Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 4450 entities
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 1
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- In the past, the Special Rapporteur and other mechanisms against torture, including some of the most important treaty-based monitoring mechanisms,1have focused predominantly on preventing the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in “custodial” settings, that is, once persons have been arrested, interned, imprisonedor otherwise deprived of their liberty. The extent to which and how the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is applied to the use of force by State agents outside custodial settings (“extra-custodial” use of force) has not yet been systematically examined. This question is particularly relevant where State agents resort to unnecessary, excessive or otherwise unlawful force without necessarily infringing the right to life, for example, during arrest, stop andsearch or crowd control operations. While States must be in a position to use all lawful and appropriate means, including necessary and proportionate force, with a view to maintaining public security and law and order, experience shows that the use of force in insufficiently controlled environments carries a significant risk of arbitrariness and abuse. In his most recent report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/34/54), the Special Rapporteur expressed his intention to examine how the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment should be applied and interpreted in extra-custodial settings, particularly in view of potential justifications such as law enforcement, public security, crowd control or self-defence and the defence of others. The Special Rapporteur also expressed his intention to examine the extent to which the use of certain types of weapons, riot control devices or other means and methods of law enforcement would have to be considered intrinsically cruel, inhuman or degrading in the light of their immediate to long-term consequences.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 6
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- In order for the use of force by State agents to be lawful, full adherence to all of the above principles is required.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 7
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- According to the principle of legality, any use of force by State agents must pursue a lawful purpose and must be based on and regulated by national law. 10 Lawful purposes typically include effecting the arrest or preventing the escape of a person suspected of having committed a crime, self-defence or defence of others against an unlawful threat of death or serious injury, or dispersing violent assemblies. A further parameter of legality is the equal treatment of all persons before the law in accordance with the principle of non-discrimination (see A/HRC/26/36, para. 74, and A/HRC/31/66, para. 15). States must provide express authority for the use of force in their national law and must regulate the matter in line with their obligations under international law.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 8
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The principle of necessity requires that any use of force by State agents must be restricted to the least harmful means that can reasonably be expected to achieve the purpose pursued. Thus, law enforcement officials must apply non -violent means whenever possible and may use force only when, and only to the extent, strictly necessary to achieve a lawful purpose.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 9
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The principle of necessity has a qualitative, a quantitative and a temporal aspect. In qualitative terms, any use of force must be “unavoidable” in the sense that non-violent or other less harmful means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the desired purpose. 12 In quantitative terms, whenever the use of force is unavoidable, the degree to which and the manner in which force is employed may not be more harmful than strictly necessary. 13 Finally, in temporal terms, the use of force is unlawful if, at the moment of its application, it is not yet or no longer unavoidable to achieve the desired lawful purpose. Therefore, any law enforcement operation involving the use of force requires a constant reassessment of its necessity to achieve the desired purpose. Should the circumstances evolve so as to permit the achievement of that purpose through less harmful means, force may no longer be used.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 10
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- While the principle of necessity requires a factual assessment of t he least harmful means that can be expected to achieve the desired purpose, the principle of proportionality involves an additional and separate value judgment as to whether the harm expected to result from the use of force can be justified in the light of the benefit of the desired purpose. Even if force is necessary for the achievement of that purpose, it can only be permissible if the resulting harm remains proportionate compared to the seriousness of the offence and the importance of the desired purpose. 14 Thus, irrespective of considerations of necessity, the requirement of proportionality defines an absolute upper limit for the force that might be permissible to achieve a specific lawful purpose (A/HRC/26/36, para. 66). The “harm” to be weighed in the proportionality assessment does not necessarily have to be of physical nature, but can also involve mental suffering and emotions of humiliation and distress.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 11
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- A proportionality assessment must always be made in the light of the circumstances of each case. As a general rule, potentially lethal force must not be used except where strictly necessary to: (a) defend any person against the imminent threat of death or serious injury; (b) prevent the perpetration o f a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life; or (c) arrest a person presenting such a danger or prevent their escape. Intentionally lethal force may only be used when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life from an unlawful attack. 15 For example, even the aim of lawful arrest cannot justify the use of firearms to stop a thief or pickpocket not otherwise posing a threat to life and limb. In such cases, considerations of proportionality require that the risk of the suspect escaping arre st is to be preferred over the risk of causing the suspect’s death or serious injury. Other factors that may be relevant in evaluating the degree of force that is proportionate include the individual’s behaviour, age, gender and health.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 12
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Even if the use of force is necessary and proportionate in the immediate circumstances of a case, it may nonetheless be unlawful if it results from a failure to plan, organize and control operations so as to minimize harm, respect and pr eserve human life and avoid any excessive use of force.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 13
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- In particular, States should thoroughly train their police forces to avoid situations in which the use of force will become inevitable and equip them with various methods and types of weapons and ammunition allowing for a differentiated use of force, including “less lethal” incapacitating weapons and self-defensive equipment such as shields, helmets, bulletproof vests and bulletproof means of transportation. Moreover, law enforcement officials must constantly re-evaluate the situation with a view to avoiding unnecessary or excessive use of force. Whenever the use of force becomes unavoidable, law enforcement officials must ensure that assistance and medical aid is provided to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 14
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- In practice, the required standard of precaution does not impose an unrealistic burden but always relates to what is reasonably possible in the circumstances.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 15
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Applying the principles of legality, necessity, proportionality and precaution to the particular context of policing assemblies, any decision to forcibly disperse a peaceful assembly or protest must be taken with due regard to the freedoms of assembly and of expression. In particular, article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that “no restrictions may be placed on the exercise of [the right to peaceful assembly] other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”. Moreover, it must be emphasized that individuals cannot lose their protection against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under any circumstances whatsoever, including in the context of violent riots or unlawful protests.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 16
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- It should be noted that the above-mentioned principles govern the use of force, not only in extra-custodial settings, but also where riots, unrest or other violent incidents occur within places of detention. 20 Depending on the circumstances, they may also be relevant in determining the permissibility of invasive health and security procedures, such as the taking of bodily samples or a strip search. 21 In their relations with persons deprived of their liberty, law enforcement officials may not use force, except when strictly necessary for the maintenance of security and order within the institution or when personal safety is threatened, and they may not use firearms, except in self-defence or in the defence of others against the immediate threat of death or serious injury or when strictly necessary to prevent the escape of an inmate presenting a threat of death or serious injury.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 17
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The absolute and non-derogable prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has been codified in a wide range of universal and regional instruments 22 and today is universally recognized as a core principle of customary international law. 23 The prohibition of torture is also one of the few norms of customary international law that is universally recognized as having attained peremptory status (jus cogens). Furthermore, the prohibition of torture, cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment “at any time and in any place whatsoever” is also included in article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which the International Court of Justice has held to reflect a general principle of law, namely, “elementary considerations of humanity”.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 18
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The absolute and non-derogable character of the prohibition entails that any use of force amounting to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is conclusively unlawful and cannot be j ustified under any circumstances, 25 whereas the peremptory character of the prohibition of torture means that any contradicting national administrative act or legislation, international agreement or judicial decision is automatically devoid of any legal effect.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 19
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- States have a corollary obligation to take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction. 26 Wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that extra-custodial force amounting to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has been used, States have a duty to conduct a prompt and impartial investigation in order to ensure full accountability for any such act, including, as appropriate, administrative, civil and criminal accountability, and to ensure that victims receive adequate redress and rehabilitation.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 20
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Torture has been defined in many universal and regional instruments, albeit not always in precisely identical terms.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Access to information in international organizations 2017, para. 6
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Where rule of law prevails, Governments and Government officials stay accountable to their citizens through a variety of mechanisms. Too often, however, accountability is a chimera, and nowhere is this more evident than in situations where authorities withhold information from the public. Without freedom to access information of all kinds — in particular when Governments withhold information from the public and its judicial, legislative and media mechanisms — abuses may take place, policies affecting the general welfare may not be tested and improved and overall public engagement and participation diminishes, often by design. By contrast, information-rich environments help promote good decision-making and meaningful public debate, building credibility for public institutions. Even if implementation may not always meet the highest standards, Governments have recognized this fundamental point, at the intersection of good, open government and the human right of access to information, recognizing that the credibility of public authorities depends on their willingness to engage with those who fund their work and elect their key officials — the members of the public.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 3
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- 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 Procedures: Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Stigma and the realization of the human rights to water and sanitation 2012, para. 44
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Human dignity is the foundation of all human rights. The International Covenants on Human Rights proclaim that the rights enshrined therein derive from the inherent dignity of the human person. Human dignity is an intrinsic and universal quality of the human person. Behaviour and activities that violate human dignity can include activities or statements that "demean and humiliate individuals or groups because of their origins, status or beliefs", as well as negative stereotyping that implies that members of a particular group are inferior. Stigma is, by its demeaning and degrading nature, antithetical to the very idea of human dignity. Stigma as a process of devaluation, of making some people "lesser" and others "greater", is inconsistent with human dignity, which is premised on notions of the inherent equality and worthiness of the human person. It undermines human dignity, thereby laying the groundwork for violations of human rights. Human dignity is closely linked to the realization of the human rights to water and sanitation, and to various related rights such as non-discrimination, the right to be free from inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to privacy.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Water & Sanitation
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Agenda setting of the work of the Special Rapporteur 2015, para. 63
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Additionally, the Special Rapporteur envisages building upon the work of the mandate in the area of protection of the rights of victims of trafficking and access to justice. In that regard, she intends to further follow up on the basic principles on the right to an effective remedy for trafficked persons, which provide for remedies for victims of trafficking, including restitution, rehabilitation, compensation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition, and call on States to ensure that access to those measures shall not depend on the victim's capacity or willingness to cooperate in legal proceedings. When looking into remaining gaps in the conceptualization of the right to an effective remedy and the operationalization of the basic principles at the national level, the Special Rapporteur expects to further delve into issues such as the possible types of trafficking exploitation covered by the principles, what the barriers to access to remedy are, whether the nature of the State responsibility affects the content of the reparation, the available forms of reparation, the accessibility of compensation funds to victims and the conditions for the protection of victims' rights in out of court settlements .
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, especially in women and children
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 51
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The revision of the Rules offers a good opportunity to insist on the obligation of authorities to ensure free, fair and transparent access to a facility's medical services by providing a sufficient number of qualified, independent physicians in all facilities. The Rules should insist on the obligation to guarantee the availability of prompt, impartial, adequate and consensual medical and psychological examination upon the admission of each detainee. Medical examinations should also be provided when an inmate is taken out of the place of detention for any investigative activity, upon transfer or release and in response to allegations or suspicion of torture or other ill-treatment. Likewise, medical examinations must take place if a victim makes a complaint or upon his or her lawyer's motion, subject to judicial review in the event of delay or refusal. It is essential that medical examinations be conducted in a setting that is free of any surveillance and in full confidentiality, except for when the presence of prison staff is requested by the medical personnel. Health personnel must be free from any interference, pressure, intimidation or orders from detention authorities.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Migration and the right to adequate housing 2010, para. 24
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- States have an immediate obligation to ensure non-discrimination in the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to adequate housing, regardless of their level of development, in order to reduce existing inequalities (see E/1991/23, annex III, para. 1). The obligation of non-discrimination requires the equitable allocation of resources and services to ensure the realization of the right to adequate housing to all, and is not subject to progressive realization. It entails prioritizing the needs of marginalized and disadvantaged groups; eliminating laws, policies and practices that disproportionately affect the right to adequate housing of certain groups; incorporating equality and non-discrimination principles in all legislation and policies; and adopting special measures to counter embedded discrimination and inequalities against particular groups. States have no justification for not protecting vulnerable groups from housing-related discrimination, as the obligation to prohibit discrimination is binding on all States even in times of severe resource constraints (see E/1991/23, para. 12, and E/C.12/GC/20, para. 13).
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Effective and full implementation of the right to health framework, including justiciability of ESCR and the right to health; the progressive realisation of the right to health; the accountability deficit of transnational corporations; and the current ... 2014, para. 16
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Courts have enforced obligations to respect and protect with regard to the right to health. The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights elaborated, in Social and Economic Rights Action Center and Center for Economic and Social Rights v. Nigeria, that the obligation to respect within the right to health requires a State "to respect the free use of resources" of an individual or group "for the purpose of rights-related needs". In Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights v. Greece, the European Committee of Social Rights held that the State must engage in stronger regulatory practices to protect air quality, including the regulation of private actors, to protect its obligation under the right to health.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Occupational health 2012, para. 35
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The right to occupational health indicators and benchmarks must be developed with the participation of workers and trade unions, including those in the informal economy. Monitoring of occupational health laws and policies on the basis of these mechanisms must be done transparently and in partnership with workers and the civil society, and all information resulting from this process must be made publicly available and accessible. Moreover, States must ensure that workers are intimately familiar with the right to health indicators and benchmarks so they can participate in the monitoring and evaluation of occupational health laws and policies on the basis of these mechanisms. Workers are best positioned to determine whether laws and policies affecting their occupational health are meeting the right to health benchmarks, and they have the greatest stake in ensuring that these laws and policies comply with the right to health. Ensuring that workers are familiar with the right to health indicators and benchmarks will additionally facilitate prospective State accountability by allowing workers to ascertain whether their right to occupational health is being realized.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Occupational health 2012, para. 24
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The right to access information is central to the right to health and an essential component of active and informed participation. It includes the right to access health-related education and information and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas concerning health issues. States also have a positive obligation in this respect to provide workers with health and rights-related information and to ensure that third parties, including private employers, do not limit access to such information. The ILO also requires States to ensure that national health laws and policies provide workers with comprehensive information, education and training related to occupational health. The right to occupational health thus requires that employers make available and accessible information concerning all health and safety risks, including those related to production inputs and equipment, machinery and chemicals used in the work place. States must further ensure that workers' right to access information affecting their occupational health supersedes employers' rights to protect commercial information under commercial confidentiality, trade secret and other related laws.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Health financing in the context of the right to health 2012, para. 12
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- General Comment No. 14 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognizes that investments in health should not disproportionately favour expensive curative care services, which are often accessible only to a small fraction of the population, over primary and preventive health care, which benefit a far larger part of the population. Primary health-care services are generally less costly than secondary and tertiary care, which by definition require health-care workers with specialized training, sophisticated diagnostic equipment and significant physical health infrastructure. Investment in primary health care is thus more cost-efficient in the long run because it prevents illness and promotes general health, which reduces the need for more costly secondary and tertiary care. The resulting savings may be reinvested in the health system, possibly in the form of additional health-care subsidies for the poor. The right to health thus requires an efficient allocation of health funds and resources between primary, secondary and tertiary care sectors, with an emphasis on primary health care.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
The exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in the context of elections 2013, para. 49
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- As described in previous reports by the Special Rapporteur, any restrictions must be permitted by international law, and thus meet the strict requirements of international human rights law. In the context of elections, the Special Rapporteur believes that the test threshold should be raised to a higher level. It is therefore, not sufficient for a State to invoke the protection of the integrity of the election process, the need to ensure non-partisan and impartial elections, the need to preserve peace or security to limit these rights, insofar as the context of elections is a critical time when individuals have a say about the fate of their country. In this regard, the Human Rights Committee stated that the reference to "democratic society" in the context of article 22, indicates in the Committee's opinion, that the existence and operation of associations, including those which peacefully promote ideas not necessarily favourably viewed by the Government or the majority of the population, is a cornerstone of a democratic society.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
The use of encryption and anonymity to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion and expression in the digital age 2015, para. 29
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The permissible limitations on the right to privacy should be read strictly, particularly in an age of pervasive online surveillance - whether passive or active, mass or targeted - regardless of whether the applicable standards are "unlawful and arbitrary" under article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, "arbitrary" under article 12 of the Universal Declaration, "arbitrary or abusive" under article 11 of the American Convention on Human Rights, or "necessary in a democratic society" under article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (see A/HRC/13/37, paras. 14-19). Privacy interferences that limit the exercise of the freedoms of opinion and expression, such as those described in this report, must not in any event interfere with the right to hold opinions, and those that limit the freedom of expression must be provided by law and necessary and proportionate to achieve one of a handful of legitimate objectives.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Protection of journalists and press freedom 2010, para. 36
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur notes that, in time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and which is officially and lawfully proclaimed in accordance with international law, a State may derogate from certain rights, including the right to freedom of expression. However, derogations are permissible only to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation and only when and for so long as they are not inconsistent with its obligations under international law. Moreover, there are certain non-derogable rights, as outlined in article 4(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Hence, a journalist should never, under any circumstances, be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life, subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, imprisoned merely on the grounds of inability to fulfil a contractual obligation, held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence at the time when it was committed, denied recognition as a person before the law, or denied the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Human rights criteria for making contract farming and other business models inclusive of small-scale farmers 2011, para. 6
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Paragraph text
- Contract farming has gained importance in recent years in both developed and developing countries. Buyers see it as a means of strengthening control down the supply chain in order to respond to an increased need for production traceability and food product standardization, as quality and food safety standards have gained in importance and as consumers express concerns about the environmental and social aspects of production. Controlling contracted farmers to prevent extra-contractual marketing or the diversion of inputs received for uses other than crop production under the contract may be costly, but the costs are generally offset by the improved reliability and more consistent quality of supplies compared with products purchased on the open market. Contract farming can minimize firms' risks with respect to changes in supply and demand and allows firms to promote safety standards and other quality requirements. Contracts also enable firms to schedule the delivery of products at optimal times for their business, something that they cannot control when relying on the spot market.
- Body
- Special Procedures: Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Food & Nutrition
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph