of violence, or a major industrial accident, they must be able to justify not only that such a situation constitutes a threat to the life of the nation, but also that all their measures derogating from the Covenant are strictly required by the exigencies of the situation. In the opinion of the Committee, the possibility of restricting certain Covenant rights under the terms of, for instance, freedom of movement (article 12) or freedom of assembly (article 21) is generally sufficient during such situations and no derogation from the provisions in question would be justified by the exigencies of the situation.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
Article 6: The right to life 1982, para. 1
- Paragraph text
- The right to life enunciated in article 6 of the Covenant has been dealt with in all State reports. It is the supreme right from which no derogation is permitted even in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation (art. 4). However, the Committee has noted that quite often the information given concerning article 6 was limited to only one or other aspect of this right. It is a right which should not be interpreted narrowly.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1982
Paragraph
Article 4: States of Emergency 2001, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- A fundamental requirement for any measures derogating from the Covenant, as set forth in article 4, paragraph 1, is that such measures are limited to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation. This requirement relates to the duration, geographical coverage and material scope of the state of emergency and any measures of derogation resorted to because of the emergency. Derogation from some Covenant obligations in emergency situations is clearly distinct from restrictions or limitations allowed even in normal times under several provisions of the Covenant. Nevertheless, the obligation to limit any derogations to those strictly required by the exigencies of the situation reflects the principle of proportionality which is common to derogation and limitation powers. Moreover, the mere fact that a permissible derogation from a specific provision may, of itself, be justified by the exigencies of the situation does not obviate the requirement that specific measures taken pursuant to the derogation must also be shown to be required by the exigencies of the situation. In practice, this will ensure that no provision of the Covenant, however validly derogated from will be entirely inapplicable to the behaviour of a State party. When considering States parties' reports the Committee has expressed its concern over insufficient attention being paid to the principle of proportionality.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2001
Paragraph
Article 14: Right to Equality before Courts and Tribunals and to Fair Trial - replaces GC No. 13 2007, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- Some countries have resorted to special tribunals of "faceless judges" composed of anonymous judges, e.g. within measures taken to fight terrorist activities. Such courts, even if the identity and status of such judges has been verified by an independent authority, often suffer not only from the fact that the identity and status of the judges is not made known to the accused persons but also from irregularities such as exclusion of the public or even the accused or their representatives from the proceedings; restrictions of the right to a lawyer of their own choice; severe restrictions or denial of the right to communicate with their lawyers, particularly when held incommunicado; threats to the lawyers; inadequate time for preparation of the case; or severe restrictions or denial of the right to summon and examine or have examined witnesses, including prohibitions on cross-examining certain categories of witnesses, e.g. police officers responsible for the arrest and interrogation of the defendant. Tribunals with or without faceless judges, in circumstances such as these, do not satisfy basic standards of fair trial and, in particular, the requirement that the tribunal must be independent and impartial.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2007
Paragraph
Article 9: Liberty and security of person 2014, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- There are other elements in article 9 that in the Committee's opinion cannot be made subject to lawful derogation under article 4. The fundamental guarantee against arbitrary detention is non-derogable, insofar as even situations covered by article 4 cannot justify a deprivation of liberty that is unreasonable or unnecessary under the circumstances. The existence and nature of a public emergency which threatens the life of the nation may, however, be relevant to a determination of whether a particular arrest or detention is arbitrary. Valid derogations from other derogable rights may also be relevant when a deprivation of liberty is characterized as arbitrary because of its interference with another right protected by the Covenant. During international armed conflict, substantive and procedural rules of international humanitarian law remain applicable and limit the ability to derogate, thereby helping to mitigate the risk of arbitrary detention. Outside that context, the requirements of strict necessity and proportionality constrain any derogating measures involving security detention, which must be limited in duration and accompanied by procedures to prevent arbitrary application, as explained in paragraph 15 above, including review by a court within the meaning of paragraph 45 above.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
Establishment of national institutions to facilitate the implementation of the Convention 1993, para. 1
- Paragraph text
- Alarmed at the increasing number of racially and ethnically motivated massacres and atrocities occurring in different regions of the world,
- Body
- Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1993
Paragraph
Article 14: Right to Equality before Courts and Tribunals and to Fair Trial - replaces GC No. 13 2007, para. 6
- Paragraph text
- While article 14 is not included in the list of non-derogable rights of article 4, paragraph 2 of the Covenant, States derogating from normal procedures required under article 14 in circumstances of a public emergency should ensure that such derogations do not exceed those strictly required by the exigencies of the actual situation. The guarantees of fair trial may never be made subject to measures of derogation that would circumvent the protection of non-derogable rights. Thus, for example, as article 6 of the Covenant is non-derogable in its entirety, any trial leading to the imposition of the death penalty during a state of emergency must conform to the provisions of the Covenant, including all the requirements of article 14. Similarly, as article 7 is also non-derogable in its entirety, no statements or confessions or, in principle, other evidence obtained in violation of this provision may be invoked as evidence in any proceedings covered by article 14, including during a state of emergency, except if a statement or confession obtained in violation of article 7 is used as evidence that torture or other treatment prohibited by this provision occurred. Deviating from fundamental principles of fair trial, including the presumption of innocence, is prohibited at all times.
- Body
- Human Rights Committee
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2007
Paragraph
Establishment of an international tribunal to prosecute crimes against humanity 1994, para. 1
- Paragraph text
- Alarmed at the increasing number of racially and ethnically motivated massacres and atrocities occurring in different regions of the world,
- Body
- Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
- Document type
- General Comment / Recommendation
- Means of adoption
- N.A.
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 1994
Paragraph