Human rights & International Legal Order

international human rights law has to be seen as an essential element of global politics and human rights are linked to the emergence of an international legal order.
Within this structure human rights are, at the global level, primarily the concern of the United Nations. It is necessary to appreciate that human rights are now what are referred to as ‘cross-cutting’ principles, which means that other international institutions should bear in mind the human rights impact and implications of their policies and decisions.
The initial and primary responsibility of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organisation (WTO) is the regulation of international finance and trade. They should, however, be human rights sensitive.
Within this chapter, the term ‘the political economy of human rights’ will refer to a general argument: it is necessary to place human rights in a political and economic context in order to understand their global operation.
Human rights and the values of the International legal order:
This discussion relates to human rights and development and picks up some themes which highlight a complex interaction of social, political, economic and other forces on a global scale.
We can consider human rights as part of the process of globalisation. Globalisation is the transition from the colonial empires of ‘old’ Europe to an international order defined at the end of the Second World War.
As states have increased in number and political entities thus become smaller, to be viable they tend to become more reliant upon each other for food, energy, goods, consumables and indeed many other things.
No one state can alone fulfill the needs and demands of its population, as well as have a prosperous economy and ensure its defence.
The post-war world remains marked by a division between developed and developing countries.
Moreover, international order is defined by the foundation of powerful supranational agencies charged with the task of overseeing the operation of the global economy: the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO. The UN does not act in a vacuum, but operates in a global contest that is in part defined by the activities of these other organisations.
The UN has its roots in the desire for a lasting peace that arose after the Second World War. Prior to the creation of the UN, there had been other attempts to create international mechanisms for the prevention of war.
In 1899, the International Peace Conference adopted the Convention for the Pacific, Settlements of International Disputes and established the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which began work in 1902.
After the First World War, in 1919, the Treaty of Versailles created the League of Nations, ‘to promote international cooperation and to achieve peace and security.’
Although, the League of Nations failed to prevent the outcome of the Second World War, with the conclusion of hostilities the International community saw the need for a body that would prevent future conflicts.
In 1945, a meeting in San Francisco, delegates drew up proposals for a UN Charter that was signed later that same year.
US President Roosevelt stated that the UN ‘spells...the end to the system of unilateral action, exclusive alliances and sphere of influence, and balances of power, and all the other expedients which have been tried for centuries and have always failed.’
The sovereign state was fundamental to the UN; and the UN depended on the goodwill of nations for the preservation of peace.
However, at the time of the UN’s inception, human rights were not as central as they were to become.
Prior to the Second World War, international law did not impede the right of sovereign states to violate the rights of their subjects.
The summary execution or torture of a citizen only became a legal problem if the victim was a subject (national or citizen) of another state.
In other words, citizens did not have personal rights as such; the law tended to treat the state itself as the aggrieved party. This position was based on the idea of a state’s sovereignty.
A citizen did not enjoy rights that would protect him or her from the state. Human rights became more important in the direct aftermath of the Second World War.
The International Military Tribunal was set up by the Allies at Nuremberg to try Germans accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. This was and still is hugely contentious as the Allies themselves committed these crimes. The very notion of a crime against humanity does suggest that there is ‘something’ inviolate to the human being and a government can be held accountable for the way in which it treats its individual.
The role of human rights in the setting up of the UN, was limited. This was due to the central idea of a state’s internal affairs being solely it’s concern (Article 2 of the Charter)