home

International legal control over human rights. Monitoring the observance of human rights. European human rights system

Although international organizations and bodies have been dealing with human rights issues for decades, it is obvious that progress in this direction can only be achieved with effective international monitoring of their actual observance.

Until 1997, the UN Secretariat had a Center for Human Rights, which was engaged, in particular, in collecting information from various sources about the situation with human rights in the world. Since 1997, its functions have been transferred to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Under him and under the auspices of the UN Commission on Human Rights, there is a procedure for considering private complaints based on resolution No. 1503 of May 27, 1970 of the Economic and Social Council. This procedure has a number of features. It is universal because it does not depend on the consent of states; a citizen of any state can use it.

This procedure is not judicial, and the consideration of such complaints does not have significant substantive consequences for the states concerned. However, such consideration is important for identifying situations where systematic and gross violations of human rights are occurring.

The Commission on Human Rights is a subsidiary body of ECOSOC, established in 1946. Members of the commission (43 people) are elected by ECOSOC for a period of 3 years. Meetings of the Commission take place in Geneva (Switzerland).

The Commission submits proposals, recommendations and reports to ECOSOC regarding the Charter of Human Rights, international declarations or conventions on civil liberties, women's rights, freedom of information, protection of minorities; preventing discrimination based on race, gender, language and religion; all other matters relating to human rights. The Commission has several subsidiary bodies of its own, including the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities.

The UN Human Rights Committee was created on the basis of UN General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of December 16, 1966 in accordance with Art. 28 of the Civil and Civil Covenant political rights. In fact, the Committee is an independent international body consisting of 18 independent experts acting in their personal capacity. Members of the Committee are elected from citizens of the states parties to the Covenant for a period of 4 years and can be re-elected. The seat of the Committee is Geneva.

The Committee has the power to monitor compliance with the provisions of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by considering:

1) periodic reports of state parties on certain measures to implement the provisions of the Covenant;

2) complaints of the participating states against each other about the provisions of the Covenant;

3) complaints from individuals when the state violates the rights enshrined in the Covenant.

In 1993, the UN General Assembly established the post of High Commissioner for Human Rights. The issue has been debated at the UN for decades, but it is too early to say whether the commissioner, currently former Irish President M. Robinson, will lead to real improvements in human rights around the world.

Control mechanisms for monitoring the state of human rights in certain areas also operate in specialized UN agencies. This work is carried out most consistently in the ILO, which regularly monitors the situation with compliance through its supervisory bodies. labor rights in certain countries.

The Council of Europe has a developed system of supervisory bodies for human rights, based on the activities of the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. In November 1998, Protocol No. 11 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms came into force, providing for the abolition of the Commission and the Court and the creation on their basis of a single European Court of Human Rights.

In accordance with this Protocol, the unconditional right of private individuals to file petitions is established. Now there will be no need to wait for a special statement from the member states of the Council of Europe on this issue, as has been the case until now.

Thanks to its extensive practice in considering complaints, the European Court of Human Rights has become a significant factor in the legal development and improvement of the system of human rights protection in Europe, and the case law created by it can be used by states that have recently become members of the Council of Europe, and, in particular, Russia, to improve their legislation and law enforcement.

As already noted, principles and norms in the field of human rights are formulated in documents of both a universal and regional nature.

62. Regional systems for the protection of human rights.

Classification of human rights treaties and international human rights standards

The UN Charter contains legally binding general provisions on the need for international cooperation to promote and develop respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. But it does not contain a specific list of them.

At the same time, the UN Charter has formulated a number of principles governing the observance of human rights: dignity and value are recognized as fundamental human personality, equality of peoples, equality of men and women, inadmissibility of discrimination on the grounds of race, gender, language, religion.

After the approval of the UN Charter by the international community, mainly the UN and its specialized agencies, it was adopted big number human rights documents containing norms regulating legal relations in this area.

It seems that they could be classified as follows.

It is generally accepted that the so-called International Bill of Human Rights includes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its two Optional Protocols: on private complaints and the abolition of the death penalty.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948, was the first universal document in the history of international relations that proclaimed a list of human rights and freedoms. Its importance cannot be overestimated, and, according to popular opinion, due to its authority and wide application, it has become, despite its original form as a resolution of the General Assembly, having a recommendatory character, an act having binding legal force (as ordinary rules).

In 1966, the General Assembly adopted the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They came into force in 1976.

From the very beginning, these documents took the form of international conventions, binding on the states participating in them, and were the most general acts in terms of their coverage of human rights issues, establishing standards in this area. They got wide international recognition and authority. They are constantly referred to in resolutions of various international organizations and in treaties on certain aspects of human rights.

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recognizes such rights as the right to work, to just and favorable conditions of work, to the formation and unimpeded operation of trade unions, to social security, to family protection, to an adequate standard of living, to the highest sufficient standard of living. physical and mental health, education, participation in cultural life.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees such rights as the right to life, freedom from torture or slavery, liberty and security of person, humane treatment and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, free movement and freedom of choice of residence, the right to leave any country, return to one's own country, equality before the courts, freedom from interference with privacy, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, the right to hold opinions and to freedom of information, peaceful assembly, freedom of association, participation in the conduct of public affairs, equality before the law .

These rights and freedoms, specified in comparison with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, were assumed by the States Parties to the Covenants to provide all persons under their jurisdiction; At the same time, states must ensure the implementation of the rights recognized in the Covenants by taking appropriate national legislative and other measures. At the same time, the possibility of their legal restrictions, necessary, for example, to protect state security, is allowed. public order, public health or morals, or the rights and freedoms of others.

A special group of human rights acts are represented by documents aimed at suppressing crimes against humanity, such as war crimes, genocide, apartheid, and combating gross mass violations of human rights affecting the interests of large masses population or entire peoples and could have serious international consequences, negatively affecting interstate relations. These include the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the 1973 Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, the 1968 War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Convention, and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination 1965, Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery, 1956. According to these treaties, states condemn the policies specified in these Conventions, undertake to suppress and prohibit on their territories any actions that contradict the goals of these Conventions, and undertake obligations to carry out joint actions to combat manifestations of this group of offenses. They also cooperate in punishing specific individuals responsible for their crimes, in particular using the institution of extradition to bring them to justice or independently bringing them to justice.

A number of agreements are intended to protect the interests of the individual from abuse by government agencies or individuals and organizations. These include the 1960 Convention against Discrimination in Education, the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, and the 1989 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Under these Conventions, states agreed to take measures to prevent and eradicate certain violations of individual rights on their territories, as well as to restore violated rights.

Another group of treaties is devoted to cooperation between states in achieving positive results in ensuring human rights. These are the Equal Remuneration Convention for Men and Women for Work of Equal Value of 1951 (aimed at ensuring the right of women to equal pay with men), the Nationality Convention married woman 1957 (provides for the autonomy of a woman to decide on her nationality when marrying a foreigner), 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness, Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (provides for the provision of certain political, civil, social and economic rights to them), Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951, Employment Policy Convention 1964 (aims to ensure the right to work), Women's Political Rights Convention 1952, Maternity Protection Convention

1952 Convention on the Protection wages 1949 and a number of others. Under treaties of this type, states that became parties to them committed themselves to take legislative and practical measures to ensure human rights, which are considered by the international community as minimum standards for the social protection of individuals.

Finally, it is worth noting the conventions adopted, for example, by UN special agencies, which specify general standards for the observance of human rights and develop industry standards in their development. Thus, the International Labor Organization has developed a large number of conventions on issues such as wages, working hours, working conditions for various categories of workers, etc.

A significant role is played by documents that are not legally binding, but which reflect the point of view of the international community on certain human rights issues. Among them are decisions of international human rights conferences in Tehran (1968) and Vienna (1993), declarations and resolutions of the UN General Assembly on the right to self-determination, declarations, protocols and other documents on the prevention of discrimination, including against persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, the rights of women and children, human rights in the field of justice, medical ethics, which should be considered as the minimum standards of behavior accepted in a civilized society.

Important documents of this nature are also adopted by UN special agencies. Thus, UNESCO adopted the Declaration on the dissemination among youth of the ideals of peace, mutual respect and understanding between peoples of 1965, the Declaration of Principles of International Cultural Cooperation of 1966, the Declaration social progress and Development of 1969, Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress for Peace and the Benefit of Humanity 1975, Declaration of Basic Principles Concerning the Contribution of the Media to Peace and International Understanding, to the Advancement of Human Rights and to the Fight against Racism and Apartheid and warmongering, 1978, which laid the foundations for the formation of a new international information order.

Such documents, which are initially only advisory in nature, often then form the basis of adopted treaty acts that establish the relevant provisions as mandatory for compliance by states.

Under it and under the auspices of the UN Commission on Human Rights, there is a procedure for considering private complaints based on Economic and Social Council resolution 1503 of May 27, 1970. This procedure has a number of features. It is universal because it does not depend on the consent of states; a citizen of any state can use it.

At the same time, in order for a complaint to be considered, it must meet certain minimum requirements, failure to comply with which will render it unacceptable.

Control mechanisms for monitoring the state of human rights in certain areas also operate in specialized UN agencies. This work is carried out most consistently in the ILO, which regularly monitors, through its supervisory bodies, the situation with respect to labor rights in certain countries.

The universal human rights conventions provide, as already noted, for the submission and consideration by relevant expert committees on a regular basis of reports on legislative, judicial, administrative and other measures taken by States parties to fulfill their obligations. Based on such consideration, committees adopt detailed conclusions and recommendations. This procedure is the main form of control over the implementation of the relevant conventions.

At the same time, they also contain other control functions and mechanisms to achieve the goals set in these international legal acts.

Thus, some of these conventions establish a procedure according to which a state can submit complaints regarding the actions of other state parties. For example, according to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Article 11), any state party can use it. For this purpose, it is envisaged, in particular, to create conciliation bodies. However, states practically do not resort to this procedure.

At the same time, the control function related to the consideration of private complaints has received significant development in the Human Rights Committee and other convention bodies. The latter is, as already noted, optional and is implemented only after the relevant state has given consent to consider the complaints of its citizens.

When considering petitions, international convention bodies are guided by certain criteria, most notably the rule that such complaints are not considered unless the petitioners have exhausted all available domestic national remedies of the state (this rule does not apply in cases where the use of such remedies is excessive is delayed).

Having considered petitions and clarifications from states on this matter, these bodies can make proposals and recommendations both to the individuals or groups of individuals who sent them and to the participating states. This nature of the procedure gives grounds to consider it semi-judicial.

However, the disadvantage of its functioning is that today such petitions come almost exclusively from residents Western Europe, where there is a certain level of legal awareness of the population and conditions for the functioning of such a mechanism, although these countries are already characterized by a high degree of protection of human rights.

Unfortunately, states where, due to historical and other circumstances, the level of protection of the rights of the population is low, either do not make statements about joining these optional procedures, or, if they do, their citizens do not use them.

The Council of Europe has a developed system of human rights supervisory bodies, which was based on the activities of the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. In November 1998, Protocol No. 11 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms came into force, providing for the abolition of the Commission and the Court and the creation on their basis of a single European Court of Human Rights.

In accordance with this Protocol it is established unconditional right to petition by private individuals. Now there will be no need to wait for a special statement from the member states of the Council of Europe on this issue, as has been the case until now.

Thanks to its extensive practice in considering complaints, the European Court of Human Rights has become a significant factor in the legal development and improvement of the system of human rights protection in Europe, and the case law created by it can be used by states that have recently become members of the Council of Europe, and in particular Russia, to improve their legislation and law enforcement .

Share your work on social networks

If this work does not suit you, at the bottom of the page there is a list of similar works. You can also use the search button

Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Federal state budget educational institution

higher professional education

"KUBAN STATE UNIVERSITY"

(FSBEI HPE "KubSU")

Department of Civil Procedure and International Law

Admitted to defense at the State Attestation Commission

Head of the department

Doctor of Law sciences, professor

S.V. Potapenko

(signature)

"____" ______________ 2014

GRADUATE QUALIFICATION (DIPLOMA)

JOB

international control for the protection of human rights

Work completed K. P. Gorlova

(signature, date)

Faculty of Law

Speciality 031001.65 Jurisprudence

Scientific director

Ph.D. legal Sciences, Associate Professor A.V. Bakhnovsky

(signature, date)

Standard controller

Ph.D. legal Sciences, Associate Professor A.V. Bakhnovsky

(signature, date)

Krasnodar 2014

Introduction........................................................ ........................................................ ....................3 1 Universal human rights monitoring bodies....................................10 1.1 Control functions of UN bodies.................................................... ................10 1.2 Human rights monitoring mechanism operating within the ILO.................................................... ........................................................ ...........eleven Human Rights Committee................................................................... .............................13 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination……………...................15 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women..........…..16 Committee against Torture……………………………………………………………......20 Committee on the Rights of the Child………………………………………………………………24 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights................25 2 Regional human rights monitoring bodies....................................28 Monitoring the observance of human rights within the Council of Europe......28 2.2 European Committee for the Prevention of Torture....................................................31 2.3 Monitoring the observance of human rights within the CIS....................................36 2.4 Inter-American Commission and Inter-American Court of Human Rights.................................................. ........................................................ ...................46 2.5 African Commission and African Court of Human Rights...........…51 Conclusion…………………………………........……………………………......54 List of sources used.......................................................................56

INTRODUCTION

A timely international system for the protection of human rights includes three levels: international, regional and national. The formation of international mechanisms for the protection of human rights is associated with the United Nations, the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The political authority of the latter was so high that its provisions were included in the constitutions of many states of the world and had a significant impact on the subsequent development of international relations and international politics, and the formation of an international system for the protection of human rights.

The most effective control mechanisms for all states are state reports (primary, additional, periodic).

The Committee often uses alternative reports provided by non-governmental organizations that can influence the opinions of Committee members. The latter has the right to issue recommendations to improve the human rights situation in the country. Although the decisions taken by the committee are not binding, a number of states have already taken appropriate action on them.

The most important bodies for the protection of human rights are the institution of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as UNCHR 1993). The scope of activities of the UNCHR is the promotion and protection of human rights throughout the world; strengthening international cooperation in the field of human rights, achieving dialogue with governments to ensure respect for human rights; coordination of efforts undertaken in this area by various UN bodies, etc.

The international system for the protection of human rights within the UN is significantly developed and supplemented by regional systems for the protection of human rights, based on territorial community, approximately the same level of socio-economic development and a number of other factors, that is, they include countries located approximately in the same “historical time”. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950), adopted within the Council of Europe, was the first international treaty at the regional level to transform the principles proclaimed by the Universal Declaration.

Thus, global community, recognizing the value of human rights and life, has reached agreement on international human rights standards. International standards are the result of a compromise between countries with different political and legal systems and traditions, which, for one reason or another, have come to a common expression of their positions, which often differ markedly in practice. Membership of states in the universal and regional systems is dependent on the compliance of national legislation with the Charter of the organization and the relevant human rights convention. The functions of international and domestic human rights protection are differentiated as follows: at the international level, international standards in the field of human rights are developed and control bodies operate to monitor their compliance; at the national level, states bring their legislation in accordance with international standards and guarantee their implementation. For the domestic implementation of international standards, a certain area of freedom of action remains for their adaptation and specification, in the process of which national characteristics (culture, traditions, mentality) are reflected.

According to Art. 55 of the UN Charter promotes “universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion” 1 . ECOSOC exercises the corresponding powers on behalf of the UN.

Under his leadership, a human rights commission operated, in which 43 states were represented. In order to strengthen the UN human rights mechanism, in September 2005 it was decided to create a Human Rights Council, replacing the Human Rights Commission and competent to make recommendations on situations of rights violations. In December 1993, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution establishing the post of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. In May 1999, the post of Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe was established, who is competent to provide advisory services, present reports, conclusions and recommendations. Some conventions provided for the creation of special bodies. These include: the Human Rights Committee under the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Committee on the Rights of the Child based on the Convention on the Rights of the Child; Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on the basis of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination; Committee for the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families on the basis of International Convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women; Committee against Torture on the basis of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights did not provide for a special body, stipulating the possibility of action through ECOSOC; its last decision in 1985 established a committee on economic, social and cultural rights. Each committee consists of experts (the Committee against Torture has 10, the rest have 18 people), and it cannot include more than one citizen of one state; fair geographical distribution and representation are taken into account various forms civilization and basic legal systems.

States party to the covenants and conventions have undertaken to report regularly to the relevant committee on the state of human rights and on measures taken to advance the realization of rights. The Committee studies the reports, discusses them at its meetings and provides its states with comments on them. The Committee may also receive and consider communications from States which have made declarations recognizing such competence of each Committee. The USSR not directly when signing a number of acts, but later in July 1991 recognized such competence of the committees on the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and punishments. In October 2004, the Russian Federation acceded to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, thereby recognizing the competence of the relevant Committee.

Human rights covenants and other international acts provide legal protection for the proclaimed rights and freedoms, and, on the one hand, they fix the obligations of states to implement national means of protection, and on the other hand, they introduce and directly regulate international means of protection. The initial position on the national (intrastate) mechanism was first formulated in Art. 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to effective redress by the competent national courts in the event of a violation of the fundamental rights granted to him by the constitution or law.” 2 . The next step was the recognition that the “right to legal protection” (the term of the Covenant on Political Rights) belonging to a person is real only with the corresponding responsibilities of the state and its bodies.

At the same time, and this emphasizes the normative significance of the covenants, it was established that the rights and freedoms recognized in the covenants are subject to legal protection. Consequently, national courts and other competent state bodies were entrusted with the duty to protect not only constitutional but also international treaty rights.

In accordance with paragraph 3 of Art. 2 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, each state undertakes to provide: any person whose rights and freedoms recognized in the Covenant are violated, an effective remedy; establishing the right to legal protection for any person through judicial, administrative or legislative bodies; application by the competent authorities of legal remedies.

The OSCE participating States, in the Vienna Final Document of 15 January 1989, expressed their intention to provide “effective remedies” and defined their specific content in relation to the relationship of the competent authorities of the state with those who claim that their rights have been violated.

Highest form legal regulation in this area was the establishment of special international mechanisms created in accordance with international regulations of special bodies that were endowed with the authority to accept, consider and evaluate individuals' appeals.

Such mechanisms, in relation to certain areas of legal regulation, were provided for in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Committee against Torture was empowered to receive and consider communications from individuals (or groups of individuals) who claim that they are victims of violations by the State party of the stated in the Convention of rights (according to Article 14 of the first and Article 22 of the second Convention).

After considering the message and the information requested from the state, the Committee submits its opinions, proposals, recommendations to the relevant state and interested party.

The Human Rights Committee, established by the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has additional competences set out in the first Optional Protocol to the Covenant. This refers to the function of considering individual appeals in connection with violations of the rights proclaimed in the Covenant. The condition for the Committee to exercise such a function is the participation of the state not only in the Covenant, but also in the Protocol and the recognition by the state of the specified competence of the Committee.

Any person within the jurisdiction of such a State who alleges that any of the rights enumerated in the Covenant has been violated and who has exhausted all available domestic remedies may submit a written communication to the Committee for its consideration. The Committee brings the communication to the attention of the State concerned, which, within six months, provides the Committee with written explanations and informs about appropriate measures. After considering all submissions, the Committee forwards its views to the State and person concerned.

The control mechanisms established in the treaties boil down to the creation of control bodies within international organizations, the establishment by states of special control bodies, and the use of national technical means of control.

The successful implementation of control is facilitated by agreed additional measures, such as equipping military facilities with special identification marks (Treaty between Russia and the United States on the Further Reduction of the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms of 1993); harmonized rules for counting weapon systems; notifications about upcoming actions; exchange of quantitative data on weapons, their locations and technical characteristics. Inspection provided for by international agreements is widely used as a control method.

1 Universal human rights monitoring bodies

1.1 Control functions of UN bodies

The creation of a system of international control over the implementation of legal circumstances undertaken by states in the field of human rights will be one of the most significant achievements in the international regulation of this area. The role of control bodies in modern conditions is constantly increasing. Increasing attention is being paid to their functions and powers in the activities of the UN and in various universal and regional agreements. As is known, there is no supranational authority that could control the implementation of the principles and norms of international law. Therefore, states have envisaged the creation of an international control mechanism. 3 In this process, a significant role is played by the fact that a number of issues that previously fell within the internal competence of states are now regulated by international law. The functions of international control are constantly expanding, while some of its forms and methods are borrowed from the internal practice of states. Verification seriously increases the effectiveness of the application of agreed norms and principles of international law by each participating state international agreements. The forms of such control largely depend on the nature of human rights violations and can be very diverse. It is worth noting that they are determined by the Charter, decisions of the UN and its specialized agencies, international agreements of a universal and regional nature. 4 Let us note the fact that in modern interstate relations, the implementation of human rights is carried out by legislative, administrative and other means at the disposal of each state, and international bodies exclusively control this process.

Therefore, we cannot agree with the statements of a number of international lawyers that control bodies have the functions of directly ensuring human rights with the help of the means at their disposal. They do not have such means in the field of human rights. Today, a number of control bodies have been created in accordance with the UN Charter, others are established on the basis of international agreements of both a universal and regional nature. 5

1.2 The ILO human rights monitoring mechanism

The control mechanism primarily includes the activities of a committee of experts on the application of conventions and recommendations. The Committee of Experts consists of reputable lawyers from various countries, who are personally appointed by the Administrative Council. 6

Annual reports are sent to the ILO (International Labor Office), international officials work with these reports and give their comments and assessments. Next, reports and recommendations are sent to a committee of experts, and discussion takes place there. If necessary, the committee of experts can make comments on the work of the government in relation to ratified conventions and recommendations, or can send requests to governments on issues of interest, based on the results of the meeting. 7

For example, the report of the meeting of the committee of experts on the regulation of the labor of migrant workers was of great importance. The reports of the expert committee are sent to the Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. This is a committee - an administrative body, which, based on the results of the work of specialists, gives a final assessment of the behavior of the state and compliance with the responsibilities that the state assumed upon becoming a member of the ILO, ratifying certain documents.

The control mechanism includes the consideration of complaints and violations by states of obligations to comply with international labor standards. Complaints can be of two main types:

Firstly, these are the so-called submissions, which can be submitted by trade unions or representatives of entrepreneurs. In fact, these are complaints against states that have taken upon themselves by ratifying certain conventions. The proposal is considered in a tripartite committee, which is specially created each time under the Administrative Council. Any member state may lodge a complaint against another member state of the International Labor Organization which, in the opinion of the complaining state, is not complying with a convention that was once ratified by those two states.

Complaints are submitted to an investigation committee, which is established on a priority basis and operates under the Administrative Council. 8 He may request special evidence and hear witnesses. Based on the results of the meeting, an assessment is made of the activities of the member state and the legislation adopted in this state. If the results are controversial, the state wants to challenge the result of the work of the commission of inquiry, then the findings can be appealed to the International Court of Justice, whose decision is final. 9

Regarding sanctions, if a member state does not take into account the decision of the International Court of Justice, if it refuses to implement the recommendations of the commission of inquiry, then the Administrative Council can put pressure on the state. Unfortunately, the ILO Constitution is silent on what the nature of this pressure might be. 10 Sanctions can be anything, for example, suspension of membership, and in some cases even expulsion. But in practice, the Charter formulates such a provision that the International Labor Organization does not seek to use coercive measures, it appeals to the consciousness of the state, to public opinion, to its strength, and does not seek to exert pressure. In this regard, there are numerous wishes, firstly, to change the Charter in such a way that effective sanctions are introduced for non-compliance with the recommendations of the commission of inquiry for non-compliance with the decision of the International Court of Justice. Secondly, the disadvantage is the lack of consideration of individual complaints. International Labor Organization in Lately very actively responds to such wishes and initiatives that relate to improving the activities of organizations.

Human Rights Committee

The Human Rights Committee was created in 1977 in accordance with article 28 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 11

The Committee consists of 18 members citizen parties to the Covenant with high moral qualities and recognized competence in the field of human rights. Members of the Committee are elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the States Parties to the Covenant for a term of four years and serve in a personal capacity and not as representatives of their countries. Typically, the Human Rights Committee holds three sessions throughout the year, each lasting three weeks. As a rule, sessions are held in New York in the spring, and in Geneva in the summer and autumn. All States that have ratified or acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are required to report to the Committee on the measures they have taken to give effect to the rights enshrined in the Covenant and on the progress made in the enjoyment of those rights. The initial report is submitted within one year of the entry into force of the Covenant in respect of the country concerned. Reports on further changes are due every five years. The meetings are organized in such a way that government representatives have time to consult with the government and obtain the necessary information. The second important function of the human rights committee is to interpret the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in order to dispel any doubts about the scope and meaning of its articles. The Observations provide guidance to States Parties in applying the provisions of the Covenant and in preparing their reports.

Under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Committee is authorized to receive and consider communications from individuals who claim to be victims of a violation by a State party to the Covenant of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant.

Any State Party to the Covenant may submit a communication to the Committee alleging that another State Party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Covenant. However, this can only be done in cases where both parties have declared that they recognize the competence of the Committee to receive and consider such communications. Although this procedure came into force in 1979, the Committee has not yet received a single complaint of this type.

1.4 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is established in accordance with Article 8 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination to monitor and review measures envisaged and taken by States to fulfill obligations under the Convention. The members of this committee act independently, without receiving any instructions from outside, they cannot be removed or replaced from their duties without their consent. 12 States parties to the Convention are required to submit reports every four years on the judicial, administrative or other measures taken to implement the provisions of the Convention. There are many misconceptions regarding this committee, one of which is the opinion that a state is not obliged to implement the Convention if it believes that racial discrimination does not exist on its territory. 13 In the Committee's view, a State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Convention if it merely condemns racial discrimination in its Constitution. All States Parties to the Convention recognize the competence of the Committee to receive complaints from a State Party that another State Party is not implementing the provisions of the Convention, and to take appropriate measures in this regard. Until now, no participating State has used this procedure, which provides for the creation of a conciliation commission if the issue under consideration cannot be resolved in any other way. Complaints from individuals can also be accepted by the Committee against their State, alleging that they are victims of racial discrimination, if that State is a party to the Committee.

The Committee brings this information to the attention of the relevant state without disclosing the source, if this has been agreed. Once the State has provided an explanation of its position and possibly proposed a solution, the Committee considers the issue and makes a proposal and recommendations, which are transmitted both to the individual or group concerned and to the State party.

The task of eliminating the injustices that underlie racial discrimination, as well as the dangers associated with it, is one of the goals of the activities carried out by the United Nations.

1.5 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women was established in accordance with Article 17 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. 14 The Committee consists of 23 experts of all moral character and recognized competence in the field covered by the Convention. Members of the Committee are elected for a four-year term and act in a personal capacity, i.e. are not representatives of their states. Since its creation in 1982, and with only one exception, the Committee has been composed entirely of women representing a wide range of different professions (lawyers, teachers, diplomats, etc.). The Committee meets once a year, meeting for two weeks in Vienna or New York, and reports annually on its activities to the General Assembly through ECOSOC. 15 In accordance with Article 17 of the Convention, the main task of the committee is to consider reports on legislative, judicial, administrative or other measures taken by States Parties to implement the provisions of the convention. The initial report is submitted within one year of ratification of or accession to the Convention; subsequent reports must be submitted every four years or as requested by the Committee. A pre-session working group of five Committee members prepares a list of identified issues and lists of questions that are sent in advance to reporting States. This gives States the opportunity to prepare responses for presentation at Committee sessions. Representatives of a state may attend a meeting of the Committee dedicated to the consideration of the report of that state. First, committee members make observations and comments regarding the form and content of the report, then they ask questions regarding specific articles of the Convention. Representatives may answer some of these questions right away, while others may take a day or two to answer. The Committee may ask further questions at this stage and will request more detailed information before the next report. The Committee then prepares concluding observations on the report of individual States parties so that these observations can be reflected in the Committee's report to the General Assembly. These concluding remarks address the most important issues raised during the dialogue with representatives of a particular state, highlight both positive aspects and issues of concern to the committee, and indicate what information the state should include in its next report. The Committee's consideration of state reports is an adversarial process. The Committee never officially declares that a particular state is violating the Convention. Instead, he draws attention to weaknesses in the policies of the state concerned through questions and comments. This approach also means that the Committee does not put pressure on states that openly violate the provisions of the Convention. Article 21 of the Convention provides that the Committee may make proposals and recommendations of a general nature based on its examination of reports and information received from States parties. To date, the committee's general recommendations are limited in both scope and practical implications. While intended for all participating States rather than individual States, these recommendations are often too general, making it difficult to monitor their implementation, and are not binding. Non-governmental human rights and women's organizations are a valuable source of information for the Committee.

Reports submitted by participating States do not always accurately reflect the situation of women's rights in a given country and do not always identify existing problems. Information and statistics independent organizations brings great benefit to the committee in assessing the actual situation in individual states. To the extent possible, these materials should contain references to specific articles of the Convention that are relevant to the issues or issues being addressed. NGOs may submit written communications to the Committee through the Division for the Advancement of Women. On October 6, 1999, the UN General Assembly adopted the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which provides for the possibility of filing individual complaints (communications) by persons who claim to be victims of a violation by a state party to the Protocol of any of the rights set out in the Convention. 16 The Protocol entered into force on 22 December 2000. Communications may be made by or on behalf of persons or groups of persons subject to the jurisdiction of a State Party who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights set forth in the Convention. Messages must be submitted in writing and must not be anonymous. The Committee shall not consider a communication until it is satisfied that all available domestic remedies have been exhausted, unless such remedies have been unreasonably delayed or are unlikely to achieve the desired result. The Committee declares a communication inadmissible if:

(a) the same matter has already been considered by the Committee or has been or is being considered under another procedure of international investigation or settlement;

B) it is incompatible with the provisions of the Convention;

C) it is clearly groundless or insufficiently substantiated;

D) it constitutes an abuse of the right to direct such communication;

E) the facts that are the subject of the communication occurred before this Protocol entered into force for the State concerned, unless these facts also occurred after that date. At any time after receipt of a communication and before deciding on its merits, the Committee may submit to the State party concerned, for urgent consideration, a request that that State take such interim measures as may be necessary to avoid possible irreparable harm to the victim or victims of the alleged violation . Unless the Committee considers a communication inadmissible and provided that the person or persons agree to have their name or names disclosed, the Committee shall communicate in confidence any communication sent to it under the Protocol to the attention of the State concerned. The notified State shall submit to the Committee, within six months, written explanations or statements explaining the matter and any measures, if any, that the State may have taken. Investigation of information regarding serious and systematic violations under the optional protocol: in cases where the committee receives credible information indicating claims and systematic violations by a State party of the rights set out in the convention, the committee invites that State to cooperate in examining the information and to provide observations in this regard regarding relevant information. Where justified and with the consent of the State, the investigation may include a visit to its territory. After examining the results of such an investigation, the Committee transmits those results to the State concerned, along with any comments and recommendations.

Committee against Torture

Within the framework of the Council of Europe, in order to complement the control mechanism created on the basis of the European Convention of 1950, the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment was adopted as an extra-judicial mechanism of a preventive nature. Based on the convention, a committee against torture was established. Currently, 40 member states of the Council of Europe are parties to the Convention and therefore accept jurisdiction. 17

The task of the Committee against Torture is to examine, through visits, the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty, with a view to strengthening, if necessary, protection against torture and against inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The number of members of the Committee is equal to the number of parties to the convention. The members of the Committee are selected from among persons of high moral character, known for their competence in the field of human rights or having professional experience in this field. Obviously, these are not only lawyers, but also persons with experience in matters of prison management and in various fields of medicine related to the maintenance of persons deprived of their liberty. This makes the dialogue between the committee and the state more effective and facilitates the concrete proposals of the committee.

Committee members serve in their personal capacity and are independent and impartial and capable of performing their functions effectively. Experts are subject to the same requirements of independence, impartiality and ability to perform their duties as committee members and are subject to the instructions of the committee, which is responsible for their actions.

The Committee's members and experts enjoy the privileges and immunities provided for in the annex to the convention to ensure the independent performance of their duties. Members of the committee are elected by an absolute majority of the members of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for a term of four years. They can only be re-elected once. A state party to the 1987 convention must permit visits to any place within its jurisdiction where persons deprived of their liberty by public authority are being held. The objects of visits can be both government and private institutions. The main criterion is deprivation of liberty as a result of actions of government authorities. By general rule, visits are made by at least two committee members. The Committee may, if it considers it necessary, have the assistance of experts and translators.

Along with periodic visits, the committee has the right to organize such visits as it deems necessary based on specific circumstances; in relation to such visits, it is at the discretion of the committee to decide whether visits are necessary and the reasons for making such a decision. Thus, since the committee is not bound by the investigation of individual complaints, it is free to evaluate information from individuals or groups and to decide whether to take action based on such information. The committee notifies the government of the party concerned of its intention to make a visit. 18 After such notification, he has the right to visit any place at any time. The state must ensure that the committee, in carrying out its tasks, has access to any place where these persons are located, as well as other information in the state's possession that the committee needs to carry out its tasks.

In seeking such information, the committee shall comply with applicable regulations. national law and professional ethics. The Committee has the right to talk with persons deprived of their liberty in private and to freely enter into contact with any person who can provide it with relevant information. In exceptional circumstances, the competent authorities of the interested party may submit a submission to the committee containing objections to a specific time or specific place proposed by the committee for a visit. Such representations may only be made for reasons of national defence, public safety, serious disorder in places of detention, the medical condition of a person or in connection with urgent questioning relating to a crime. felony. After each visit, the committee draws up a report on the facts established during the visit, taking into account any comments that may have been submitted to it by the interested state. He submits a final report, including any recommendations necessary from the committee's point of view. If the State does not cooperate or refuses to correct the situation in light of the committee's recommendations, the committee may, after giving the State an opportunity to state its position, decide by a two-thirds majority of the members, make a public statement on the matter. 19

Taking into account specific features functions of the Committee provided for by this Convention, the Committee meets at behind closed doors. This provision is complemented by the principle contained in Article 11 of the Convention that the data collected by the Committee in connection with the visit, the content of its report and consultations with the State concerned are confidential information.

Subject to confidentiality rules, the Committee annually submits a general report on its activities to the Committee of Ministers. The report, which is presented to the Assembly and made public, contains information about the organization and internal workings of the Committee and its activities, indicating the states visited. The 1967 Convention applies not only in times of peace, but also in times of war or other public emergency. The Committee does not visit places which are effectively controlled on a regular basis by representatives or delegations of the Protecting Powers or International Committee Red Cross on the basis of the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949 and its Additional Protocols of June 8, 1977. However, the Committee may visit certain places that the ICRC has not visited effectively or regularly. The 1987 Convention provides for a non-judicial preventive mechanism that promotes cooperation between states in the field of human rights protection. All member states of the Council of Europe are parties to the Convention. In the future, after the entry into force of Additional Protocol No. 1, states that are not members of the Council of Europe will also be able to become participants. It is also very significant that there is no duplication of the work of the Committee against Torture and the European Court of Human Rights. 20

Committee on the Rights of the Child

The Committee on the Rights of the Child was created in 1991year in accordance with Article 43 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and consists of eighteen experts of high moral character and recognized competence in the field covered by the Convention23. Members of the Committee serve in a personal capacity, are elected for a four-year term and may be re-elected. The Committee meets annually in New York. Reports on the activities of the Committee are submitted to the General Assembly through ECOSOC once every two years. In accordance with article 44 of the Convention, States parties undertake to report to the Committee on the measures they have taken to secure the rights recognized in the Convention and on the progress made in the implementation of these rights. 21

The initial report must be submitted within two years of the entry into force of the Convention for the State Party concerned, and every five years thereafter. According to the Convention, States Parties must ensure wide publicity of their reports in their own countries. Based on its examination of reports, the Committee may make offers and recommendations of a general nature, which are transmitted to the State concerned and communicated to the General Assembly along with State comments, if any.

The same way, States parties to the Optional Protocols to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict and the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography are required to report to the Committee on the measures they have taken to strengthen the rights recognized in the optional protocols and on the progress made in implementation these rights.

Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Economic, social and cultural rights are designed to protect people as full persons, based on a concept that guarantees a person the opportunity to simultaneously enjoy rights, freedoms and the benefits of social justice. In a world where, according to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), “one fifth of the population developing countries goes to bed with a feeling of hunger, a fourth is unable to satisfy even such a basic need as the need for purified drinking water, and a third lives on the brink of survival in conditions of such appalling poverty that it is impossible to describe in words. Although much has been done since the creation of the United Nations to alleviate the plight of the world's population, more than 1 billion people still live in conditions of extreme poverty, lack housing, suffer from hunger and malnutrition, unemployment, illiteracy and chronic diseases. More than 1.5 billion people are deprived of the opportunity to drink purified drinking water and use water supply and sewerage systems; about 500 million children cannot receive even a primary education, and more than 1 billion people cannot read and write.

The enormous scale of social marginalization occurring despite continued global economic growth and development poses serious challenges not only to development but also to fundamental human rights.

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by resolution of the General Assembly on December 16, 1966, after almost twenty years of debate during its development. Ten years later, it finally became law and came into force on January 3, 1976. The Covenant contains some of the most important international legal norms establishing economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to work under just and favorable conditions, the right to social protection, the right to an adequate standard of living and to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, the right to education and to enjoy the results of freedom in the field of culture and scientific progress. 22 The compliance of States parties with their obligations under the Covenant and the level of implementation of related rights and obligations is monitored by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In its activities, the Committee relies on many information sources, including reports submitted by member states and information received from specialized UN agencies - the International Labor Organization, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

World Organization Health, Food and Agriculture UN, as well as from the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the UN Center for Human Settlements and other agencies. In addition, it is provided with information by non-governmental and community organizations operating in the territory of states that have ratified the Covenant, international human rights organizations and other non-governmental organizations, as well as other UN treaty bodies; In addition, the Committee uses publicly available sources.

2 Regional human rights monitoring bodies

2.1 Human rights monitoring within the Council of Europe

In 1949, as a result of the signing of the London Treaty, the Council of Europe was founded. The Council of Europe relied on the principles of pluralistic democracy, human rights, and respect for the law. In order to join the Council of Europe, countries must demonstrate respect for and adherence to human rights and laws. Further, the Council of Europe should also promote the development and promotion of the various cultures of the peoples of Europe. In this way, the Council of Europe contributes to the support of democracy and economic growth in the region.

Countries that join the Council of Europe retain their independence and political structure. However, these countries must fulfill the obligations imposed by the agreement signed in the main building of the Council of Europe, the Palais de Europe in Strasbourg (France). Official languages Council of Europe are English and French languages. The Parliamentary Assembly also uses German, Italian, and Russian as working languages during meetings. The Council includes 45 countries with a total population of 875 million. Also, more than 400 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on this moment have consultative status with the Council of Europe. The following countries have been members of the Council of Europe (ten in total) from the very beginning: Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Greece and Türkiye joined in 1949; Iceland and Germany in 1950. Austria became a member in 1956; Cyprus in 1961; Switzerland in 1963; Malta in 1965; Portugal in 1976; Spain in 1977; Liechtenstein in 1978; San Marino in 1988; Finland in 1989, Andorra in 1994. 23

Following the collapse of communism in many European countries in 1989, new members from Central and Eastern Europe joined the Council of Europe. Hungary joined in 1990; Poland in 1991; Bulgaria in 1992; Estonia, Lithuania, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Romania joined in 1993. Latvia, Albania, Moldova, Ukraine and Macedonia became members of the Council of Europe in 1995, while Russia and Croatia in 1996. New members of the Council of Europe are Georgia (1999), Armenia and Azerbaijan (2001), Bosnia and Herzegovina (2002), Serbia and Montenegro (2003).

The Council of Europe has awarded observer status to several countries, including Canada, the Vatican, Japan, Mexico and the United States.

The Council of Europe consists of several departments:

The Committee of Ministers is the main department in the Council of Europe. It consists of the foreign ministers of all member countries.

The Parliamentary Assembly is a deliberative body and consists of 313 members and 313 substitutes, who are appointed by the national assemblies.

The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe is an advisory body with local and regional representatives. It consists of the Chamber of Local Authorities and the Chamber of Regions. The Secretary General of the Council of Europe manages and coordinates the activities of the organization. A secretary is elected every 5 years. The Council of Europe has developed and is developing to promote and publicize human rights. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 is more familiar to the general public as the European Convention on Human Rights. It was the first formal agreement of the Council of Europe aimed at protecting human rights, and it is also the first international human rights agreement with practical recommendations. The agreement was inspired by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights). It was signed in Rome on November 4, 1950. The agreement came into force in September 1953. The Convention ensures the support and implementation of human rights and fundamental human freedoms, which are the basis of justice and peace in the world and the best way achieving this is effective political democracy on the one hand, and a common understanding and respect for the human rights on which they depend on the other. The Convention mainly protects civil and political rights, which are found in Articles 1-18. Articles 19-51 list the working mechanisms of the European Court and Commission, while Protocol 1, 4,6, 7, and 12 include additional rights. The right of individual redress (Article 25) obliges states to accept the Court and recognize its decisions 24 .

Note that international legal instruments such as agreements (also called agreements, conventions and protocols) must be respected by the countries that sign the agreement.

When negotiations are completed, the text of the contract is recognized as genuine and final. The document is signed by representatives of the countries. There are many ways in which states demonstrate their agreement to sign a treaty, the most common and accepted of which is ratification or acceptance. The new agreement is ratified by the countries that drafted the agreement. A state that did not take part in the negotiations may later accept the agreement. The document comes into force when a predetermined number of states ratify or accept the agreement.

The European Court of Human Rights was created on September 3, 1953. The Court is located in Strasbourg and the Court has jurisdiction over the countries of the Council of Europe that have agreed to accept the non-compulsory jurisdiction of the Court. Once a state agrees, all court decisions regarding that state are binding. Judges are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

The initial structure of the Court and the mechanism for considering cases is based on a two-tier system for the protection of rights, which is the European Commission of Human Rights (outdated or unnecessary today) and the Court.

The dichotomy between the two institutions worked well at first, as the Court dealt with a small number of cases. However, the number of pending cases increased significantly from 16 cases between 1960 and 1975 to 119 in 1997 alone. On 1 November 1998, Protocol 11 came into force, abolishing the Commission on Human Rights as the new European Court of Human Rights and replacing the previous system. 25

The Court hears allegations of human rights violations from individuals as well as on behalf of countries. However, it is rare for states to sue each other if the violations are not serious enough. In order for the Court to consider an application, it is necessary that the applicant has tried all sorts of courts at the level of his state.

2.2 European Committee for the Prevention of Torture

Within the framework of the Council of Europe, in order to complement the control mechanism created on the basis of the European Convention of 1950, the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was adopted on November 26, 1987 with an extra-judicial mechanism of a preventive nature. The Committee against Torture was established on the basis of the Convention. Currently, 40 member states of the Council of Europe are parties to the Convention and therefore accept the jurisdiction of the Committee.

The number of members of the Committee is equal to the number of parties to the Convention. Members of the Committee are elected from among persons of high moral character, known for their competence in the field of human rights or having professional experience in this field (Clause 1, Article 4, Chapter 2). Obviously, these are not only lawyers, but also persons with experience in matters of prison management and in various fields of medicine relevant to the maintenance of persons deprived of their liberty. This contributes to greater effectiveness of the dialogue between the Committee and the state and facilitates the path to specific proposals from the Committee.

Members of the Committee serve in their personal capacity, are independent and impartial and are capable of performing their functions effectively. Experts are subject to the same requirements of independence, impartiality and capacity to perform their duties as Committee members. They are subject to the instructions of the Committee, which is responsible for their actions.

The Committee, its members and experts enjoy the privileges and immunities provided for in the Annex to the Convention (Article 16) to ensure the independent performance of their duties.

Members of the Committee are elected by an absolute majority of votes of members of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for a period of four years. They can be re-elected only once (clause 3, article 5, chapter 2).

A state party to the 1987 Convention must permit visits to any place within its jurisdiction where persons deprived of their liberty by public authority are held (Article 2, Chapter 1). The objects of visits can be both public and private institutions. The main criterion is deprivation of liberty as a result of actions of government authorities. As a general rule, visits are made by at least two members of the Committee. The Committee may, if it considers it necessary, have the assistance of experts and translators. 26

Along with periodic visits, the Committee has the right to organize such visits as it deems necessary based on specific circumstances. For such visitsIt is left to the discretion of the Committee to decide whether a visit is necessary and the reasons for making such a decision. Thus, since the Committee is not concerned with the investigation of individual complaints (as provided for, for example, by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms), it is free to assess information received from individuals or groups and to decide whether to take action. based on such information.

The Committee shall notify the government of the Party concerned of its intention to make a visit. After such notification, he has the right to visit any place at any time.

The State must provide the Committee with access to its territory and the right of movement without restrictions; full information on places of detention of persons deprived of liberty; unrestricted access to any place where these persons are located; and other information that the state has and which is necessary to carry out its tasks.

In seeking such information, the Committee shall comply with the applicable rules of national law and professional ethics (Article 8, Chapter 3).

The Committee has the right to talk with persons deprived of their liberty in private and to freely enter into contact with any person who, as it believes, can provide it with relevant information.

In exceptional circumstances, the competent authorities of the Party concerned may make a submission to the Committee containing objections to a specific time or place proposed by the Committee for a visit. Such representations may only be made for reasons of national defence, public safety, in the event of serious disturbances in places of detention of persons deprived of liberty, the medical condition of a person or in connection with an urgent interrogation concerning the commission of a serious crime (Cap. 1, Art. 9. 3).

After each visit, the Committee draws up a report on the facts found during the visit, taking into account any observations that may have been submitted to it by the State concerned. He submits a final report, including any recommendations necessary from the Committee's point of view. If a State does not cooperate or refuses to correct the situation in the light of the Committee's recommendations, the Committee may, after giving the State an opportunity to present its position, decide by a two-thirds majority of the members to make a public statement on the matter (Article 10 Chapter 3).

Taking into account the specific features of the Committee's functions under this Convention, the Committee meets in private.

This provision is complemented by the principle contained in Article 11 of the Convention that the data collected by the Committee in connection with the visit, the content of its report and consultations with the State concerned are confidential information. Subject to confidentiality rules, the Committee annually submits a general report on its activities to the Committee of Ministers. The report, which is presented to the Assembly and made public, contains information about the organization and internal work of the Committee and about its actual activities, indicating the states visited. The 1987 Convention applies not only in times of peace, but also in times of war or other public emergency. The Committee does not visit those places that are effectively controlled on a regular basis by representatives or delegations of the Protecting Powers or the International Committee of the Red Cross on the basis of the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949 and its Additional Protocols of June 8, 1977 (Art. 17 Ch. 4). However, the Committee may visit certain places (particularly in the case of a non-international armed conflict) which the ICRC has not visited “effectively” or “on a regular basis”.

The 1987 Convention assumes its relationship with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights of 1950 (clause 2 of Article 17). The Commentary to the Convention provides that the fundamental importance of the right to make an individual complaint, established by Article 25 of the European Convention on Human Rights, is not diminished. A person whose case has been examined by the Committee may not be refused under Article 27(1)(b) of the European Convention on Human Rights if he subsequently complains to the European Court of Human Rights that he has been the victim of a violation of that Convention. The Committee against Torture does not deal with issues arising from cases before the European Court or the interpretation of the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights.

So, the 1987 Convention provides for an extra-judicial preventive mechanism that promotes cooperation between states in the field of protecting human rights. All member states of the Council of Europe are parties to the Convention. 27

In the future, after the entry into force of Additional Protocol No. 1, states that are not members of the Council of Europe will also be able to become participants. It is also very significant that there is no duplication of work between the Committee against Torture and the European Court of Human Rights.

2.3 Monitoring compliance with human rights within the CIS

After the adoption of the UN Charter, the Human Rights Covenants and other international agreements in the area under consideration, the process of establishing an international control mechanism to monitor the implementation by states of their obligations begins. Its creation and functioning are one of the most significant achievements in the international regulation of human rights of the second half of the 20th century.

The role of control bodies in modern conditions is constantly increasing. Increasing attention is being paid to their functions and powers in the activities of the UN and in various international agreements.

As is known, in international relations there is no supranational authority that could control the implementation of the principles and norms of international law, in necessary cases, forcefully implement them or impose sanctions for violation of undertaken obligations. Therefore, states envisaged the creation of an international control mechanism that arose as a result of the expansion of international law-making, the complication of interstate relations, and the emergence of global problems affecting the destinies of all humanity.

In this process, a significant role is played by the fact that a number of issues that previously fell under the internal competence of states are now regulated by international law. The functions of international control are constantly expanding, while some of its forms and methods are borrowed from the internal practice of states.

The forms of such control largely depend on the nature of human rights violations and can be very diverse. They are determined by the Charter, decisions of the UN and its specialized agencies, international agreements of a universal and regional nature.

The purpose of the control mechanism is not to coerce or apply sanctions to states for failure to fulfill their obligations, but only to monitor the implementation and life of the provisions of international agreements. One of the main tasks of control bodies is to provide assistance and assistance to states in fulfilling their international obligations by making appropriate decisions and recommendations.

States, agreeing to international legal regulation of fundamental human rights and freedoms, undertake corresponding obligations. The objects of such human rights obligations are implemented by the states themselves. However, their implementation is subject to control by the international community. This is one of the fundamental specific features of the international legal regulation of human rights. Currently, a number of control bodies have been created in accordance with the UN Charter, others are established on the basis of international human rights agreements of both a universal and regional nature. 28 Issues related to human rights are discussed primarily in the General Assembly, its Third Committee, the Economic and Social Council, the Commission on Human Rights and the Commission on the Status of Women, as well as the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. The functions of these organs are extremely diverse. They make recommendations, make decisions, convene international conferences, prepare draft conventions, conduct research, provide advisory and technical assistance to individual countries.

In a number of cases, they also exercise control functions over states’ compliance with obligations undertaken under the UN Charter and international agreements.

In fact, all the main and a significant number of subsidiary organs of the UN deal with issues related to human rights to one degree or another.

The practice of creating special bodies to study specific situations and conduct investigations into gross, massive and systematic violations of human rights, including the policy of apartheid and racial discrimination, as well as violations in territories occupied as a result of aggression, has also become somewhat widespread in the UN.

Pursuant to Resolution 2, the Commission on Human Rights established a special working group of five experts in 1967, tasked with investigating allegations of torture and ill-treatment of prisoners, detainees and persons under police surveillance in South Africa. ECOSOC welcomed the Commission's decision, condemned the South African government for its refusal to cooperate with the working group and instructed it to also investigate allegations of violations of trade union rights in South Africa.

At its 24th session in 1968, the Commission on Human Rights decided to expand the mandate of the working group. She was also tasked with investigating the mistreatment of prisoners in Namibia, Southern Rhodesia and African territories under Portuguese rule; conduct an investigation into the consequences arising from the unlawful arrest and prosecution by the South African authorities of Namibian citizens in territory for which the UN was directly responsible; conduct a thorough investigation of one of the working group's findings on whether South Africa's policies contain elements of the crime of genocide.

The ad hoc working group of experts organized visiting missions, heard witnesses, obtained necessary written information, prepared studies and submitted reports to the Commission on Human Rights with their findings and recommendations. Based on the group's reports, various UN bodies, including the General Assembly, made decisions regarding specific aspects of the manifestations of the policies of apartheid and racism, and made recommendations on measures to combat them.

Monitoring the implementation by states of their obligations to suppress apartheid and genocide, which are international crimes, is not limited to verification and can be combined with enforcement measures taken by decision of the Security Council.

Special bodies were created by the UN to investigate violations of human rights by totalitarian regimes. The legality of the creation of these bodies was determined by the fact that the policies pursued by such regimes represent a denial of the goals and principles of the UN Charter and are accompanied by massive and systematic violations of basic human rights and freedoms. The 31st session of the Commission on Human Rights, held in February–March 1975, established an ad hoc working group of five members to conduct “an investigation into the existing situation of human rights in Chile.” The UN Commission on Human Rights appointed a special rapporteur for Chile in 1979 to study human rights violations in that country. Having visited Chile, in 1986 he presented a report in which he stated such facts of human rights violations in this country as murders and disappearances of persons, abductions, torture and torture of prisoners.

The UN Commission on Human Rights approved the work of the special rapporteur and condemned the Chilean government for massive and gross violations of human rights. Special rapporteurs or representatives of the UN Commission on Human Rights have been appointed for Iraq, El Salvador, Haiti and a number of other countries. 29

One of the common control forms of work of the UN Commission on Human Rights is the creation of so-called thematic mechanisms. The first such mechanism was the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, established by the Commission in 1980. The Commission then appointed a special rapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions in 1982, and a special rapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions in 1985. torture.

This Commission also appoints special rapporteurs on certain problems and to protect a special category of victims of human rights violations. So, in 1986 there was Institute established Special Rapporteur on the implementation of the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. In 1990, a Special Rapporteur was appointed on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, and in 1991, a Working Group on Arbitrary Detention was established, with a mandate to include detentions that are incompatible with fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression, freedom of association and assembly, freedom of conscience. By the end of 1992, the UN Commission on Human Rights had established 11 thematic procedures, and their number continues to grow. Representatives of these bodies travel to countries where human rights are violated, establish dialogue with the relevant states, and annually submit reports on their activities to the Human Rights Commission.

The experience of many years of discussion of issues of human rights at the UN has clearly shown that a well-thought-out organization and activity of control bodies is of paramount importance for the fruitful functioning of the entire system of relations between states in the area under consideration. However, at present, control activities are still far from perfect.

The system of supervisory bodies in the field of human rights created by the UN is extremely cumbersome, there is duplication and parallelism in its work, and consideration of numerous issues on the agenda is postponed from year to year to subsequent sessions. These bodies work mainly from session to session and are unable to take emergency measures in the face of major crises.

The ongoing massive violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms are largely determined by the lack of political will of UN member states to create an appropriate mechanism with the necessary powers that would not only coordinate the work program of numerous control bodies, but also act quickly, effectively and decisively in emergency circumstances. It is no coincidence that many scientists, diplomats and statesmen, analyzing the current situation, they talk about a “crisis”, a “deadlock”, the need to reorganize the entire system of activities of UN human rights bodies on the basis of a “new approach”. It should be borne in mind that not only the international community as a whole, but also individual states in exceptional cases may resort to coercive measures to suppress criminal violations of human rights. They, on their own initiative, have the right to use economic, diplomatic and other measures not related to the use of armed force for this purpose. As interstate practice shows, such measures are effective under certain circumstances.

One of the most controversial and contradictory in the doctrine of international law and practice interstate relations is the question of the legality of humanitarian intervention. Since the emergence of international law, many scientists have recognized the legality of humanitarian intervention, that is, the use of force, up to the outbreak of war by a state in the name of “humane” goals to protect national and other minorities, as well as the lives and property of its citizens located on the territory of another state .

Based on the fact that every person, regardless of his belonging to a particular state, is recognized as having certain natural rights, Hugo Grotius in his work “On the Law of War and Peace” (1625) justified the so-called just wars for the sake of protecting not only their own, but also foreign subjects, if “obvious lawlessness” is committed against them.

The doctrine of humanitarian intervention was widely used at that time in the practice of international relations. It served as one of the many “justifications” for the enslavement of “uncivilized” peoples. After the Second World War and the formation of the UN, the right to use force in international relations was subject to serious restrictions. However, even today the issue of the legality of humanitarian intervention, which is often used by individual states as a pretext for the use of armed force, is widely debated. The issue of the legality of humanitarian intervention and the limits of its application is discussed in various international forums. This problem has been addressed at several conferences. 30

One of the goals of the Organization, as emphasized in paragraph 3 of Art. 1 of the UN Charter is to promote and develop respect for human rights. Moreover, the UN Charter, not limited to the promotion and development of respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms, obliges states to respect them.

To promote universal respect and observance of human rights, states, as emphasized in the UN Charter, undertake to take both joint and “independent action in cooperation with the Organization” (Article 56). The expression “independent action”, as is quite obvious, means that states not only can, but are also obliged to take measures to protect human rights and freedoms, cooperating and consulting with the UN. Therefore, if the UN and the Security Council for one reason or another fail to act, then an individual state can use force to fear the lives of its citizens.

The use of armed force must be short in duration and limited to a small contingent of troops. Large-scale military action aimed at seizing territory or overthrowing a government is absolutely unacceptable. Once the goal of the humanitarian intervention has been achieved, the armed forces must immediately withdraw from the territory of the foreign state. The reaction of the international community and individual states to criminal violations of fundamental human rights and freedoms must be quick and effective. Along with the activities of the UN, all higher value To protect individual rights and freedoms at the international level, the functioning of convention bodies established on the basis of a number of international human rights agreements adopted after the creation of the UN is acquired. The current system of human rights convention bodies, one of the main functions of which is the consideration of state reports, is a relatively recent development. Before their creation, in accordance with the decision adopted by ECOSOC in 1965 on the recommendation of the UN Commission on Human Rights, UN member states submitted annual reports to the UN Secretary-General on the implementation of certain rights. The Human Rights Committee established by the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has additional competence set out in the first Optional Protocol to the Covenant.

This refers to the function of considering individual appeals in connection with violations of the rights proclaimed in the Covenant. The condition for the exercise of such a function is the participation of the state not only in the Covenant, but also in the protocol, and the recognition by the state of the specified competence of the Committee. Any person within the jurisdiction of such a State who alleges that any of the rights enumerated in the Covenant has been violated and who has exhausted all available domestic remedies may submit a written communication to the Committee for consideration (a complaint may also be made if if the use of internal remedies is unduly delayed).

The Committee brings the communication to the attention of the State concerned, which, within six months, provides the Committee with written explanations and informs about the measures taken. After considering all submissions, the Committee forwards its views to the State and person concerned.

At the regional level, a similar procedure is planned within the Commonwealth of Independent States. Article 33 of the CIS Charter provided for the creation of a Human Rights Commission as an advisory body designed to monitor the implementation of member states' human rights obligations. According to the Regulations on this Commission dated September 24, 1993 and in the context of the norms of the CIS Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms dated May 26, 1995, it is competent to consider both written requests from states on issues of violation of human rights, as well as individual and collective appeals from individuals who have exhausted all available domestic remedies. Based on the information provided, the Commission prepares a conclusion. An effective procedure for considering appeals from individuals operates in the bodies of the Council of Europe.

One can note a general tendency to supplement national legal mechanisms with international ones. The approach of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, embodied by the participating states in the Charter of Paris for a New Europe of November 21, 1990, is characteristic. Along with the UN and bodies established on the basis of various conventions, many specialized institutions are involved in the consideration of issues related to human rights UN system. In some of them, a system of extensive international control has been created and is functioning, which has its own specific features. Among these specialized institutions, special mention should be made of the International Labor Organization (ILO), whose experience can be used in the activities of other international organizations. 31

This organization was created in 1919 within the framework of the League of Nations, and in 1946 it became the first specialized agency of the UN. The main goal of the ILO is international legal regulation of labor in order to improve its conditions. A characteristic feature inherent in this organization is that not only representatives of the member states take part in its work, but also representatives of workers and representatives of entrepreneurs of these countries on an equal basis with them. The highest body of the ILO is the annual General Conference, which is attended by four representatives from each member of the Organization, of which two are government delegates, and the other two represent workers and employers, respectively. In this case, each delegate votes independently. This representation ensures that all these different interest groups influence the adoption of conventions and recommendations. Clear violations of human rights occurring in crisis situations around the world, often prompt states to demand a stronger response from the United Nations. In such cases, the Human Rights Commission appoints a special rapporteur or working group of inquiry.

Rapporteurs work in areas such as extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; torture; independence and impartiality of the judiciary; jurors and assessors and the independence of judges; religious intolerance; use of mercenaries; freedom of belief and free expression of opinions; racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia; child trafficking, child prostitution and child pornography; eliminating violence against women; and the impact of toxic and hazardous products on the enjoyment of human rights. In addition, there are special rapporteurs assigned to individual countries, including Afghanistan, Burundi, Congo, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Iran, Iraq, Myanmar, Nigeria, Occupied Palestine, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sudan.

Special Rapporteurs may use any resources, including individual communications and reports from non-governmental organizations, in preparing their reports. Much of their research is conducted on the ground and consists of interviews with authorities and victims and the collection of evidence from the field where possible. Special rapporteurs can also use the urgent action procedure to approach governments at the highest level. Between 1992 and 1996, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial and arbitrary executions, for example, made 818 urgent appeals on behalf of more than 6,500 people in 91 countries and received responses to about half of his appeals. The reports of special rapporteurs are published by the Commission on Human Rights and thereby help to make public both the facts of human rights violations and the responsibility of governments for them.

2.4 Inter-American Commission and Inter-American Court of Human Rights

The human rights protection system operating within the Organization of American States has a number of features compared to the regional system of the Council of Europe.One of the differences is that the functioning of the Inter-American system for the protection of human rights is based on three documents at once: the Charter of the Organization of American States, the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights.Noting the importance of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, it should first of all be emphasized that in terms of the time of its adoption, it was six months ahead of even the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Along with a fairly extensive list of rights and freedoms, the American Declaration also proclaimed ten duties of a person, including such as duties towards society as a whole; in relation to children and parents; obligations to receive education; obey the law; serve society and the nation, pay taxes; refrain from political activities in a foreign country; obligation to work, etc. There is nothing like this in the text of European documents.For almost 20 years (from 1959, when it was decided to create the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights within the OAS, to 1978, when the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights came into force), this Declaration was the very document that was in basis of the activities of the Inter-American Commission. With the entry into force of the Inter-American Convention, the Commission, in its law enforcement activities in relation to the states parties to the Convention, is guided by the provisions of the latter, while in relation to the OAS member states that have not ratified the convention, the Commission continues to apply the provisions of the American Declaration.

Thus, a unique situation has been created when, within the framework of one regional system for the protection of human rights, two subsystems operate simultaneously; for one, the basic document is the American Declaration (a legally non-binding document), for the other, the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights - a treaty binding on all participating states. The Inter-American Convention on Human Rights, adopted on November 22, 1969 and entered into force on July 18, 1978, is a multilateral international treaty " closed type": only OAS member states have the right to sign, ratify or accede to it. 32

The entry into force of the Convention in 1978 completed a 30-year process of formation within the Organization of American States of a regional system for the protection of human rights and marked the transition from the predominantly rule-making phase in the activities of this organization to the phase of direct practical implementation of the norms and provisions contained both in the convention itself, as well as in the OAS Charter and the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. Thus, this process took much more time for the American countries than a similar one within the Council of Europe.

The list of rights and freedoms contained in the Inter-American Convention does not go beyond traditional civil and political rights. It, as in the European Convention, is narrower than the list enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. However, at the same time it should be noted that this list of rights in the Inter-American Convention is much broader than in the European Convention. In particular, it contains rights such as the right to a name, the rights of a child, the right to citizenship or nationality, the right to equality before the law, and the right to asylum.

The functioning of the control mechanism established in accordance with the Convention (Commission and Court) is based on the provision according to which any person or group of persons, as well as a non-governmental organization legally recognized in one or more member states of the OAS, is entitled to submit to the Inter-American Commission petitions alleging violations of the Convention by a State party. While this provision is legally binding for any State Party to the Convention, the provision giving the Commission the power to receive and consider communications submitted by one State Party against another in connection with the latter's violation of its obligations under the Convention is optional and therefore imposes legal obligations. nature and applies only to those states that have made special declarations recognizing the competence of the Commission on this issue.

As of January 1997, a total of 13,000 petitions had been submitted to the commission, of which 13 were subsequently referred to and considered by the Court. It is important to note that only two of the cases considered by the Court involved violations of procedural rights; the rest involved alleged cases of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial or arbitrary executions (one of the realities of the American countries).

All petitions must be submitted to the Commission, which will initially review them for admissibility. The admissibility criteria for a petition under the Inter-American Convention generally correspond to the same requirements under the European Convention. If the complaint is deemed admissible, the Commission conducts an investigation into it. Based on the results of consideration of the complaint, the Commission draws up a report, which will contain a conclusion as to whether there has been a violation of the Convention. The Commission may then submit this report for consideration to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

In general terms, the Commission's functions are to promote and protect human rights. To carry out these functions, the Commission is vested with appropriate powers, including: submitting to the governments of OAS member states relevant recommendations regarding the improvement of national legislation on human rights issues, as well as promoting the implementation and compliance with human rights proclaimed in the Inter-American Convention; preparing reports and studies which the Commission considers necessary for the performance of its functions; consideration of complaints about human rights violations by a state party to the Convention, etc. 33

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is an autonomous judicial body charged with the application and interpretation of the Inter-American Convention. Only States Parties to the Convention and the Inter-American Commission have the right to refer a case to the Court. The decisions of the Court on cases considered by it are binding on the parties involved in the consideration and are not subject to appeal. At the request of one of the parties to the case, the Court may provide an interpretation of its decision. One of the most important functions of the Court was the adoption of interim measures “in extremely important and urgent cases, as well as if necessary to prevent irreparable damage to persons” Lukyantsev, p. 243. Such measures can be taken by the Court both in cases already before it and in those that are still before the Inter-American Commission. Given the special conditions of modern Latin America, these measures have played a positive role in protecting witnesses from violence in cases involving human rights violations.

In addition, the Inter-American Court has advisory jurisdiction to interpret the provisions of both the Convention itself and other treaties relating to the protection of human rights in the countries of the American continent. Thus, the range of issues on which the Court can give advisory opinions is significantly wider than the similar range under the European Convention. The Inter-American Court has the right, at the request of any OAS member state, to give an opinion on the compliance of any law of such country with the provisions of the Convention or other treaties in the field of human rights. The low number of decisions and advisory opinions issued by the Court allowed V. A. Kartashkin to conclude that the activities of control bodies within the framework of the Inter-American system “proved to be practically ineffective.” One of the reasons for the low efficiency of the inter-American system can be considered that during its creation the authors of the Convention tried to mechanically transfer many elements of the European Convention to American soil.

2.5 The African Commission and the African Court of Human Rights The basis of the regional system for the protection of human rights on the African continent is the African Charter of Human and Peoples' Rights developed and adopted within the framework of the Organization of African Unity, the purpose of which is to promote the development of respect for human rights and their protection on the African continent . The Charter is a “closed” type of agreement, since only OAU member countries can be its participants. The text of the Charter was adopted and opened for signature in 1981, and came into force in 1986. Today, 51 member states of the Organization of African Unity are parties to the Charter. Ethiopia and Eritrea have signed but not ratified the Charter, and Morocco is not a member of the OAU, which makes its participation in the Charter impossible. Thus, the African Charter is the most universal regional treaty, i.e. Within its region, this document enjoys almost unconditional recognition.

The peculiarity of the African Charter is that it reflects the political reality of the continent. As well as the historical traditions of African peoples and the value of African civilizations. It differs significantly from similar regional agreements adopted earlier within the Council of Europe and the Organization of American States. Among the most striking distinctive features of the Charter, which at the same time represent conceptual innovations in the field of international human rights law, are the recognition, along with human rights, of the rights of peoples; recognition of the indivisibility of human rights, which in the Charter means political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights; recognition of the right to development as a human right; the proclamation of a number of fundamental duties imposed on the individual in his relations with family, community, society, the state, as well as other legally recognized entities and the international community; a strongly collectivist approach to human rights.

A private individual must, according to the concept of the Charter, give priority to the interests of the community. In response, the community undertakes to protect the rights of its members. 34

Thus, two conclusions can be drawn regarding the rights part of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights: firstly, the Charter is the only international multilateral treaty that enshrines the so-called “third generation” of human rights. Secondly, a number of rights enshrined in the Charter are formulated in a very broad way, but at the same time much less meaningful. The Charter establishes a weaker mechanism (compared to the European Convention) for the protection of the human rights proclaimed in it: the only supervisory body under the Charter is the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights; The establishment of a Human Rights Court is not provided for in the Charter. The Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights consists of 11 members who perform their functions in a personal capacity; members of the Commission are elected for a term of 6 years. In accordance with the Charter, the Commission carries out the following functions: promotes the development of human rights; ensures the protection of human and peoples' rights; carries out the interpretation of all provisions of the Charter at the request of a state party to a treaty, an organ of the OAU or an African organization recognized by the OAU; performs any other tasks that may be assigned to it by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government. All communications are treated confidentially until the Assembly of Heads of State and Government decides otherwise. Another specific function of the African Commission is to conduct visits to the territory of States Parties to the Charter by members of the Commission. Each member of the Commission is responsible for certain countries.

The purpose of such visits is to formulate recommendations aimed at improving the guarantees of the rights of member states as enshrined in the Charter.

Thus, the African regional human rights system has a number of significant differences from the European system, both in terms of the rights and freedoms enshrined within the framework of the documents adopted therein, and in terms of the functioning of the control mechanism. In the case of the protection of civil and political rights, it seems that it is better to use the mechanism of the universal system of protection under the International Covenant.

It should be noted, first of all, the political nature of the control mechanism under the African Charter, which distinguishes the African system from the European one.

CONCLUSION

During the study, problems were identified:

1. Duplication of functions of international control bodies.

2. Non-submission or untimely submission of reports by member states to international bodies, and therefore lack of objective information from these bodies.

3. Lack of real mechanisms for monitoring the implementation of decisions of international control bodies, with the exception of the control mechanism operating within the Council of Europe.

4. The procedure for filing individual complaints is not provided for in all international human rights monitoring bodies.

The following measures could help solve these problems:

Clear delineation of the functions of international control bodies.
Introducing harsh political sanctions for violations of reporting obligations by participating States.
Creation of control mechanisms for the implementation of orders of international bodies monitoring the observance of human rights, or vesting existing bodies with such functions.
Introducing a procedure for filing individual complaints in all international human rights monitoring bodies.

The European human rights system evolves along with the development of society. In line with the European legal space, a key role in this process of convergence of the EU legal systems and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is assigned to European courts. Therefore, the problem of interaction between European judicial institutions comes to the fore. It can be solved by creating mechanisms of cooperation and coordination. This will eliminate duplication of decisions, reduce the risk of conflicts and increase the level of legal protection for individuals.

A new aspect that needs to be taken into account when considering legal remedies in Russia is the impact on them from European judicial institutions. For Russia, the harmonization of national human rights norms with the norms of the Council of Europe, the timeliness of measures taken at the stage of enforcement proceedings, the restructuring of legal consciousness and the training of qualified specialists in the field of European law are extremely important.

LIST OF SOURCES USED

Normative legal acts

European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1987 // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation. 1998. No. 36. Art. 4465

Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10, 1948 // International law in documents. M., 1982.

Convention No. 153 concerning working hours and rest periods in road transport of 27 June 1979 // International protection human rights and freedoms. M., 1990.

Convention No. 148 for the Protection of Workers from Occupational Risks Caused by Air Pollution, Noise and Vibration in Workplaces of June 20, 1977 // International Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms. M., 1990.

Convention No. 115 concerning the Protection of Workers ionizing radiation dated June 22, 1960 // International protection of human rights and freedoms. M., 1990.

Convention No. 138 on the minimum age for employment of June 26, 1973 // International protection of human rights and freedoms.

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969 //Current international law. Documents in 2 volumes. T.1. / Comp. Yu.M. Kolosov, E.S. Krivchikova. M., 2002.

African Charter of Human and Peoples' Rights 1981 //International Human Rights Acts: Collection of Documents / Comp. V.A. Kartashkin, E.A. Lukasheva. 2nd ed., add. M., 2002.

Official materials

Data from the European Court of Human Rights for 2009 // Human Rights. Prakika of the European Court of Human Rights. 2010. No. 2.

Arbitrage practice

On the application by courts of general jurisdiction of generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation: Resolution of the Plenum Supreme Court Russian Federation dated 10.10.2003 No. 5 // Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 2003. No. 12.

Kalashnikov v. the Russian Federation: Resolution of the European Court of Human Rights of July 15, 2002 // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 2002. 17 Oct., 19 Oct.

Vladimir Krivonosov v. Russia: Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of November 27. 2008 // Bulletin of the European Court of Human Rights. 2008. No. 12.

Monographs, textbooks, study guides, comments

Bessarabov V.G. European Court of Human Rights. M., 2004.

Beknazar-Yuzbashev T.B. Human rights and international law. M., 1996.

Berestnev Yu.Yu., Razumov S.A., Reidy E. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Codes. Article 3. Prohibition of torture. M., 2002.

David R. Basic legal systems of our time. M., 1988. 425 p.

Danilenko G.M. International protection of human rights. Introductory course: textbook. M., 2000.

Gavrilov V.V. The UN and human rights: mechanisms for the creation and implementation of normative acts. Vladivostok, 1998.

Kartashkin V.A. Human rights in international state law. M., 1995.

Kartashkin V.A. International mechanisms for the protection of human rights. How to file a complaint with international authorities. M., 2003.

Krylov S.B. History of the creation of the United Nations. 2nd ed., add. M., 1960.

Moskalenko K.A. International protection of human rights. M., 2001.

International law. Textbook for universities. Responsible editors prof. G.V. Ignatenko and prof. O.I. Tiunov. M: Publishing group NORM INFRA. M, 1999 584 p.

International law: Tutorial. 2nd ed., revised. and additional M.: Yurist, 2001. 416 p.

Peter Calvocoressi. Global politics after 1945. Book 1. Moscow, 2000.

Systematic history of international relations in two volumes / Edited by A.D. Bogaturova. Volume two. Events of 1945-2003. M.: Cultural Revolution, 2006. 720 p.

Saidov A.Kh. Universally recognized human rights. M., 2002.

Theory of Government and Rights. Textbook for law schools and faculties. Ed. V.M. Korelsky and V.D. Perevalova M.: Publishing group NORMA INFRA. M, 1998 570 p.

Utyashev M.M. Course of lectures on the history of political and legal doctrines. Ufa, 1999.

Khropanyuk V.N. Theory of Government and Rights. Tutorial. M.: Publishing house. 1997. 396 p.

Science articles

Bayring B. International obligations of Russia in the field of human rights protection: policy and practice // Constitutional law: Eastern European Review. 2001. No. 2.

The Russian Federation's reports on the situation with discrimination and an alternative report were presented at the UN NGO // http://www.sova-center.ru . Access date 10/02/2012.

Kartashkin V.A. Reform of convention bodies on human rights // International Lawyer. 2007.No. 2.

Kurdyukov D.G. The right to complain in the context of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950: abstract. dis...candidate of legal sciences. Kazan, 2001.

Moryakov D.A. International legal regulation of the prohibition and prevention of torture and the legal system of the Russian Federation: abstract. dis...candidate of law. Sci. Kazan, 2008.

1 Charter of the United Nations of June 26, 1945 // Current international law. Documents in 2 volumes. T.1. / Comp. Yu.M. Kolosov, E.S. Krivchikova. M., 2002.

2 Universal Declaration of Human Rights of December 10, 1948 // International Public Law: Coll. documents / Comp. K.A. Bekyashev, D.K. Bekyashev: In 2 volumes. T.1.M., 2006.

3 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. // International protection of human rights and freedoms. Collection of documents. M., 1990.

4 Charter of the United Nations of July 26, 1945 // International law in documents. M., 1982.

5 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. // International protection of human rights and freedoms. Collection of documents. M., 1990. P. 132.

7 International law. / Rep. ed. Yu.M. Kolosov, V.I. Kuznetsov. M., 1995. P. 35.

8 Vienna Convention on the Law of International Treaties, 1969 // Current international law. Documents in 2 volumes. T.1. / Comp. Yu.M. Kolosov, E.S. Krivchikova. M., 2002. P.190-215.

9 International law. / Rep. ed. Yu.M. Kolosov, V.I. Kuznetsov. M., 1995. P. 42.

10 Saidov A.Kh. Universally recognized human rights. M., 2002. P. 30.

11 Moskalenko K.A. International protection of human rights. M., 2001. From 60.

12 Berestnev Yu.Yu., Razumov S.A., Reidy E. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Codes. Article 3. Prohibition of torture. M., 2002.P 132.

13 Human Rights Commission. Report 45 session. UN. P.141.

14 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation. 2001. No. 2. P. 163.

15 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. // International protection of human rights and freedoms. Collection of documents. M., 1990.

16 Kartashkin V.A. Human rights in international state law. M., 1995. P. 121.

17 Ishchenko O.A., Ishchenko E.G. Problems of implementation of international law in Russian legislation // International public and private law. 2008. No. 3.

18 International law. Textbook for universities. Responsible editors prof. G.V. Ignatenko and prof. O.I. Tiunov. M: Publishing group NORM INFRA. M, 1999. P 584.

19 David R. Basic legal systems of our time. M., 1988.P 425.

20 European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1987 // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation. 1998. No. 36. S 4465.

21 Constitution of the Russian Federation 1993 (as amended). M., 2014.

22 General Assembly: Official reports. Thirty-second session. Doc.44/A/32/44. New York, 1997.

23 Kurdyukov D.G. The right to complain in the context of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950: abstract. diss...candidate of legal sciences. Kazan, 2001. P. 73.

24 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of November 4, 1950 // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation. 2001. N 2, C 163.

25 International law: Textbook. 2nd ed., revised. and additional M.: Yurist, 2001. С 416.

26 Utyashev M.M. A course of lectures on the history of political and legal doctrines. Ufa, 1999. From 36.x

27 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 // Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation. 2001. No. 2. Art. 163.

28 General Assembly: Official reports. Forty-sixth session. Doc.40/A/46/40. New York, 1991.

29 General Assembly: Official reports. Thirty-second session. Doc.44/A/32/44. New York, 1997.

30 International law. / Rep. ed. Yu.M. Kolosov, V.I. Kuznetsov. M., 1995.

31 Khropanyuk V.N. Theory of Government and Rights. Tutorial. M.: Publishing house. 1997. From 396.

32 Peter Calvocoressi. World politics after 1945. Book 1. Moscow, 2000

33 American Convention on the Rights of Man and Peoples of 1969 //International Acts on Human Rights: Collection of Documents / Comp. V.A. Kartashkin, E.A. Lukasheva. 2nd ed., add. M., 2002.

34 African Charter of Human and Peoples' Rights 1981 //International Human Rights Acts: Collection of Documents / Comp. V.A. Kartashkin, E.A. Lukasheva. 2nd ed., add. M., 2002

Other similar works that may interest you.vshm>
12684.		Human rights system: criminal procedural, international and humanitarian meaning	35.89 KB
	The international concept of human rights and its impact on Russian legislation 3. Human rights and the fight against crime 5. The objective point is characterized by the following aspects: human dignity, the value of a person in general, regardless of specific qualities and characteristics; personal dignity as the value of a particular individual in his possession of positive spiritual and physical qualities; dignity associated with belonging to a particular social group.
6828.		Basic rights of citizens to protect other rights and freedoms	6.59 KB
	These rights include: 1 judicial protection of rights and freedoms; 2 the right to competent justice so that the case is subject to jurisdiction; 3 the right to receive qualified legal assistance, including free legal assistance; 4 presumption of innocence The accused is innocent until proven otherwise; 5 right to humane justice No one can be convicted again for the same crime all evidence must be obtained in accordance with the law every convicted person has the right to pardon no one is obliged to testify...
18743.		School mediation as an effective tool in protecting children's rights	219.13 KB
	Recently, conflicts between children, teachers and students, parents and students have become more frequent at school. School is a part of society. What society is like, so is school. It is no coincidence that one of the ways to resolve school conflicts is through “arrows”.
17930.		The role of internal affairs bodies in protecting the rights, freedoms and interests of citizens	33.3 KB
	Rights and freedoms of man and citizen when carrying out operational investigative activities. Activities of internal affairs bodies to observe, protect and defend the electoral rights of Russian citizens. Internal affairs bodies in the implementation of the constitutional rights of minors in Russia and their interaction with local government bodies
17105.		RELATIONSHIP OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND CITIZEN RIGHTS	28.32 KB
	The theoretical and legal study of the relationship between human rights and civil rights is relevant against the background of the processes of globalization and integration taking place in the world, which contribute to the convergence of economic, legal and socio-cultural spaces. In law, there is a process of interpenetration of international and national law, which is most clearly manifested in the sphere of ensuring and regulating individual rights.
6814.		Features of socio-economic and cultural rights: 1) they are both rights and guarantees; 2) are specified in special legislation; 3) pursue general social goals. They constitute a special group of fundamental human and civil rights.	7.53 KB
	Basic principles of the legal status of man and citizen in the Russian Federation. Guarantees of human and civil rights and freedoms legal means ensuring the implementation of these rights and freedoms. Constitutional guarantees: The duty of the state to protect rights and freedoms; Self-defense of rights and freedoms; International protection of rights and freedoms; Compensation for harm; The irrevocability of rights and freedoms; Age. guarantees of rights and freedoms are those methods enshrined in K.
2413.		CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, FREEDOMS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF HUMAN AND CITIZEN. INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS AND UNIVERSAL MECHANISM FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN AND CITIZEN RIGHTS	16.73 KB
	Features of constitutional rights and freedoms: Constitutional rights and freedoms as well as responsibilities arise directly on the basis of the Constitution and not on the basis of specific legal relations. These freedoms and responsibilities are realized through legal relations regulated by other branches of law. According to the time of its formation: the rights and freedoms of the first generation were formulated in the process of bourgeois revolutions...
19548.		Ensuring human rights in the activities of internal affairs bodies	22.72 KB
	Rights of arrested persons during and after arrest under international law and the legislation of the Russian Federation Article 108 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation provides that detention is applied to persons suspected and accused of committing crimes for which punishment is provided in the form of imprisonment for a term of more than two years if it is impossible to apply another milder measure. 91 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. 108 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; if he is hiding, part 466 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; if the accused is undergoing an inpatient forensic psychiatric examination or there are...
1305.		International human rights law	3.13 MB
	Human rights as a branch of international law. European Court of Human Rights. The term human rights droits de lhomme first appears in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen in 1789. The relevance of the work is due to the fact that one of the issues of the individual’s position in society is the question of legal mechanisms for the protection of human rights and freedoms.
4176.		INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS	28.51 KB
	Mechanism for monitoring their compliance: the activities of non-conventional international bodies for the observance and protection of human rights (UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Commission on Human Rights, etc.)

Due to the fact that human rights are a value higher order and the fate of peace and security depends on the level of their protection and provision in a particular state, the international community has developed certain mechanisms for monitoring the observance of human rights. These mechanisms are put into action by international bodies and organizations.

UN Human Rights Council. The creation of the Council was justified by the fact that the UN Commission on Human Rights, in the opinion of UN members and experts, had to a certain extent exhausted itself and lost the properties of an effective body. In addition, the Commission was accused of excessive politicization. The UN Human Rights Council, in comparison with the Commission, has the highest status - it is a subsidiary body of the UN General Assembly. IN new council included 47 states that are elected for a period of three years on a geographical basis by a simple majority of votes at a meeting of the UN General Assembly. Ukraine is a member of the Council. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in his speech at the opening of the first session of the Human Rights Council on 19 June 2006, said: “I am pleased to say that world leaders have decided to integrate the promotion and protection of human rights into national policy and support further strengthening of human rights action throughout the United Nations system. The Council was created to bring human rights issues to their proper level within the system, and its members are elected directly by the General Assembly to work side by side with the Security Council and the Economic and Social Council."

UN Human Rights Committee Created on the basis of UN General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of December 16, 1966 in accordance with Art. 28 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In fact, the Committee is an independent international body, which consists of 18 independent experts acting in their personal capacity. Members of the Committee are elected from citizens of the states parties to the Covenant for a period of 4 years and can be re-elected. The seat of the Committee is Geneva (Switzerland).

The Committee has the power to monitor compliance with the provisions of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by considering:

1) periodic reports of state parties on the measures they have taken to implement the provisions of the Covenant;

2) complaints from member states against each other about violations of the provisions of the Covenant;

3) complaints from individuals regarding violations by the state party of the rights enshrined in the Covenant.

An individual's complaint must concern only the fact of a violation of the rights enshrined in the Covenant and cannot be anonymous. In addition, the person filing the complaint must exhaust all domestic remedies for the violated right or prove that the consideration of her case is being unreasonably delayed. Having found the complaint admissible and accepted it for consideration, the Committee requests the State Party named in the complaint to provide, within six months, an explanation on the merits of the issue and indicate the measures that will be taken at the national level to correct the situation. The state and the person who filed the complaint are on equal terms before the Committee.

Committee against Torture based on the 39th session of the UN General Assembly in accordance with Art. 17 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 1984. The Committee consists of 10 experts.

The committee examines the reports; conducts confidential investigations when it believes the facts are reasonable; carries out certain functions to resolve disputes between participating states; appoints a conciliation commission; reviews individual messages.

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) created in 1959 as the main element of the control mechanism for compliance with the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. The headquarters of the Court is located in Strasbourg (France).

At first, three bodies took part in the monitoring mechanism for compliance with the provisions of the 1950 Convention: the European Commission of Human Rights, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights. Considering that such a mechanism is quite cumbersome and complex, Protocol No. 11 to the 1950 Convention was opened for signature in 1994, which provided for significant structural reforms. In November 1998, Protocol No. 11 came into force, so it is advisable to consider a new operating procedure for this mechanism.

Currently, the European Court of Human Rights is the only body monitoring compliance by member states with the provisions of the 1950 Convention. The Court operates on a permanent basis and consists of judges, the number of which corresponds to the number of states party to the 1950 Convention. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe from each state - The participant is selected by one judge. Judges sit in the Court in personal status.

Each State Party may refer to the Court a complaint about any alleged violation of the provisions of the 1950 Convention or its Protocols by another Party.

The Court may also receive applications from any person, non-governmental organization or group of persons alleging a violation by one of the participating States of the rights enshrined in the Convention or its protocols. In doing so, applicants must adhere to certain procedural requirements. The participating States undertake not to interfere in any way with the exercise of this right.

The Court hears cases brought before it in committees of three judges, chambers of seven judges, and a Grand Chamber of 17 judges.

Given the urgent need to amend certain provisions of the Convention in order to improve the effectiveness of its supervisory system in the long term, mainly due to the increased workload on the European Court of Human Rights and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Protocol No. 14 amending the supervisory mechanism of the Convention was signed. This protocol increases the term of office of judges from 1 to 9 years, and also introduces an additional criterion allowing the European Court to declare a complaint inadmissible depending on the nature of the harm caused to the applicant. The mechanism for selecting clearly unacceptable complaints is also being improved. The purpose of the protocol is to increase the effectiveness of the work of the ECHR in the context of a sharp increase in complaints received here in connection with the accession of new states to the Council of Europe.

Protocol No. 14 to the 1950 Convention also introduces the following major procedural changes: consideration by a single judge of clearly inadmissible applications; wider competence to examine applications, which are already the subject of established case-law of the European Court, by committees of three judges instead of chambers of seven judges.

The Court, at the request of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, can make advisory opinions on questions of law concerning the interpretation of the 1950 Convention and its protocols.

According to Art. 19 of the Final and Transitional Provisions, the Protocol shall enter into force on the first day of the month following the expiration of three months from the date on which all High Contracting Parties that have signed the Convention express their consent to be bound by Protocol No. 14 and deposit their instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval for storage by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. On January 15, 2010, Russia was the last of the 47 countries of the Council of Europe to ratify Protocol No. 14.

The OSCE also has certain mechanisms for monitoring compliance with human rights. Thus, any OSCE member state can ask another member of the organization to provide information on a specific case of human rights violation. The response to such a request must be sent no later than 10 days.

Commissions of OSCE experts may be created at the request of a member state of the organization to consider and possibly assist in solving human rights problems on its territory.

The OSCE Governing Council (formerly the Committee of Senior Officials), consisting of foreign ministers, is involved in resolving controversial issues related to human rights.

In 1992, the post of High Commissioner on National Minorities of the OSCE was established. The High Commissioner does not act as an ombudsman who defends the rights of national minorities and does not investigate individual cases of human rights violations. Its functions include identifying situations of inter-ethnic tension that may pose a threat to peace, security or relations between OSCE participating States, and facilitating their prompt resolution.

On December 20, 1993, at its 48th session, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 48/141 on the establishment of the post of High Commissioner for Human Rights based on the decision of the World Conference on Human Rights (Vienna, 1993). According to this resolution, the High Commissioner for Human Rights is appointed Secretary General The UN is its deputy. He has the status of "UN official" and bears "under the direction and auspices of the Secretary-General, primary responsibility for the activities of the United Nations in the field of human rights." In fact, the High Commissioner for Human Rights provides general management of the activities of the UN Center for Human Rights, a structural unit of the UN Secretariat.

On July 28, 2008, the General Assembly, without a vote, approved the proposal of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to appoint Navanethem Pillay ( South Africa) the new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. her four-year term began on September 1, 2008.

From July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2008, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour (Canada). her predecessor, Sergio Vieira de Mello (Brazil), died in action official duties as head of the UN mission in Iraq as a result of the bombing of the UN office in Baghdad on August 19, 2003.

The rules, expressed in the form of generally accepted principles and norms of international human rights law, can be considered as certain international legal standards. States cannot infringe on these rights and freedoms. They are obliged to create a legal, social and political regime that would oblige and guarantee the rights and freedoms granted to a person.
Ensuring the obligations undertaken by states in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms is achieved through domestic and international legal measures, which is a mechanism for monitoring the observance of human rights and freedoms.

Domestic and international legal measures in the field of protection of human rights and freedoms Domestic measures to ensure human rights obligations primarily include the fundamental human rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Laws of the Russian Federation.

State legislation must accept the requirements of international legal norms and adapt to it. The “translation” of the requirements of an international legal norm into the requirements of national law is called the implementation of international law. The implementation of these norms in the field of human rights is closely related to the constitutional regulation of the state’s activities to ensure and implement these rights. It is the constitution, first of all, that determines the foundations of the relationship between the individual and the state.
The Constitution of the Russian Federation reflects many generally recognized human rights and freedoms enshrined in international law, as we have already discussed above.
International legal measures to ensure human rights obligations primarily include:
- international procedures are the most common way to enforce human rights obligations. It is associated with a variety of measures and actions of states. This is, first of all: consideration by the competent bodies provided for by international treaties (UN, Human Rights Committee, ILO1) relating to human rights, reports of states on the fulfillment of their obligations, consideration by these bodies of complaints, petitions, appeals from individuals, groups for violation of their rights; study and investigation of situations concerning human rights violations;

international control - can be provided for by an international treaty to check how the state fulfills its obligations. In the event of a violation of these obligations, the state is pointed out such a violation, and it is obliged to take measures to eliminate them;
international programs to promote the rights of certain categories individuals- can be adopted within the framework of international organizations and are aimed at improving the situation of certain categories of citizens. For example: UN Development Program for the Progress of Working Women - 1968, World Declaration on the Survival, Protection and Development of Children, Program of Action for Refugee Issues (within the CIS);
the activities of international officials in the field of human rights protection (for example, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights);
international criminal liability of individuals for gross violations of human rights norms - provided for in accordance with the Agreement between the governments of the USSR, USA, Great Britain and France on the prosecution and punishment of major war criminals, concluded on August 8, 1945. On the basis of the Agreement, the International Military Tribunal for trials of war criminals. The UN Security Council established the International Military Tribunal on 22 February 1993 to prosecute those responsible for serious violations.

To carry out domestic measures - to ensure guarantees of state protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens, their observance and respect by state bodies, local governments and officials, the Constitution of Russia of 1993 established the institution of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, whose status is regulated by the Federal Constitutional Law “On Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation."

International legal control over human rights. Monitoring the observance of human rights. European human rights system

More on the topic Human Rights Monitoring Mechanism:

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

International legal control over human rights. Monitoring the observance of human rights. European human rights system

More on the topic Human Rights Monitoring Mechanism:

What else to read

THE LAST NOTES

Categories