UN General Assembly Resolution 60/147

Last updated
UN General Assembly
Resolution 60/147
Date16 December 2005
CodeA/RES/60/147 (Document)
SubjectReparation for Victims of International Human Rights Violations
Voting summary
  • 40 voted for
  • None voted against
  • 12 abstained
Resultadopted

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. [1] 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.

Contents

The principles were drafted by Dutch jurist Theo van Boven, who served as the UN's Special Rapporteur on the Right to Reparation to Victims of Gross Violations of Human Rights from 1986 to 1991, and were finalised after over 20 years of research. They have since been adopted by UN Member States. They are non-binding, however it has been recommended by the General Assembly that States take the Basic Principles and Guidelines into account. [2]

The Resolution consists of 27 principles outlining the obligation of all UN member states to respect and implement international human rights law and international humanitarian law. It is the first codification of the rights of victims of human rights violations to reparation and remedies, and to access justice within domestic legal systems.

Members of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), 2007-2009 Members of HRC.png
Members of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), 2007-2009

Description

The Basic Principles and Guidelines prescribe that victims of human rights abuses have a right to reparation. This right derives from the general principle of the law on State Responsibility that a wrongful act arising from a breach of an international obligation gives rise to an obligation to make reparation. [3] The recognition of a right to reparation extends from the duty of States to remedy wrongful acts under international law, an obligation codified in Article 34 of the Draft Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts(2001).

The Resolution combines the rights afforded under both international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and codifies the duty of States to implement domestic reparations for victims. [4] It addresses gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law that constitute crimes under international law. Its provisions concern the status and treatment of victims of such violations and their remedial rights under international law, including the right to receive reparation for harm suffered. [1] It also specifies statutes of limitations in relation to such violations, access to justice and access to relevant information concerning violations and reparation mechanisms. [5]

The Basic Principles and Guidelines are not intended to create new obligations. They are intended to serve as a tool/guiding instrument for States in implementing domestic policies. [1]

Background

61st sitting of the Human Rights Commission: Votes of UN Member States
ForAgainstAbstain
  1. Flag of Argentina.svg  Argentina
  2. Flag of Armenia.svg  Armenia
  3. Flag of Bhutan.svg  Bhutan
  4. Flag of Brazil.svg  Brazil
  5. Flag of Burkina Faso.svg  Burkina Faso
  6. Flag of Canada (Pantone).svg  Canada
  7. Flag of the People's Republic of China.svg  China
  8. Flag of the Republic of the Congo.svg  Congo
  9. Flag of Costa Rica.svg  Costa Rica
  10. Flag of Cuba.svg  Cuba
  11. Flag of the Dominican Republic.svg  Dominican Republic
  12. Flag of Ecuador.svg  Ecuador
  13. Flag of Finland.svg  Finland
  14. Flag of France.svg  France
  15. Flag of Gabon.svg  Gabon
  16. Flag of Guatemala.svg  Guatemala
  17. Flag of Guinea.svg  Guinea
  18. Flag of Honduras (1949-2022).svg  Honduras
  19. Flag of Hungary.svg  Hungary
  20. Flag of Indonesia.svg  Indonesia
  21. Flag of Ireland.svg  Ireland
  22. Flag of Italy.svg  Italy
  23. Flag of Japan.svg  Japan
  24. Flag of Kenya.svg  Kenya
  25. Flag of Malaysia.svg  Malaysia
  26. Flag of Mexico.svg  Mexico
  27. Flag of the Netherlands.svg  Netherlands
  28. Flag of Nigeria.svg  Nigeria
  29. Flag of Pakistan.svg  Pakistan
  30. Flag of Paraguay.svg  Paraguay
  31. Flag of Peru.svg  Peru
  32. Flag of South Korea.svg  South Korea
  33. Flag of Romania.svg  Romania
  34. Flag of Russia.svg  Russian Federation
  35. Flag of South Africa.svg  South Africa
  36. Flag of Sri Lanka.svg  Sri Lanka
  37. Flag of Eswatini.svg  Swaziland
  38. Flag of Ukraine.svg  Ukraine
  39. Flag of the United Kingdom.svg  United Kingdom
  40. Flag of Zimbabwe.svg  Zimbabwe
None
  1. Flag of Australia (converted).svg  Australia
  2. Flag of Egypt.svg  Egypt
  3. Flag of Eritrea.svg  Eritrea
  4. Flag of Germany.svg  Germany
  5. Flag of India.svg  India
  6. Flag of Mauritania.svg  Mauritania
  7. Flag of Nepal.svg    Nepal
  8. Flag of Qatar.svg  Qatar
  9. Flag of Saudi Arabia.svg  Saudi Arabia
  10. Flag of Sudan.svg  Sudan
  11. Flag of Togo.svg  Togo
  12. Flag of the United States.svg  United States of America

The first draft of the Basic Principles and Guidelines was prepared by Theo van Boven in 1997, at the request by the Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. [6] After incorporating extensive feedback and further research, the 2000 Draft Principles and Guidelines [7] were presented to the Commission on Human Rights, and subsequently circulated to state governments as well as non-governmental organisations for comment.

On 31 August 2000, the basic principles and guidelines were open for comment, and the Secretary-General invited member states to submit feedback. Between 2000 and 2002, the document underwent further revision. [8]

In August 2003, an international consultation was held by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), at the request of the Commission on Human Rights, for the purpose of finalising the text. [9] A revised version was produced, which incorporated feedback from State governments and NGO's, as well as expert and qualified publicized opinions. [10] Two subsequent consultative meetings were held in Geneva in October 2003. [11] The Chairman-Rapporteur of the meeting, Mr. Alejandro Salinas, produced a report [12] which the Commission on Human Rights received and welcomed.

On 19 April 2005, the Human Rights Commission passed Resolution 2005/35 during its 61st organisational session in New York, affirming the guidelines [13] and also recommending them for approval by the General Assembly. [14] Put before member states, the Resolution passed by a recorded vote of 40 in favour, with 12 abstentions and 0 voting against. [15]

Adoption

The Basic Principles and Guidelines were placed before the UN General Assembly in its 60th sitting. On 16 December 2005, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Basic Principles and Guidelines as Resolution A/RES/60/147 (2005) by consensus. [16] The Basic Principles and Guidelines were officially published by the United Nations in 2006.

Victims under international law

The Resolution providing a comprehensive definition of victims, which combines existing definitions found in human rights instruments and jurisprudence. Principle 8 defines the term victim as including "persons who individually or collectively suffered harm, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights ... also includes the immediate family or dependents of the direct victim and persons who have suffered harm in intervening to assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization." [1]

The Resolution's focus away from perpetrators and towards victims is part of a wider shift in international criminal jurisprudence towards the acceptance of the rights, obligations and responsibilities that are owed to individuals under international law. [17] This follows a general trend towards the recognition of the involvement of non-state actors in international law. [18]

Prior to recent developments, the focus of human rights law has been on holding perpetrators accountable, and victims have remained in the background. The creation of international criminal tribunals and the increase in ratifications of human rights instruments over recent decades have provided more comprehensive recognisition of victims under international law. [19] The creation of the International Criminal Court in 1998 under the Rome Statute increased the focus on victim perspectives. By establishing international criminal jurisdiction over the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression, the Statute providing explicitly recognised the role of victims in international proceedings and defining their rights to reparation. The Basic Principles and Guidelines offered considerable guidance to the content of the Rome Statute in relation to recognising victims' rights, despite being in the drafting process at the time. [20]

The right to reparation

The Basic Principles and Guidelines extend the rights afforded to victims by combining entitlements afforded under both human rights law and humanitarian law. [21] There is considerable overlap in the rights and protection afforded under these regimes, in areas such as the prohibition of discrimination on racial, gender and religious grounds and the right to a fair trial. [22] International legal bodies, including the International Court of Justice, have affirmed that the application of human rights law and humanitarian law can be dual and complementary. This was confirmed in the 2006 ICJ judgment of Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo. [23] Many human rights theorists have argued that the distinction between different branches of international law is less relevant in determining redress of victims. [24]

The Resolution is the first international instrument to altogether articulate the remedies for human rights violations. [25] It clarifies the remedial rights of victims as comprising: (a) equal and effective access to justice;(b) adequate, effective and prompt reparation of harm suffered; (c) access to relevant information concerning violations and reparation mechanisms. [1]

While this right has been confirmed in international law, and human rights instruments have addressed the remedial rights of victims, the Basic Principles was the first document that articulated these rights in full. [26]

The Resolution prescribes that this can take five forms: restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, and the guarantee of non-repetition. This codifies the existing right to reparation which has been confirmed as an entitlement of customary international law. [27]

There has been considerable discussion over whether the right to reparation is one that accrues individually or collectively. [28] Some legal scholars have argued that the entitlement of victims to reparation is a collective right rather than an individual right, because it depends on the incorporation of human rights treaties into domestic legislation. [29] The classification of reparation as an individual right has also been rejected on the grounds that it is not unequivocal, due to the exceptions created by law on state immunity. The right to reparation is restricted by the limited legal personality of individuals under international law. For a victim to receive reparation under international law, a State must bring a claim on their behalf. Exercising this right also requires that the State give any received compensation to that injured national, which is not required under international law. Under Article 19 of the Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection, this is a decision at their discretion. [30]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Holiday</span> Festive day set aside by custom or by law

A holiday is a day or other period of time set aside for festivals or recreation. Public holidays are set by public authorities and vary by state or region. Religious holidays are set by religious organisations for their members and are often also observed as public holidays in religious majority countries. Some religious holidays, such as Christmas, have become secularised by part or all of those who observe them. In addition to secularisation, many holidays have become commercialised due to the growth of industry.

A United Nations General Assembly resolution is a decision or declaration voted on by all member states of the United Nations in the General Assembly.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Commission of Jurists</span> Non-governmental human rights organization based in Geneva, Switzerland

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is an international human rights non-governmental organization. It is a standing group of 60 eminent jurists—including senior judges, attorneys and academics—who work to develop national and international human rights standards through the law. Commissioners are known for their experience, knowledge and fundamental commitment to human rights. The composition of the Commission aims to reflect the geographical diversity of the world and its many legal systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">M. Cherif Bassiouni</span> Egyptian academic

Mahmoud Cherif Bassiouni was an Egyptian-American emeritus professor of law at DePaul University, where he taught from 1964 to 2012. He served in numerous United Nations positions and served as the consultant to the US Department of State and Justice on many projects. He was a founding member of the International Human Rights Law Institute at DePaul University which was established in 1990. He served as president from 1990 to 1997 and then as president emeritus. Bassiouni is often referred to by the media as "the Godfather of International Criminal Law" and a "war crimes expert". As such, he served on the Steering Committee for The Crimes Against Humanity Initiative, which was launched to study the need for a comprehensive convention on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, and draft a proposed treaty. He spearheaded the drafting of the proposed convention, which as of 2014 is being debated at the International Law Commission.

The laws of state responsibility are the principles governing when and how a state is held responsible for a breach of an international obligation. Rather than set forth any particular obligations, the rules of state responsibility determine, in general, when an obligation has been breached and the legal consequences of that violation. In this way they are "secondary" rules that address basic issues of responsibility and remedies available for breach of "primary" or substantive rules of international law, such as with respect to the use of armed force. Because of this generality, the rules can be studied independently of the primary rules of obligation. They establish (1) the conditions of actions to qualify as internationally wrongful, (2) the circumstances under which actions of officials, private individuals and other entities may be attributed to the state, (3) general defences to liability and (4) the consequences of liability.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">War and environmental law</span>

War can heavily damage the environment, and warring countries often place operational requirements ahead of environmental concerns for the duration of the war. Some international law is designed to limit this environmental harm.

In jurisprudence, reparation is replenishment of a previously inflicted loss by the criminal to the victim. Monetary restitution is a common form of reparation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theo van Boven</span> Dutch jurist and professor emeritus

Theodoor Cornelis (Theo) van Boven is a Dutch jurist and professor emeritus in international law.

Impunity is the ability to act with exemption from punishments, losses, or other negative consequences. In the international law of human rights, impunity is failure to bring perpetrators of human rights violations to justice and, as such, itself constitutes a denial of the victims' right to justice and redress. Impunity is especially common in countries which lack the tradition of rule of law, or suffer from pervasive corruption, or contain entrenched systems of patronage, or where the judiciary is weak or members of the security forces are protected by special jurisdictions or immunities. Impunity is sometimes considered a form of denialism of historical crimes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Yogyakarta Principles</span> Document about human rights in the areas of sexual orientation and gender identity

The Yogyakarta Principles is a document about human rights in the areas of sexual orientation and gender identity that was published as the outcome of an international meeting of human rights groups in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, in November 2006. The principles were supplemented and expanded in 2017 to include new grounds of gender expression and sex characteristics and a number of new principles. However, the Principles have never been accepted by the United Nations (UN) and the attempt to make gender identity and sexual orientation new categories of non-discrimination has been repeatedly rejected by the General Assembly, the UN Human Rights Council and other UN bodies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Security Council Resolution 1544</span> United Nations resolution adopted in 2004

United Nations Security Council resolution 1544, adopted on 19 May 2004, after recalling resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 1322 (2000), 1397 (2002), 1402 (2002), 1403 (2002), 1405 (2002), 1435 (2002) and 1515 (2003), the Council called on Israel to cease demolishing Palestinian homes.

Reparations are broadly understood as compensation given for an abuse or injury. The colloquial meaning of reparations has changed substantively over the last century. In the early 1900s, reparations were interstate exchanges that were punitive mechanisms determined by treaty and paid by the surrendering side of conflict, such as the World War I reparations paid by Germany and its allies. Reparations are now understood as not only war damages but also compensation and other measures provided to victims of severe human rights violations by the parties responsible. The right of the victim of an injury to receive reparations and the duty of the part responsible to provide them has been secured by the United Nations.

Memorialization generally refers to the process of preserving memories of people or events. It can be a form of address or petition, or a ceremony of remembrance or commemoration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights</span>

The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) is an instrument consisting of 31 principles implementing the United Nations' (UN) "Protect, Respect and Remedy" framework on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. Developed by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) John Ruggie, these Guiding Principles provided the first global standard for preventing and addressing the risk of adverse impacts on human rights linked to business activity, and continue to provide the internationally accepted framework for enhancing standards and practice regarding business and human rights. On June 16, 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council unanimously endorsed the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights, making the framework the first corporate human rights responsibility initiative to be endorsed by the UN.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute</span>

The Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute at Washington University School of Law, established in 2000 as the Institute for Global Legal Studies, serves as a center for instruction and research in international and comparative law.

The term international framework of sexual violence refers to the collection of international legal instruments – such as treaties, conventions, protocols, case law, declarations, resolutions and recommendations – developed in the 20th and 21st century to address the problem of sexual violence. The framework seeks to establish and recognise the right all human beings to not experience sexual violence, to prevent sexual violence from being committed wherever possible, to punish perpetrators of sexual violence, and to provide care for victims of sexual violence. The standards set by this framework are intended to be adopted and implemented by governments around the world in order to protect their citizens against sexual violence.

<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 guarantees of non-repetition is a component of reparations as stipulated in the United Nations Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights resolution proclaiming 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. Guarantees of non-repetition are post-conflict measures taken to ensure that systemic human rights abuses do not recur.

The Declaration on the Rights of Peasants is an UNGA resolution on human rights with "universal understanding", adopted by the United Nations in 2018. The resolution was passed by a vote of 121-8, with 54 members abstaining.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eleventh emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly</span> 2022 session of the United Nations General Assembly

The eleventh emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly opened on 28 February 2022 at the United Nations headquarters. It addresses the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Maldivian politician Abdulla Shahid served as President of the body during this time.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 United Nations. "Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 16 December 2005". United Nations Audiovisual Library. Retrieved 16 May 2019.
  2. UN General Assembly Resolution 60/147, 16 December 2005, oper. para. 2.
  3. Articles on State Responsibility for Internationally Wrongful Acts, adopted by the ILC and submitted to the General Assembly under UN Doc A/56/10 (2001), Article 1
  4. Evans, Christine (2012). "The Right to Reparation in International Law for Victims of Armed Conflict" (PDF). Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law: 6. Retrieved 7 June 2019.
  5. Mayer-Rieckh, Alexander (2017). "Guarantees of Non-Recurrence: An Approximation". Human Rights Quarterly. 39 (2): 423–424. doi:10.1353/hrq.2017.0024. S2CID   148591244.
  6. Draft Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to Restitution, Compensation and Rehabilitation for Victims of Gross Violations of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 16 January 1997, E/CN.4/1998/43.
  7. Draft Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, 18 January 2000, E/CN.4/2000/62, Annex (2000 Draft Principles and Guidelines).
  8. Bassiouni, M. Cherif (2006). "International Recognition of Victims' Rights". Human Rights Law Review 6. 2: 248 via Oxford University Press Journals.
  9. United Nations. "GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 60/147" (PDF). United Nations Audiovisual Library. Retrieved 2019-05-25.
  10. Bassiouni, Cherif M. (2006). "International Recognition of Victims' Rights". Human Rights Law Review. 6:2: 249–250.
  11. Bassiouni, M. Cherif (2006). "International Recognition of Victims' Rights". Human Rights Law Review 6. 2: 250 via Oxford University Press Journals.
  12. "ODS HOME PAGE" (PDF). documents-dds-ny.un.org. Retrieved 2019-05-21.
  13. "E/RES/2005/30". United Nations Digital Library. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
  14. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (16 May 2019). "Human Rights Resolution 2005/35". Ref World.
  15. "Implementing victims' rights" (PDF). Retrieved 2020-02-27.
  16. "Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 16 December 2005" (PDF). UN General Assembly documents. 2006. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
  17. Evans, Christine (2012). "The Right to Reparation in International Law for Victims of Armed Conflict" (PDF). Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law: 125. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  18. Bassiouni, M. Cherif (2006). "International Recognition of Victims' Rights". Human Rights Law Review. 6 (2): 203–279. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngl009.
  19. Evans, Christine (2012). "The Right to Reparation in International Law for Victims of Armed Conflict" (PDF). Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law: 125. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  20. Evans, Christine (2012). "The Right to Reparation in International Law for Victims of Armed Conflict" (PDF). Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  21. Bassiouni, M. Cherif (2006). "International Recognition of Victims' Rights". Human Rights Law Review. 6 (2): 204–5. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngl009.
  22. Ratner, S (1998). "The Schizophrenias of International Criminal Law". Texas International Law Journal. 33: 237–257.
  23. ICJ Judgments. "(DRC v Rwanda) [2006] ICJ Rep 6" (PDF).
  24. Van Boven, Theo (2006). Freshman; et al. (eds.). 'Victims' Rights to a Remedy and Reparation (PDF). Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill NV. pp. 19–40. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  25. Evans, Christine (2012). "The Right to Reparation in International Law for Victims of Armed Conflict" (PDF). Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law: 38. Retrieved 8 June 2012.
  26. Bell, C (2000). Peace Agreements and Human Rights. Oxford University Press.
  27. Shelton, D (2005). Remedies in International Human Rights Law. Oxford University Press. p. 147.
  28. Evans, Christine. "The Right to Reparation in International Law for Victims of Armed Conflict" (PDF). Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law: 42. Retrieved 8 June 2019.
  29. Tomuschat, C (2008). Human Rights, Between Idealism and Realism. Oxford University Press. pp. 192–193.
  30. "ILC Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection" (PDF).