Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women

Last updated

OP-CEDAW
Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
Signed6 October 1999 [1]
LocationNew York [1]
Effective22 December 2000 [2]
Condition10 ratifications [3]
Signatories80 [1]
Parties115 [1]
Depositary UN Secretary-General [4]
LanguagesArabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, and Spanish [5]

The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (OP-CEDAW) is an international treaty which establishes complaint and inquiry mechanisms for the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Parties to the Protocol allow the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to hear complaints from individuals or inquire into "grave or systematic violations" of the convention. The Protocol has led to a number of decisions against member states on issues such as domestic violence, parental leave and forced sterilization, as well as an investigation into the systematic killing of women in the Mexican city of Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua.

Contents

The Protocol was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 6 October 1999, and in force from 22 December 2000. As of October 2023, the Protocol has 80 signatories and 115 parties. [1]

Genesis

In 1979, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). [6] The Convention outlawed discrimination against women, [7] but did not include any mechanism by which this prohibition could be legally enforced. [8]

An individual complaints mechanism was suggested during the original drafting of CEDAW, but was rejected at the time. [9] Fifteen years later, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights suggested that new procedures were needed to implement the convention, and suggested a "right of petition". [10] An independent expert group produced a draft in 1994, [11] containing a complaint procedure and an inquiry procedure, and this was adopted for further study by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in early 1995. [12] The idea of an Optional Protocol was further endorsed by the Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995, which called for "the elaboration (of) a draft optional protocol to the Women's Convention that could enter into force as soon as possible." [13]

In March 1996 the Commission on the Status of Women established an open-ended working group to produce a formal draft. [13] This reported back after three years of deliberation in early 1999. The Optional Protocol was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 6 October 1999. [14]

Summary

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women outlaws discrimination on the basis of gender, and obliges its parties to repeal discriminatory laws and guarantee equality in the fields of health, employment, and education. [13] The Optional Protocol is a subsidiary agreement to the convention. It does not establish any new rights, but rather allows the rights guaranteed in the convention to be enforced. [15]

Articles 1–7 create an individual complaints mechanism similar to those of the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Article 14 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Parties agree to recognise the competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to consider complaints "by or on behalf of" individuals or groups who claim their rights under the Convention have been violated. [16] If a complaint is submitted on behalf of a victim, then this requires their consent, unless the submitter can justify acting without it. [17] What constitutes "justification" in such a case is up to the committee. [18] The ability for complaints to be submitted on behalf of victims is seen as vital in allowing NGOs such as women's organizations and human rights groups to use the Protocol to enforce the convention. [13]

Complainants must have exhausted all domestic remedies, and anonymous complaints and complaints referring to events which occurred before the country concerned joined the Optional Protocol are not permitted. [19] The committee can request information from and make recommendations to a party, [20] though these are not binding. [21]

Articles 8–10 create an inquiry mechanism. Parties may permit the committee to investigate, report on and make recommendations on "grave or systematic violations" of the convention. [22] The Committee may invite the relevant party to respond and inform it of any measures taken as a result of such an inquiry, either directly or through the normal reporting process under the convention. [23] Parties may opt out of this obligation on signature or ratification, [24] but only Bangladesh, Belize, Colombia, Cuba and Tajikistan have done so. [1]

Article 11 requires parties to ensure that those complaining under the Optional Protocol are not subjected to ill-treatment or intimidation. [25]

Article 13 requires parties to inform their citizens about the convention, the Optional Protocol, and the rulings of the committee, so as to facilitate complaints. [26]

Articles 12 and 14 govern the procedure [27] and reporting [28] of the Committee in handling complaints.

Articles 15–21 govern ratification, entry into force, and amendment of the Optional Protocol.

Reservations and membership

Global participation in OP-CEDAW .mw-parser-output .legend{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}.mw-parser-output .legend-color{display:inline-block;min-width:1.25em;height:1.25em;line-height:1.25;margin:1px 0;text-align:center;border:1px solid black;background-color:transparent;color:black}.mw-parser-output .legend-text{} Signed and ratified Acceded or succeeded Signed and ratified, but does not recognise competence for Articles 8 and 9 Only signed, not ratified Not signed OP-CEDAW-members.svg
Global participation in OP-CEDAW
  Signed and ratified
  Acceded or succeeded
  Signed and ratified, but does not recognise competence for Articles 8 and 9
  Only signed, not ratified
  Not signed
Helena Dalli submitting Malta's instrument of accession to OP-CEDAW at the UN Headquarters in March 2019 Ratification of the (Optional) Protocol to CEDAW (March 2019).jpg
Helena Dalli submitting Malta's instrument of accession to OP-CEDAW at the UN Headquarters in March 2019

A number of parties have made reservations and interpretative declarations to their application of the Protocol. Bangladesh, Belize and Colombia have exercised their right under Article 10 of the Protocol not to recognise the jurisdiction of the committee to investigate "grave or systematic violations" of the convention. [1] Colombia declares that neither the Protocol nor the committee can require it to decriminalise "offences against life or personal integrity". [1]

Not every state which is a party to CEDAW is a party to the Protocol, and several major states still remain outside the Protocol. The United States has not become a signatory because it has not yet ratified CEDAW. [29] Japan does not participate in any of the individual communications mechanisms for human rights treaties, but is currently considering joining while observing how these procedures are functioning. [30] China is currently "studying the problem of accession to the Optional Protocol". [31]

Individual complaints

The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women has considered eleven complaints against seven countries since the Optional Protocol came into force, [32] on subjects such as domestic violence, division of property, forced sterilization and parental leave. Six complaints were rejected for lack of jurisdiction or because the complainants had not exhausted all domestic remedies. The other five decisions are summarised below:

In 2005, in the case of A.T. v. Hungary, [33] the Committee ruled that Hungary had violated numerous articles of the convention by failing to adequately protect women against domestic violence. It recommended that the complainant be immediately protected from her abusive former partner, and that Hungary improve its handling of domestic violence cases and immediately adopt the committee's previous recommendation for a law allowing protection and exclusion orders. [33] The recommendations were implemented by the time of Hungary's sixth periodic report to the Committee in 2006. [34]

In 2006, in the case of Dung Thi Thuy Nguyen v. The Netherlands, [35] the Committee expressed concerns about aspects of parental leave provisions in The Netherlands. It recommended the Dutch government collect further information on the number of women combining part-time salaried employment with self-employment, and review the law if this revealed that a significant number of women were disadvantaged. [35]

In 2006, in the case of A.S. vs Hungary, [36] the Committee ruled that the forced sterilization of a Romani woman in Hungary violated the convention. It recommended compensating the complainant for the breach of her rights, a full review of legislation surrounding informed consent in cases of sterilisation to ensure it complied with international human rights standards, and ongoing monitoring of Hungarian medical facilities to ensure that any changes were put into practice. [36]

In 2007, in the cases of Şahide Goekce (deceased) v. Austria [37] and Fatma Yildirim (deceased) v. Austria, [38] the Committee ruled that the Austrian government was failing to protect women from domestic violence. [37] It recommended strengthening the implementation and monitoring of existing domestic violence laws and greater training for police. [38]

Inquiries

The committee has also conducted one inquiry into "grave or systematic violations" under Article 8, in relation to the systematic killing of women in the Mexican city of Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua. [39] This found "serious lapses in compliance" [40] by the Mexican government and tolerance of severe and systematic abuses of women's rights. [40] The Committee recommended the involvement of federal as well as state authorities in the investigation of the murders, [41] the punishment of negligent or complicit officials and those involved in the persecution of victims' relatives, [42] and increased violence prevention plans. [43]

Impact and criticism

The impact of an international treaty can be measured in two ways: by its acceptance, and by its implementation. [44] [45] On the first measure, the Optional Protocol has gained widespread international acceptance. Most major states are parties, and the protocol is the second most-accepted enforcement mechanism after the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. [46] [47]

On the second measure, the number of complaints dealt with by the committee has been limited. A 2008 assessment for the UK government found that the protocol had hardly been used by NGOs as originally expected, that the reasoning of the committee was unpredictable, and that it had not affected policy-making. [48] It found that there had been some limited success in highlighting the importance of effective policies to protect women from domestic violence and forced sterilization, but that outside these areas, the protocol "has not led to a breakthrough in advancing women's rights." [48] It concludes that unless greater efforts are made to highlight awareness of the Optional Protocol and build trust in the rulings of the committee, the complaints mechanism will remain under-utilized. [49]

The protocol has been criticised by legal academics such as Bal Sokhi-Bulley and feminists such as Catharine MacKinnon who view the complaints mechanism as difficult, lengthy, [21] and lacking transparency. [18] The voluntary nature of the protocol and the non-binding nature of its "recommendations" are seen as key limits on its effectiveness. [50] [51] [52] Despite this, these critics tend to view the protocol as a valuable, if flawed, instrument for realizing women's rights. [53] [54] [55]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women</span> International bill of rights for women

The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is an international treaty adopted in 1979 by the United Nations General Assembly. Described as an international bill of rights for women, it was instituted on 3 September 1981 and has been ratified by 189 states. Over fifty countries that have ratified the Convention have done so subject to certain declarations, reservations, and objections, including 38 countries who rejected the enforcement article 29, which addresses means of settlement for disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the convention. Australia's declaration noted the limitations on central government power resulting from its federal constitutional system. The United States and Palau have signed, but not ratified the treaty. The Holy See, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, and Tonga are not signatories to CEDAW.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Committee on the Rights of the Child</span> Body that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child

The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is a body of experts that monitor and report on the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human rights in Switzerland</span> Overview of the observance of human rights in Switzerland

Human rights are largely respected in Switzerland, one of Europe's oldest democracies. Switzerland is often at or near the top in international rankings of civil liberties and political rights observance. Switzerland places human rights at the core of the nation's value system, as represented in its Federal Constitution. As described in its FDFA's Foreign Policy Strategy 2016-2019, the promotion of peace, mutual respect, equality and non-discrimination are central to the country's foreign relations.

Nauru is a small island country in the South Pacific. With a population of 13,649 it is the world's least populous independent republic. Nauru's government operates under its constitution, part two of which contains 'protection of fundamental rights and freedoms.' The Human Rights Council (UNHRC) carried out Nauru's Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in January 2011. The review was generally favourable with only a few areas of concern.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</span> Treaty of the United Nations

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is an international human rights treaty of the United Nations intended to protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities. Parties to the convention are required to promote, protect, and ensure the full enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities and ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy full equality under the law. The Convention serves as a major catalyst in the global disability rights movement enabling a shift from viewing persons with disabilities as objects of charity, medical treatment and social protection towards viewing them as full and equal members of society, with human rights. The convention was the first U.N. human rights treaty of the twenty-first century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</span> 2006 treaty for a complaints mechanism

The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is a side-agreement to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It was adopted on 13 December 2006, and entered into force at the same time as its parent Convention on 3 May 2008. As of October 2023, it has 94 signatories and 105 state parties.

<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 October 2023, the Protocol has 46 signatories and 28 state parties. It entered into force on 5 May 2013.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights</span> 1966 United Nations treaty

The First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is an international treaty establishing an individual complaint mechanism for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 16/12/1966, and entered into force on 23/03/1976. As of January 2023, it had 117 state parties and 35 signatories. Two of the ratifying states have denounced the protocol.

The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women was adopted without a vote by the United Nations General Assembly in the 48/104 resolution of 20 December 1993. Contained within it is the recognition of "the urgent need for the universal application to women of the rights and principles with regard to equality, security, liberty, integrity and dignity of all human beings". It recalls and embodies the same rights and principles as those enshrined in such instruments as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Articles 1 and 2 provide the most widely used definition of violence against women.

The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is a United Nations body of 18 experts that meets two times a year in Geneva to consider the reports submitted by 164 UN member states on their compliance with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and to examine individual petitions concerning 94 States Parties to the Optional Protocol.

Samoa, officially the Independent State of Samoa, has a population of approximately 188,000 people. Samoa gained independence from New Zealand in 1962 and has a Westminster model of Parliamentary democracy which incorporates aspects of traditional practices. In 2016, Samoa ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities CRPD and the three optional protocols to the CRC

Papua New Guinea (PNG) is a constitutional parliamentary democracy with an estimated population of 6,187,591. Police brutality, provincial power struggles, violence against women, and government corruption all contribute to the low awareness of basic human rights in the country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gender inequality in El Salvador</span>

Gender inequality can be found in various areas of Salvadoran life such as employment, health, education, political participation, and family life. Although women in El Salvador enjoy equal protection under the law, they are often at a disadvantage relative to their male counterparts. In the area of politics, women have the same rights as men, but the percentage of women in office compared to men is low. Though much progress has been made since the Salvadoran Civil War ended in 1992, women in El Salvador still face gender inequality.

The Republic of Uruguay is located in South America, between Argentina, Brazil and the South Atlantic Ocean, with a population of 3,332,972. Uruguay gained independence and sovereignty from Spain in 1828 and has full control over its internal and external affairs. From 1973 to 1985 Uruguay was governed by a civil-military dictatorship which committed numerous human rights abuses.

<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.

Yoko Hayashi is a Japanese lawyer and partner in the Athena Law Office. She was formerly an alternate member to the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights from 2004 to 2006. In 2008, she became a member of the Committee which monitors the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and in 2015 was serving as Chairperson of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Hayashi has used her legal expertise to improve the status and protect the rights of women.

Violence against women in Fiji is recognised to be "pervasive, widespread and a serious national issue" in the Pacific Island region. Fiji's rates of violence against women are "among the very highest in the world". The Fiji Women's Crisis Centre reports that 64% of women who have been in intimate relationships have experienced physical or sexual violence from their partner, including 61% who were physically attacked and 34% who were sexually abused.

Forced marriage is the marriage of one person to another person without the consent of one or both of the parties. It is to be distinguished from an arranged marriage, where the parties do not select their partners but there is free choice to accept or decline the marriage. Forced marriage is widely recognised as a human rights abuse, with some commentators considering it a form of slavery.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gender equality in Azerbaijan</span>

Gender equality in Azerbaijan is guaranteed by the country's constitution and legislation, and an initiative is in place to prevent domestic violence. Azerbaijan ratified a United Nations convention in 1995, and a Gender Information Center opened in 2002. A committee on women's issues was established in 1998.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Belém do Pará Convention</span>

The Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence against Women, better known as the Belém do Pará Convention, is an international human rights instrument adopted by the Inter-American Commission of Women (CIM) of the Organization of American States (OAS) at a conference held in Belém do Pará, Brazil, on 9 June 1994. It is the first legally binding international treaty that criminalises all forms of violence against women, especially sexual violence. On 26 October 2004, the Follow-Up Mechanism (MESECVI) agency was established to ensure the State parties' compliance with the Convention.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 "Parties to the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women". United Nations. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  2. ↑ "Discrimination Against Women Statistics". 21 December 2000. Archived from the original on 3 February 2012. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  3. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 16.
  4. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 20.
  5. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 21.
  6. ↑ "Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women New York, 18 December 1979". UN OHCHR. Archived from the original on 25 August 2009. Retrieved 6 September 2009.
  7. ↑ CEDAW, Article 2.
  8. ↑ Meron, Theodor (1990). "Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Prohibition of Discrimination Against Women". American Journal of International Law. 84 (1): 213–217. doi:10.2307/2203022. JSTOR   2203022. S2CID   147441085.
  9. ↑ Felipe Gómez Isa (2003). "The Optional Protocol for the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: Strengthening the Protection Mechanisms of Women's Human Rights" (PDF). Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law. 20 (2): 291–321 [305]. Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 October 2013. Retrieved 9 October 2010.
  10. ↑ "CEDAW: History of the Optional Protocol". UN Division for the Advancement of Women. Archived from the original on 15 May 2008. Retrieved 28 July 2008.
  11. ↑ Kwong-leung Tang (2000). "The Leadership Role of International Law in Enforcing Women's Rights: The Optional Protocol to the Women's Convention" . In Sweetman, Caroline (ed.). Women and leadership. Oxford, UK: Oxfam. pp.  65–72. ISBN   0-85598-452-X.
  12. ↑ "Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (Fourteenth Session)" (PDF). UN CEDAW. pp. 2–5. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 September 2011. Retrieved 28 July 2008.
  13. 1 2 3 4 "Claiming Women's rights: the Optional Protocol to the UN Women's Convention". Amnesty International. 2001. Archived from the original on 22 November 2018. Retrieved 17 December 2009.
  14. ↑ United Nations General Assembly Resolution 54/4, 6 October 1999.
  15. ↑ "The Optional Protocol to CEDAW & its applicability "on the ground"". Association for Women's Rights in Development. 12 February 2008. Archived from the original on 14 May 2014. Retrieved 14 May 2014.
  16. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 1.
  17. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 2.
  18. 1 2 MacKinnon, Catherine (2004). "CEDAW's Optional Protocol Procedures". Interights Bulletin. 14 (4): 173–174.
  19. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 4.
  20. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Articles 6 & 7.
  21. 1 2 Bal Sokhi-Bulley (2006). "The Optional Protocol to CEDAW: First Steps". Human Rights Law Review. 6 (1): 157. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngi029.
  22. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 8.
  23. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 9.
  24. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 10.
  25. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 11.
  26. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 13.
  27. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 14.
  28. ↑ OP-CEDAW, Article 12.
  29. ↑ "CEDAW in the United States" (PDF). AAUW. Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 April 2010. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
  30. ↑ "Responses to the list of issues and questions with regard to the consideration of the sixth periodic report: Japan (CEDAW/C/JPN/Q/6/Add.1)" (PDF). Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. 14 April 2009. p. 65. Archived (PDF) from the original on 5 March 2012. Retrieved 5 February 2010.
  31. ↑ "Responses to the list of issues and questions for consideration of the combined fifth and sixth periodic report of China (CEDAW/C/CHN/Q/6/Add.1)" (PDF). Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. 8 June 2006. p. 28. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 June 2012. Retrieved 4 February 2010.
  32. ↑ "Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women: Optional Protocol: Decisions/Views". UN Division for the Advancement of Women. Archived from the original on 11 July 2008. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  33. 1 2 "Views of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 7, paragraph 3, of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: Communication No.: 2/2003, Ms. A. T. v. Hungary" (PDF). 26 January 2005. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 May 2011. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  34. ↑ "Sixth periodic report of Hungary under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women" (PDF). 15 June 2006. p. 50. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 September 2011. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  35. 1 2 "Views of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 7, paragraph 3, of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: Communication No. 3/2004: Dung Thi Thuy Nguyen v. The Netherlands" (PDF). 14 August 2006. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 May 2011. Retrieved 16 July 2008.
  36. 1 2 "Views of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 7, paragraph 3, of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: Communication No.: 4/2004, Ms. A. S. v. Hungary" (PDF). 29 August 2006. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 March 2008. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  37. 1 2 "Views of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 7, paragraph 3, of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: Communication No. 5/2005: Şahide Goekce (deceased) v. Austria" (PDF). 6 August 2007. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 September 2011. Retrieved 16 July 2008.
  38. 1 2 "Views of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 7, paragraph 3, of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women: Communication No. 6/2005: Fatma Yildirim (deceased) v. Austria" (PDF). 6 August 2007. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 September 2011. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  39. ↑ "Report on Mexico produced by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention, and reply from the Government of Mexico" (PDF). 27 January 2005. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 July 2008. Retrieved 15 July 2008.
  40. 1 2 Report on Mexico, p. 42.
  41. ↑ Report on Mexico, p. 43.
  42. ↑ Report on Mexico, p. 44.
  43. ↑ Report on Mexico, p. 46.
  44. ↑ Lérner, Natán (1980). The U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Sijthoff & Noordhoff International. p. 165. ISBN   90-286-0160-0.
  45. ↑ Heyns, Christof; Viljoen, Frans (2001). "The Impact of the United Nations Human Rights Treaties on the Domestic Level". Human Rights Quarterly. 23 (3): 483–535. doi:10.1353/hrq.2001.0036. S2CID   144831485.
  46. ↑ "Nominal Commitments to Human Rights: A Global Survey". University College London School of Public Policy. 1 August 2009. Archived from the original on 5 June 2011. Retrieved 3 February 2010.
  47. ↑ As of December 2009, OP-ICCPR had 113 parties to OP-CEDAW's 99.
  48. 1 2 Jim Murdoch (2008). "The Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): The Experience of the United Kingdom" (PDF). p. 1. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 March 2011. Retrieved 17 December 2009.
  49. ↑ Murdoch (2008), p. 27.
  50. ↑ Isa (2003), pp. 320–321.
  51. ↑ Sokhi-Bulley (2006), p. 157.
  52. ↑ Kwong-leung Tang (2004). "Internationalizing Women's Struggle against Discrimination: The UN Women's Convention and the Optional Protocol". The British Journal of Social Work . 34 (8): 1182. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch135.
  53. ↑ Isa (2003), pp. 319–320.
  54. ↑ Sokhi-Bulley (2006), p. 158.
  55. ↑ Tang (2004), p. 1185.

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.