Fact Sheet No.14, Contemporary Forms of Slavery

Details the variety of human rights violations under the name of slavery and the forms of international cooperation to protect individuals from it, particularly the United Nations role in these efforts

Rereading the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: plurality and contestation, not consensus

In this paper I examine the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. My analysis counters conventional narratives of consensus and imposition that characterize the development of the UN human rights regime. The central argument is that within the founding text of the contemporary human rights movement there is an ambiguous account of rights, which exceeds easy categorization of international rights as universal moral principles or merely an ideological imposition by liberal powers. Acknowledging this ambiguous history, I argue, opens the way to an understanding of human rights as an ongoing politics, a contestation over the terms of legitimate political authority and the meaning of “humanity” as a political identity

Global healthcare for the 21st century and beyond

Despite the Alma-Ata goal of acceptable health care for all by the year 2000, gross inequalities continue to condemn the world’s poorer and disadvantaged citizens to inadequate levels of health and health care. Articles in this issue describe important history, cultural influences and political events leading to this disparity, as well as current challenges and model programmes that inform our path forward

Sanitation, human rights, and disaster management

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to link debates around the international law on human rights and disaster management with the evolving debate around the human right to sanitation, in order to explore the extent to which states are obliged to account for sanitation in their disaster management efforts. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on analysis of existing laws and policy relating to human rights, sanitation and disaster management. It further draws upon relevant academic literature. Findings The paper concludes that, while limitations exist, states have legal obligations to provide sanitation to persons affected by a disaster. It is further argued that a human rights-based approach to sanitation, if respected, can assist in strengthening disaster management efforts, while focusing on the persons who need it the most. Research limitations/implications The analysis in this paper focuses on the obligations of states for people on their territory. Due to space limitations, it does not examine the complex issues relating to enforcement mechanisms available to disaster victims. Originality/value This is the first scholarly work directly linking the debates around international human rights law and disaster management, with human rights obligations in relation to sanitation. The clarification of obligation in relation to sanitation can assist in advocacy and planning, as well as in ensuring accountability and responsibility for human rights breaches in the disaster context

‘Repeal the 8th’ in a Transnational Context: The Potential of SRHRs for Advancing Abortion Access in El Salvador

This article undertakes a discursive feminist reading of citizenship and human rights to understand, through the cases of Ireland and El Salvador, domestic abortion rights movements as part of a transnational women’s rights movement. While abortion has been partially decriminalised in Ireland, approximately 42 per cent of the world’s women1 of reproductive age still live in a country where abortion is prohibited entirely or only permitted to save a woman’s life or health (Singh et al., 2018, p. 4). In El Salvador, abortion is illegal and those suspected of having the procedure are prosecuted. As in Ireland, since 2012/2013 numerous controversies have brought the issue to wider public attention and have further galvanised the feminist movement to campaign for reform. Feminist abortion rights campaigns in both countries have connected important sites of activism and contestation: civil society, national parliaments, regional human rights systems and the United Nations

Mitigating humanitarian crises during non-international armed conflicts:the role of human rights and ceasefire agreements

Situations of humanitarian crisis are often caused by armed conflicts. Given the prevalence of non-international armed conflicts today, ways of ameliorating these situations are at the forefront of concerns. The international humanitarian law rules governing non-international armed conflict remain much less developed than those for international armed conflicts. This is exacerbated by the lack of direct human rights obligations for non-state armed groups, which makes governing the behaviour of non-state parties to non-international armed conflicts (non-state armed groups) even more challenging. Although several initiatives have been taken to encourage non-state actors to mitigate situations of humanitarian crisis, the role of human rights law is in need of further clarification. The paper aims to assess what role human rights may have in improving humanitarian crises, suggesting one specific way: The paper will first discuss the international laws applicable to situations of non-international armed conflict, before critically analysing some of the initiatives that have already been taken to govern the behaviour of non-state armed groups. Part 3 will assess the possibility of using cease-fire agreements to impose specific human rights obligations on all parties to a non-international armed conflict. Finally, a conclusion will be drawn in Part 4 as to the role that human rights and ceasefire agreements could have during humanitarian crises

Exploring synergies between human rights and public health ethics: A whole greater than the sum of its parts

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The fields of human rights and public health ethics are each concerned with promoting health and elucidating norms for action. To date, however, little has been written about the contribution that these two justificatory frameworks can make together. This article explores how a combined approach may make a more comprehensive contribution to resolving normative health issues and to advancing a normative framework for global health action than either approach made alone. We explore this synergy by first providing overviews of public health ethics and of international human rights law relevant to health and, second, by articulating complementarities between human rights and public health ethics.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>We argue that public health ethics can contribute to human rights by: (a) reinforcing the normative claims of international human rights law, (b) strengthening advocacy for human rights, and (c) bridging the divide between public health practitioners and human rights advocates in certain contemporary health domains. We then discuss how human rights can contribute to public health ethics by contributing to discourses on the determinants of health through: (a) definitions of the right to health and the notion of the indivisibility of rights, (b) emphasis on the duties of states to progressively realize the health of citizens, and (c) recognition of the protection of human rights as itself a determinant of health. We also discuss the role that human rights can play for the emergent field of public health ethics by refocusing attention on the health and illness on marginalized individuals and populations.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Actors within the fields of public health, ethics and human rights can gain analytic tools by embracing the untapped potential for collaboration inherent in such a combined approach.</p

Codesigning health and other public services with vulnerable and disadvantaged populations: Insights from an international collaboration

Background Codesign has the potential to transform health and other public services. To avoid unintentionally reinforcing existing inequities, better understanding is needed of how to facilitate involvement of vulnerable populations in acceptable, ethical and effective codesign. Objective To explore citizens’ involvement in codesigning public services for vulnerable groups, identify challenges and suggest improvements. Design A modified case study approach. Pattern matching was used to compare reported challenges with a priori theoretical propositions. Setting and participants A two‐day international symposium involved 28 practitioners, academics and service users from seven countries to reflect on challenges and to codesign improved processes for involving vulnerable populations. Intervention studied Eight case studies working with vulnerable and disadvantaged populations in three countries. Results We identified five shared challenges to meaningful, sustained participation of vulnerable populations: engagement; power differentials; health concerns; funding; and other economic/social circumstances. In response, a focus on relationships and flexibility is essential. We encourage codesign projects to enact a set of principles or heuristics rather than following pre‐specified steps. We identify a set of principles and tactics, relating to challenges outlined in our case studies, which may help in codesigning public services with vulnerable populations. Discussion and conclusions Codesign facilitators must consider how meaningful engagement will be achieved and how power differentials will be managed when working with services for vulnerable populations. The need for flexibility and responsiveness to service user needs may challenge expectations about timelines and outcomes. User‐centred evaluations of codesigned public services are needed