A United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

1 International Human Rights Activity.- A. Prior to the United Nations.- The League of Nations.- The League High Commissioners for Refugees.- B. The United Nations and Human Rights.- The Charter.- Machinery.- C. Achievements of the United Nations.- 1. The definition of international standards and the problem of enforcement.- 2. Enforcement procedures in the U.N. human rights treaties.- 3. Other techniques to promote or protect human rights.- (a) Communications, complaints or petitions.- (b) Periodic reports.- (c) Advisory services.- (d) Global studies of specific rights or groups of rights.- D. NGOS and Human Rights at the United Nations.- 1. Consultative status.- 2. Communications.- E. The Nature of the Problem.- 2 The Development of the High Commissioner Proposal.- The Cassin proposals.- The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.- The proposals of the Consultative Council of Jewish Organizations and of Uruguay.- Revival.- The Costa Rica draft in the works.- The Working Group’s draft.- The Commission on Human Rights approves.- ECOSOC approves.- In the Assembly.- 3 The Functions of the High Commissioner.- Subject matter.- Analogy with an Ombudsman.- General duty to assist in promoting and encouraging.- Subparagraph (a): advice and assistance to UN organs.- Subparagraph (b): assistance and services to states.- Subparagraph (c): communications.- Subparagraph (d): reporting.- A wider view of subparagraph (d): a “good offices” function.- Some general considerations.- The exhaustion of domestic remedies.- Discretion versus publicity in the High Commissioner’s operations.- The prospects for evolution.- 4 Some Administrative Matters and the Issue of Collegiality.- Appointment and financing.- Relations with the Secretary-General.- Relationship with implementation organs.- The panel of expert consultants.- 5 The Constitutionality of the Office, Particularly in the Light of Article 2, Paragraph 7 of the Charter.- A. Article 2, Paragraph 7 of the Charter.- The context of the argument.- The League domestic jurisdiction provision.- The drafting of the Charter.- Intervention.- Matters essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.- The maintenance of international peace and security.- Application to the High Commissioner proposal.- B. The Argument that the Charter Requires a Collegiate Body and not an Individual.- C. The Argument that Individuals can not be Subjects of International Law.- The Croation of the office would be constitutional.- 6 The High Commissioner as a Law Promotor Rather Than a Law Enforcer.- The High Commissioner as part of a political process.- The High Commissioner as a catalyst for the creation of international customary law.- A promotor, not an enforcer or protector.- 7 Conclusions.- The High Commissioner would not be a mere stop-gap.- An unwelcome proliferation?.- Why not leave the job to the Secretary-General?.- The implications of the proposal for international organization.- The advantages.- 1. Non-ratification of treaties.- 2. Lack of practical application of ratified treaties.- 3. Limited enforcement procedures in treaties.- 4. “Communications”.- 5 Limited sources of information.- 6. NGO representations and assistance.- 7. Inadequate supply of government reports and inefficient procedures for dealing with those obtained.- 8. Use of advisory services.- What the future holds.- Appendix I Resolution Adopted by the Economic and Social Council at Its 1479th Plenary Meeting on 6 June 1967 (Question concerning the implementation of human rights through a United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights or some other appropriate international machinery).- Appendix II United Republic of Tanzania: Amendments to Draft Resolution IV Approved by the Commission on Human Rights at Its Twenty-Third Session on the Question Concerning the Implementation of Human Rights through a United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights or Some Other Appropriate International Machinery.- Appendix III Outline of Headings Sent to States by the Secretary-General When Inviting Reports on Civil and Political Rights for the Period 1 July 1965 to 30 June 1968.