Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Rights or Privileges?

D. Okeowo
{"title":"Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Rights or Privileges?","authors":"D. Okeowo","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1320204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since 3rd January, 1976 when the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights entered into force, gallons of juristic ink have been spilled globally by legal pundits in examining the nature and scope of what is now widely known as economic, social and cultural rights. While the adoption of the treaty has recorded yet another milestone in the protection of international human rights, opinions differ as to whether these ideals could be recognized as 'rights properly so called' under international law. The classification of socio-economic rights as non-justiciable 'positive' rights requiring the dedication of significant State resources for their realization, as opposed to 'negative' civil and political rights requiring only that the State refrain from encroaching on specified areas of the life of the individual, considerably oversimplified the legal challenges which the Covenant raises. Several reasons have been given by critics of economic, social and cultural rights with a view to establishing the fact that these sets of rights are not rights per se but mere privileges accorded by the State to individuals as per its available resources. Are economic, social and cultural rights really 'rights' or 'privileges'? Are states bound to respect these rights? Are they truly enforceable? What effort is being made at the international and regional levels to give effect to these rights? What is the justiciable status of these rights in national arena?","PeriodicalId":375754,"journal":{"name":"Public International Law eJournal","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public International Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1320204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Since 3rd January, 1976 when the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights entered into force, gallons of juristic ink have been spilled globally by legal pundits in examining the nature and scope of what is now widely known as economic, social and cultural rights. While the adoption of the treaty has recorded yet another milestone in the protection of international human rights, opinions differ as to whether these ideals could be recognized as 'rights properly so called' under international law. The classification of socio-economic rights as non-justiciable 'positive' rights requiring the dedication of significant State resources for their realization, as opposed to 'negative' civil and political rights requiring only that the State refrain from encroaching on specified areas of the life of the individual, considerably oversimplified the legal challenges which the Covenant raises. Several reasons have been given by critics of economic, social and cultural rights with a view to establishing the fact that these sets of rights are not rights per se but mere privileges accorded by the State to individuals as per its available resources. Are economic, social and cultural rights really 'rights' or 'privileges'? Are states bound to respect these rights? Are they truly enforceable? What effort is being made at the international and regional levels to give effect to these rights? What is the justiciable status of these rights in national arena?
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经济、社会和文化权利:权利还是特权?
自1976年1月3日《经济、社会和文化权利国际公约》生效以来,法律专家们在全球范围内花费了大量的法律笔墨来研究现在广为人知的经济、社会和文化权利的性质和范围。虽然该条约的通过是保护国际人权的又一个里程碑,但对于这些理想是否可以在国际法下被承认为“适当的所谓权利”,意见不一。将社会经济权利归类为不可审理的“积极”权利,需要投入大量国家资源才能实现,而将“消极”的公民和政治权利归类为只要求国家不侵犯个人生活的特定领域,这大大简化了《公约》提出的法律挑战。经济、社会和文化权利的批评者提出了几个理由,目的是确立这样一个事实,即这些权利本身不是权利,而仅仅是国家根据其现有资源给予个人的特权。经济、社会和文化权利真的是“权利”或“特权”吗?各州有义务尊重这些权利吗?它们真的可以强制执行吗?在国际和区域两级正在作出什么努力来落实这些权利?这些权利在国家舞台上的可诉性地位是什么?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Dual‐Nature Thesis: Which Dualism? Legality and the Legal Relation Soldiers as Public Officials: A Moral Justification for Combatant Immunity A Pragmatic Reconstruction of Law's Claim to Authority Ownership, Use, and Exclusivity: The Kantian Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1