John Morijn

Reforming United Nations Human Rights Treaty Monitoring Reform

Discussions on the necessity to reform UN human rights treaty monitoring have witnessed a new dynamism over the last five years. After extensive consultation about ways to strengthen human rights treaty monitoring the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is expected to propose a new set of reform measures in 2012. This article aims to structure and analyse the different implemented and tabled streamlining and enhancement measures. It argues that a further reform of UN human rights treaty monitoring should take account of two fundamental considerations. Firstly, next to treaty monitoring other international human rights protection methods have gained significance over the last few decades. Today, judicial enforcement and political peer-to-peer protection through the UPR mechanism effectively condition the room for added value for treaty monitoring. Secondly, given that a case for such added value can still be made, it is significant that human rights monitoring mechanisms have not so far sufficiently been equipped, or equipped themselves to achieve structural domestic impact of their recommendations and views. This not only inherently hampers their impact, but also threatens support for their activities. In particular, prior requesting of specific input, clear indicators for what is compliant behaviour and what is not, and targeted follow-up to recommendations, all crucial aspects of ‘constructive dialogue’, have not been consistently institutionalised by treaty bodies. In this light the article outlines some concrete ways forward for a reformed reform agenda that could lay the groundwork for measures to sustainably strengthen UN human rights treaty monitoring.

The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Cultural Diversity in the EU

A crucial consequence of the Lisbon Treaty has been that the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR or the Charter) of the European Union (EU) became legally binding. As a result, considerations with direct and indirect cultural connotations, such as cultural and linguistic diversity (Article 22 CFR) were elevated to Charter level. Clearly then, at first sight the Charter holds potential to address more forcefully the cultural side of EU policy choices. However, economic considerations that are frequently at play while addressing cultural concerns, such as the freedom to conduct a business, have been similarly bolstered by their inclusion in the Charter (Article 16 CFR). Post-Lisbon, old and new cultural policy dilemmas, including the traditional balancing of economic and cultural interests, will have to be (re)considered within the framework of the Charter.

Unlocking and advancing the protection of religious beliefs in Strasbourg : towards sub-dividing "the public sphere"

Given the increasing religious diversification of European societies, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the pertinent Strasbourg jurisprudence are fast becoming a key consideration and reference point for States and their policy-makers. ECHR obligations effectively co-determine how States can and sometimes must protect religious beliefs. Without relying on abstract concepts, this contribution aims first to provide an overview of the approach that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) actually requires from States. It will be suggested that a useful way to make the case law (more) practicable would be for the Strasbourg Court (and those interpreting its work) to clarify when and how ECHR obligations are prescriptive or circumscriptive of States’ policy-making powers. The contribution will then go on to analyse some recent trends in the ECtHR case law, including the 2011 Lautsi ruling. This will lead to a proposal for the ECtHR to refine its case law by distinguishing two different scenarios in which religious beliefs are invoked.