Marlies Hesselman

Accountability for the Human Rights Implications of Natural Disasters: A Proposal for Systemic International Oversight

The practical and operational challenges of responding to disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis and hurricanes are well known. The recent decision by the UN Human Rights Council to commission research on best practices and challenges in the promotion and protection of human rights in post-disaster situations therefore reflects the increasing acknowledgement of the human rights implications of natural and human-made disasters. This article analyses the approach taken by existing international accountability mechanisms concerning humanitarian preparations for and responses to major natural disasters, before advancing proposals for more effective and systematic oversight of human rights protection in disasters. Such systemic approaches are intended to promote greater legal clarity for States and humanitarian actors confronted with the uncertainty and devastation resulting from major natural and human-made disasters, and as a means of spurring redress for those affected.

Establishing a Full 'Cycle of Protection' for Disaster Victims: Preparedness, Response and Recovery According to Regional and International Human Rights Supervisory Bodies

This article includes a comprehensive analysis of work currently being carried out by regional and international human rights supervisory bodies in the field of disaster management, being cognizant of the fact that the past decade has seen an increased international concern for the adequate protection of persons affected by disasters. Taking on board suggestions by Walter Kalin that effective disaster management encompasses three distinct phases, i.e. preparedness, response and recovery, jointly constituting a full ‘cycle of protection’, this paper analyzes the pronouncements of bodies specifically against this backdrop. The article argues that human rights bodies have already started to engage in clarifying human rights obligations in all these phases, which is important because our improved understanding of the (man-made) causes and consequences of disasters, and any pre-existing vulnerabilities that exacerbate impacts, might require a more holistic approach to managing disaster settings generally, including from a perspective of human rights.

Adopting New International Health Instruments - What Can We Learn From the FCTC?: Comment on “The Legal Strength of International Health Instruments - What It Brings to Global Health Governance?”

This Commentary forms a response to Nikogosian’s and Kickbusch’s forward-looking perspective about the legal strength of international health instruments. Building on their arguments, in this commentary we consider what we can learn from the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) for the adoption of new legal international health instruments.

Sharing International Responsibility for the Protection of Poor Migrants? An Analysis of Extraterritorial Socio-Economic Human Rights Law

This paper analyzes the possible legal bases for or the existence of extraterritorial socio-economic human rights obligations on the part of wealthier European ‘Destination Countries’ vis-a-vis poor migrants. In particular, the paper considers whether obligations of international cooperation and assistance under the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) might be a basis to address socio-economic deprivation in Countries of Origin and lead to provision of social assistance extraterritorially. The paper also analyzes the socio-economic case-law under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in respect of the conditions that attach to expulsion of migrants (e.g. M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece, Sufi and Elmi v. the UK, and S.H.H. v. the UK).The joint analysis of these documents support that wealthy States can attract responsibilities to provide protection against living in poverty in other countries, in fact, either at home or abroad. At the same time, while language and semantics on extraterritorial socio-economic protection are converging under the ICESCR and ECHR, there are also a number of questions that remain. These relate primarily to the allocation of concrete burdens to wealthy European States for the elimination/prevention of poverty in other countries and towards migrants coming from such countries, i.e. how far does the responsibility stretch?

Disaster and Non-State Actors: Human Rights-Based Approaches

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the roles and responsibilities of non-state actors (NSAs) in contributing to disaster governance from an international human rights law (IHRL) perspective. In particular, it examines how non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and business enterprises are implicated. Design/methodology/approach The paper analyzes a range of IHRL instruments, particularly treaties and international soft-law documents, and it utilizes the concepts “human rights-based approaches” (HRBAs) and “direct”/“indirect” human rights obligations to frame and understand how IHRL responsibilities for NSAs arise from these instruments. Findings IHRL not only includes relevant standards for NSAs in the area of disaster management, but NGOs and businesses also actively engage with IHRL and HRBAs by means of (soft) self-regulatory instruments to further clarify their responsibilities. Research limitations/implications The findings are of interest to all actors involved in disaster governance, and are instructive for NGOs and businesses seeking to improve the design of disaster management activity. The research addresses only the responsibility of NGOs and private companies, but the framework of analysis set out is equally of interest to other actors’ activities. Originality/value The implications of IHRL for NSAs involved in disaster management are still poorly understood, despite their vast engagement. This study contributes by clarifying the roles and IHRL responsibilities of NGOs and businesses specifically, and articulates how applications of HRBAs may improve the protection of persons.

Curbing the lifestyle disease pandemic: making progress on an interdisciplinary research agenda for law and policy interventions

By 2030, noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) will be the leading cause of death in every region in the world. While law and policy have an important role to play in curbing this pandemic, our current understanding of how they can most effectively be used is still limited. This contribution identifies a number of gaps in current research and insists on an interdisciplinary research agenda between law, health science and international relations aimed at designing concrete proposals for laws and policies to curb the NCD pandemic, both globally and domestically.