Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights

Last updated

The 1997 Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights build on the 1987 Limburg Principles on the Implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and identify the legal implications of acts and omissions which are violations of economic, social and cultural rights. [1] The guidelines were adopted by a group of over thirty experts who convened from 22–26 January 1997 in Maastricht on the occasion of the Limburg Principles' 10th anniversary. [2] Three years later, the Maastricht Guidelines along with the Limburg Principles were reissued as UN document E/C.12/2000/13 by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). [3]

Contents

Background

In 1997, the International Commission of Jurists, the Urban Morgan Institute for Human Rights, [4] and the Centre for Human Rights of the Faculty of Law of Maastricht University assembled for another workshop on the 10th anniversary of the Limburg Principles attempting to determine the possibility of using a "violations approach" to help monitor the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). [5] The assembly had three objectives: to have a better understanding of the concept of economic, social and cultural rights violations; to compile and classify types of violations of these rights; and to develop a set of guidelines which would help institutions in monitoring economic, social and cultural rights. [5]

Content

In total, 32 guidelines categorised under five sections make up the Maastricht Guidelines. These guidelines were agreed upon unanimously by the participants of the workshop, and were understood to reflect the development of international law since 1986. [2] Section 1 emphasises the significance of economic, social and cultural rights; Section 2 examines obligations owed by states in their pursuit of realising economic, social and cultural rights, and lists particular acts and omissions which amount to violations; Section 3 declares that any violations are attributable to the state and must ensure that mechanisms to remedy violations are available to victims; Section 4 devotes its attention to victims of violations as their rights were not respected, protected and fulfilled, contrary to ICESCR; and Section 5 simply contains remedies and other possible responses to violations of rights. [2]

Section 1 - The significance of economic, social and cultural rights

This section and the five guidelines contained within it preface the rest of the guidelines found in the instrument by emphasising the growing importance of economic, social and cultural rights in the world. Guideline 1 notes that the gap between the rich and the poor had doubled in the previous three decades prior to this instrument's conception, and that such a disparity makes economic, social and cultural rights deceptive and difficult to obtain. [6] Guideline 2 comments on the growing trend of reliance on the free market principle to resolve problems of human welfare, and that now more than ever, states must fulfil their obligations of protecting and promoting economic, social and cultural rights. [7] Guideline 3 refers to examples of significant legal development regarding economic, social and cultural rights in Europe and in the Americas, and the optional protocols for both ICESCR and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) which allow for individual and collective complaints. [7] Guideline 4 reaffirms that "all human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated" as proclaimed under the fifth declaration of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action [8] and would therefore mean that states are as responsible for economic, social and cultural rights as they are for civil and political rights. [9] [2] Guideline 5 states that although the considerations within the Guidelines primarily relate to ICESCR and are built upon the Limburg Principles, they are still relevant in "the interpretation and application of other norms of international and domestic law in the field of economic, social and cultural rights." [10]

Section 2 - The meaning of violations of economic, social and cultural rights

Section 2 not only examines obligations owed by states in their pursuit of realising economic, social and cultural rights, and lists violations; it also gives significance to a range of issues which relate to violations of economic, social and cultural rights, and places great importance to obligations which arise from ICESCR. Guideline 6 imposes obligations on states to respect, protect and fulfil economic, social and cultural rights. It then uses examples such as the right to housing, the right to health, and the right to work, to demonstrate how states may comply with those obligations and how they can also violate those obligations. [11] [12] Guideline 7 states that the duties to respect, protect and fulfil inherently contain the obligations of conduct and of result. Using the right to health as an example to show the nature of both obligations and how equal all human rights are. [13] Guideline 8 allows states a 'margin of discretion' in implementing respective obligations. This legal doctrine takes into account cultural, religious, and historical differences between states who have the same obligations, but does not allow states to go below the 'universal minimum standard' of economic, social and cultural rights. [14] [12] Guidelines 9 and 10 determine that despite the relative wealth of a country, minimum core obligations are binding on all states to satisfy a minimum standard for each right in ICESCR. Guideline 10 expands upon this by stating that realisation of economic, social and cultural rights may depend on the availability of financial and material resources, but scarcity of resources does not relieve states of minimum obligations to implement such rights. [2] [15] Guideline 11 defines the nature of any human rights violation; and states that violations of economic, social and cultural rights can occur in various ways. It also outlines that the grounds of discrimination, both de jure and de facto, where they affect the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights, constitute a violation of ICESCR. [16] Guideline 12 states that rights relating to women in ICESCR are compatible with the underlying principles of CEDAW, and is understood to require the elimination of discrimination arising from social and cultural disadvantages. [2] Guideline 13 attempts to help distinguish the line between inability and unwillingness, and puts the burden of proof on the state to prove that it was unable to carry out its obligations for reasons beyond its control. Guideline 14 contains acts which constitute a violation of economic, social and cultural rights; these include acts committed by non-state actors which the state has some control over. [2] Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines indicate that although the acts listed in Guideline 14 are generic, they are premised by the fact that all human rights have positive and negative obligations. [17] Guideline 15 lists ten violations which are worded generally to be made applicable in a broad range of situations and jurisdictions. All ten are positive obligations phrased in a negative manner as to qualify the omission of them as a violation of a state's duty in undertaking the realisation of economic, social and cultural rights. [2]

Section 3 - Responsibility for violations

Section 3 assigns responsibility to states for violations which are set out under Section 2 of the Maastricht Guidelines. Guideline 16 establishes that violations occurring within a state's jurisdiction is imputable to that state, and that the state must have mechanisms in place to remedy and investigate violations, among other things. [2] Guideline 17 acknowledges the possibility of states not being in effective control of territories, and therefore attributing the violation of economic, social and cultural rights to them would be seen as unfair; to get around this, Guideline 17 imposes the obligations found in Section 2 to the dominating power who has control over the territory. [18] Guideline 18 emphasises that economic, social and cultural rights can also be violated by entities other than states; with which inaction of a state in regulating their conduct will attribute the responsibility for the violation to the state. [2] Guideline 19 asserts that the obligation of states does not stop within their jurisdiction, but also extends to their participation in international organisations. Another obligation is imposed by Guideline 19 on states to ensure that policies and activities of international organisations do not commit any violations. [19]

Section 4 - Victims of violations

Section 4 as a whole focuses on the victims as they are important in the interest to ensure that rights are respected, protected and fulfilled. [20] Guideline 20 helps identify which groups and individuals are most vulnerable to suffer economic, social and cultural rights violations; in doing so, states can focus their attention to these groups which are most at risk. [21] Guideline 21 relates directly to the obligations to respect and protect a person's economic, social and cultural rights; as punishing victims for their status which others have caused undermines their rights under ICESCR. [21]

Section 5 - Remedies and other responses to violations

Section 5 contains remedies and other appropriate responses to violations of rights. Guideline 22 provides that economic, social and cultural rights are justiciable, and that victims of these rights should have access to remedies in the domestic and international levels. [2] Guideline 23 entitles victims to adequate remedies such as restitution, compensation, and rehabilitation. [2] Guideline 24 states that common law courts should be careful in their judgements relating to violations of economic, social and cultural rights as not to sanction a violation of their respective state's international obligation. [22] Guideline 25 encourages national institutions such as human rights commissions to address violations of economic, social and cultural rights as equally as they do violations of civil and political rights. [2] Guideline 26 encourages states to incorporate international instruments into their legal system to enhance the scope and effectiveness of economic, social and cultural rights, as well as remedies for victims of violations. [2] Guideline 27 urges states to develop measures which would ensure that no violators have any immunity from liability in breaching economic, social and cultural rights. [2] Guideline 28 affirms a recommendation by the International Commission of Jurists in the Bangalore Declaration and Plan of Action 1995 [23] stating; [2]

In order to achieve effective judicial and other remedies for victims ... the legal community generally should pay far greater attention to these violations in the exercise of their professions...

Guideline 29 recommends the former United Nations Commission on Human Rights (now the United Nations Human Rights Council) to appoint special rapporteurs to strengthen mechanisms with respect to preventing and monitoring, among other things, violations of economic, social and cultural rights. [2] Guideline 30 encourages states and international bodies to "actively pursue the adoption of new standards..." [2] in relation to economic, social and cultural rights, as the state's obligations would be clearer if they adopted their own standards. [24] Guideline 31 encourages the adoption of optional protocols for ICESCR, CEDAW, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) to better show the equality of all human rights. [25] Guideline 32 encourages the active monitoring and documenting of violations of economic, social and cultural rights by all relevant actors in order to help everyone fully enjoy such rights. [18]

Application and legacy

The Maastricht Guidelines are used in the Handbook for National Human Rights Institutions which is a document released by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to help promote the importance of economic, social and cultural rights. [26] Academics interpret domestic legislation which provide for economic, social and cultural rights as complying with the Maastricht Guidelines in order to fully realise these class of rights; an example of this is the commentary on the South African Constitution with regards to socio-economic rights. [27]

Optional protocols

The Optional Protocols for ICESCR, CEDAW, and UNCRC have all been developed and adopted by a majority of states since 1997. These optional protocols are in line with Guidelines 3 and 31, where both guidelines intertwine to encourage the adoption of optional protocols which not only allow for individual and collective complaints, but also the equality and importance of all rights.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human rights</span> Fundamental rights belonging to all humans

Human rights are moral principles, or norms, for certain standards of human behaviour and are regularly protected as substantive rights in substantive law, municipal and international law. They are commonly understood as inalienable, fundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being" and which are "inherent in all human beings", regardless of their age, ethnic origin, location, language, religion, ethnicity, or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense of being universal, and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone. They are regarded as requiring empathy and the rule of law, and imposing an obligation on persons to respect the human rights of others; it is generally considered that they should not be taken away except as a result of due process based on specific circumstances.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights</span> Covenant adopted in 1966 by United Nations General Assembly resolution

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) is a multilateral treaty adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (GA) on 16 December 1966 through GA. Resolution 2200A (XXI), and came into force on 3 January 1976. It commits its parties to work toward the granting of economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR) to all individuals including those living in Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories. The rights include labour rights, the right to health, the right to education, and the right to an adequate standard of living. As of February 2024, the Covenant has 172 parties. A further four countries, including the United States, have signed but not ratified the Covenant.

Economic, social and cultural rights (ESCR) are socio-economic human rights, such as the right to education, right to housing, right to an adequate standard of living, right to health, victims' rights and the right to science and culture. Economic, social and cultural rights are recognised and protected in international and regional human rights instruments. Member states have a legal obligation to respect, protect and fulfil economic, social and cultural rights and are expected to take "progressive action" towards their fulfilment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Bill of Human Rights</span> UN General Assembly resolution

The International Bill of Human Rights was the name given to UN General Assembly Resolution 217 (III) and two international treaties established by the United Nations. It consists of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with its two Optional Protocols and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The two covenants entered into force in 1976, after a sufficient number of countries had ratified them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Right to health</span> Human right towards individual health

The right to health is the economic, social, and cultural right to a universal minimum standard of health to which all individuals are entitled. The concept of a right to health has been enumerated in international agreements which include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. There is debate on the interpretation and application of the right to health due to considerations such as how health is defined, what minimum entitlements are encompassed in a right to health, and which institutions are responsible for ensuring a right to health.

<i>Human Rights Quarterly</i> Academic journal

Human Rights Quarterly (HRQ) is a quarterly academic journal founded by Richard Pierre Claude in 1982 covering human rights. The journal is intended for scholars and policymakers and follows recent developments from both governments and non-governmental organizations. It includes research in policy analysis, book reviews, and philosophical essays. The journal is published by the Johns Hopkins University Press and the editor-in-chief is Bert B. Lockwood, Jr..

The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) is a United Nations treaty body entrusted with overseeing the implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). It is composed of 18 experts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Right to food</span> Human right

The right to food, and its variations, is a human right protecting the right of people to feed themselves in dignity, implying that sufficient food is available, that people have the means to access it, and that it adequately meets the individual's dietary needs. The right to food protects the right of all human beings to be free from hunger, food insecurity, and malnutrition. The right to food implies that governments only have an obligation to hand out enough free food to starving recipients to ensure subsistence, it does not imply a universal right to be fed. Also, if people are deprived of access to food for reasons beyond their control, for example, because they are in detention, in times of war or after natural disasters, the right requires the government to provide food directly.

Decree 1775 was signed into Brazilian law by President Fernando Henrique Cardoso on January 8, 1996. The decree changed the steps FUNAI was required to follow to demarcate indigenous lands, effectively making the process more complicated and allowing for more interference from commercial interests. Individuals or companies were allowed from the beginning of the demarcation process until 90 days after FUNAI issued their report to submit an appeal showing that the contested lands do not meet the qualifications of indigenous lands as stated in the constitution. The decree also placed the final decision in the hands of the Minister of Justice, which left the fate of indigenous lands vulnerable to various political ideologies. The government claimed that allowing people to contest indigenous lands during the demarcation process would prevent any future challenges of completed lands on the basis of unconstitutionality. The decree was widely contested as a violation of indigenous rights, earning the nickname of the "Genocide Decree," due to the power it gave to commercial interests to exploit Indian lands. By April 1996, FUNAI had received over 500 appeals for over 40 indigenous territories that were in the process of being demarcated. FUNAI followed procedure and submitted its official opinion to the Ministry of Justice, rejecting the appeals that were brought against the indigenous lands. Justice Nelson Jobim sided with FUNAI on all except eight territories, ordering further investigation.

The right to development is a human right that recognizes every human right for constant improvement of well-being. It was recognized by the United Nation as an international human right in 1986.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights</span> Complaints mechanism in international law

The Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is an international treaty establishing complaint and inquiry mechanisms for the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 2008, and opened for signature on 24 September 2009. As of February 2024, the Protocol has 46 signatories and 29 state parties. It entered into force on 5 May 2013.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Right to housing</span> Economic, social and cultural right

The right to housing is the economic, social and cultural right to adequate housing and shelter. It is recognized in some national constitutions and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The right to housing is regarded as a freestanding right in the International human rights law which was clearly in the 1991 General Comment on Adequate Housing by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The aspect of the right to housing under ICESCR include: availability of services, infrastructure, material and facilities; legal security of tenure; habitability; accessibility; affordability; location and cultural adequacy.

Rights-based approach to development is promoted by many development agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to achieve a positive transformation of power relations among the various development actors. This practice blurs the distinction between human rights and economic development. There are two stakeholder groups in rights-based development—the rights holders and the duty bearers. Rights-based approaches aim at strengthening the capacity of duty bearers and empower the rights holders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 1289</span> United Nations resolution adopted in 2000

United Nations Security Council resolution 1289, adopted unanimously on 7 February 2000, after recalling resolutions 1171 (1998), 1181 (1998), 1231 (1999), 1260 (1999), 1265 (1999) and 1270 (1999) on the situation in Sierra Leone, the Council extended the mandate of the United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) for a period of six months and expanded its military component.

The Voluntary Guidelines to support the Progressive Realization of the Right to Adequate Food in the Context of National Food Security, also known as the Right to Food Guidelines, is a document adopted by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 2004, with the aim of guiding states to implement the right to food. It is not legally binding, but directed to states' obligations to the right to food under international law. In specific, it is directed towards States Parties to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and to States that still have to ratify it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination</span> 1969 United Nations human rights instrument

The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is a United Nations convention. A third-generation human rights instrument, the Convention commits its members to the elimination of racial discrimination and the promotion of understanding among all races. The Convention also requires its parties to criminalize hate speech and criminalize membership in racist organizations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human rights and development</span>

Development is a human right that belongs to everyone, individually and collectively. Everyone is “entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social, cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realized,” states the groundbreaking UN Declaration on the Right to Development, proclaimed in 1986.

The right to family life is the right of all individuals to have their established family life respected, and to have and maintain family relationships. This right is recognised in a variety of international human rights instruments, including Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 23 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">UN General Assembly Resolution 60/147</span> United Nations resolution adopted in 2005

UN General Assembly Resolution 60/147, the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, is a United Nations Resolution about the rights of victims of international crimes. It was adopted by the General Assembly on 16 December 2005 in its 60th session. According to the preamble, the purpose of the Resolution is to assist victims and their representatives to remedial relief and to guide and encourage States in the implementation of public policies on reparations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Extraterritorial Obligations</span> Extraterritorial Obligations (ETOs)

Extraterritorial Obligations (ETOs) are obligations in relation to the acts and omissions of a state, within or beyond its territory, that have effects on the enjoyment of human rights outside of that state's territory.

References

  1. ↑ Leckie, Scott; Gallanger, Anne (2006). Economic, social and cultural rights: a legal resource guide. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. xv–xvi. ISBN   978-0-8122-3916-4.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 "Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Maastricht". Human Rights Library University of Minnesota
  3. ↑ United Nations Economic and Social Council Session 24 Agenda item Day of General Discussion Organized in Cooperation with the World Iintellectual Property Organization (WIPO)E/C.12/2000/13 2 October 2000. Retrieved 5 September 2017.
  4. ↑ "Urban Morgan Institute of Human Rights | UC College of Law". www.law.uc.edu. Retrieved 2017-10-15.
  5. 1 2 Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 708. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  6. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 709. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  7. 1 2 Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 710. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  8. ↑ "OHCHR - Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action". www.ohchr.org. Retrieved 2017-05-10.
  9. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 711–712. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  10. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 712. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  11. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 714–715. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  12. 1 2 Heyns, Christof; Brand, Danie (1998). "Introduction to socio-economic rights in the South African Constitution". Law, Democracy & Development. 2 (2): 158.
  13. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 715. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  14. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 716. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  15. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 717. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  16. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 718. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  17. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 720. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  18. 1 2 Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 724. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  19. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 724–725. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  20. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 725. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  21. 1 2 Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 726. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  22. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 727. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  23. ↑ "Bangalore Declaration and Plan of Action | ICJ". www.icj.org. 1995-10-25. Retrieved 2017-10-15.
  24. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 728. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  25. ↑ Dankwa, Victor; Flinterman, Cees; Leckie, Scott (August 1998). "Commentary on the Maastricht Guidelines". Human Rights Quarterly. 20 (3): 729. doi:10.1353/hrq.1998.0028. JSTOR   762784.
  26. ↑ Economic, social and cultural rights : handbook for national human rights institutions. United Nations. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. New York: United Nations. 2005. ISBN   9211541638. OCLC   62325557.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  27. ↑ Heyns, Christof; Brand, Danie (1998). "Introduction to socio-economic rights in the South African Constitution". Law, Democracy & Development. 2 (2): 158 and 160.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.