I was at one of the very first meetings where this idea was proposed some years ago - it is exciting to see it moving forward with more groups adopting it. The initiative arose initially from within the Green Party in England and Wales, modelled on the Index of Human Rights which was published in the Observer newspaper in the mid 1990s. It has so far gained support from six small Human Rights NGOs.
I am now using this Blog to see if there is anyone out there able to take it forward in their organisation??
Synopsis
Regrettably, abuses of human rights takes place on a routine basis in many regimes around the world, including those that like to describe themselves as "democratic". The United Nations and some NGOs publish reports of these activities, but their details are available only to scholars and specialists. This enables abuses to continue, and allows political leaders to describe certain states as "evil", when there may be other states with whom they have good relations who have worse records.
By ranking all states according to their performance, an Index of Human Rights published annually by the UN would exert a steady upward pressure on governments' human rights performance. Any government concerned at its standing in this UN Index of Human Rights will be offered assistance in improving their performance by the UN Human Rights Council. A specified number of governments with the poorest record of human rights as measured on this Index could have their performance subject to legal investigation in a competent international court.
The full background to this proposal can be found here: http://www.greenhealth.org.uk/Index%20of%20Governance.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I have been corresonding with David Drew MP and others on this issue over the last year - here is one letter:
Thanks for your reply: I hope this email will answer your point and show why I think there is much merit in the proposal.
I take it that we can agree to take as a starting point that the Iraq adventure has been a massive failure. Violent overthrow of a violent dictator has led to more violence. We have learned that dictators, for all their ugliness, do have a way of holding a country together. When they are removed, there is a tendency for a kind of anarchic rebound to occur. This happened in Portugal in a relatively benign form, it happened in a malignant way in Yugoslavia, and is happenning in a very severe way right now in Iraq.
This raises the question: What then can we do about dictators, if military force is out of bounds?
To which we can give the Kerryman's answer: "I wouldn't start from here". We have instead to adopt a preventive approach. Let us identify regimes who are in the early stages of a course that leads to Human Rights (HR) abuses, and divert them from that course. There are a plethora of measuring rods that can be used accurately to identify HR abuses. Those whose human rights performance are slipping year on year merit closer attention. The very act of publishing a ranked table of human rights performance will have a salutary effect on behaviour in and of itself. This is, after all, one of the reasons for the Government to have league tables of schools and hospitals.
All of this is very much in line with the UN Charter, as the UN project is of course predicated on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Responsibility to Protect adopted at the 2005 Summit incorporated this even further into the heart of the UN project. The Index proposal fills a gap at the heart of the R2P project which has a lack of instruments to steer regimes away from the course that leads to genocide.
As you rightly say, a ruler can be taken to the International Criminal Court for human rights abuses. What is different in the matter of the Index is that it is not political caprice that leads to someone being investigated by the lawyers, but objective HR performance. When this has happened once or twice, we may find those who are near the bottom of the pile clamouring to learn how to improve their standing in the Index.
I hope that this has given you sufficient background for you to put this question to the Foreign Secretary: Does the Foreign Secretary agree that in future, rather than using military force against dictators who abuse their citizens, it would be better if the international community, acting legally through the UN, should systematically identify regimes that are on a course to become dictatorial and abusive, and to apply effective instruments to steer them towards democracy and human rights?
Post a Comment