The Human Rights Regime - Essay Example

? THE HUMAN RIGHTS REGIME by Presented to January 20, Introduction There are many different international treaties that have been passed in an attempt in improve world-wide human rights. While the current regime is far from perfect, use of it as a foundation for improvement is seen as the most effective future technique in this process (Yasuaki, 1996). The most important document that was passed in this effort was the Universal Declaration of Human rights. It was accepted and adopted on 10 Dec, 1948 by the General Assembly of the United Nations (United Nations, 1948). The rights provided by the declaration were divided into civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. These rights, which can be found in full on the website UN.org, were as follows: 1. Personal rights: Personal rights include the right to live, to have a nationality, to be recognized before law as a person, to have protection against inhumane treatment, punishment, or torture, and for protection against various racial, ethnic, sexual and religious discrimination. 2. Legal rights: These include provisions for addressing the crimes in cases where basic rights have been violated. Articles 8 through 12 have provisions for ensuring that fair and impartial public trials take place, that families of the arrested are protected, and that there is no interference by the legal system with anyone’s family, home and reputation. 3. Civil liberties: These include the right to freedom of speech, thought, conscience and religion. Everyone has the right to hold an opinion, express their point of view even in published works, movement, residence, peaceful assembly and association. Also included in civil liberties is the right to seek safety from persecution by leaving the country. 4. Subsistence rights: These include provisions for having the right to a certain standard of living. These rights include guaranteeing the ability to go out and fend for a living for one’s self and for one's family. 5. Economic rights: These include the right to work, to spend money, to rest and to have social security. Economic rights also cover the rights to found trade unions for the protection of workers, and the right of everyone to equal pay for equal work. 6. Social and cultural rights: These include the right to have a social life, to participate in community activities, to marry only by choice, and to have children. Additionally, the declaration makes provisions for the right to obtain a free primary education. 7. Political rights: These include the right to vote, to take part in government activities, to periodic and general elections with universal and equal suffrage. This list was the basis for the later declaration, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was submitted on 16 December 1966 and entered into force on 23 March 1976 (United Nations, 1976). Human rights declarations have been passed by the United Nations covering topics such as genocide, political rights of women, racial discrimination and torture. These rights have been further extended and explained upon from the Universal Declaration document, and thus we can safely say that the norms of the regime are consistent and coherent (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2007). It is generally agreed that these rights are interdependent and in complete synergy. They form a cohesive whole from which any nation or individual can pick. However, the existence of these treaties does not guarantee the rights will be given. They are binding international standards for the signatories of the treaties, but their implementation is not compulsory. It is up to the lawmakers of each nation to decide if the treaty is to be followed within that country. This is stated in Article 2, Section 7 of the UN Charter, which states that “Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter” (1945). Some matters are considered to be binding, primarily actions of the Security Council that fall under provisions of the Charter for activities that are considered “threats to the peace” (United Nations, 1945). History of the United Nations and its Powers and Limitations The Charter of the United Nations allows for much flexibility in the membership and powers of the organization. It was originally signed on 2 June 1945, and came into effect 24 October 1945. It slowly and gradually grew in size and is made of 53 governments today. Chapter II of the UN Charter covers the requirements for membership in the organization, which mostly include following the restrictions of the Charter. Additionally, the United Nations has a Security Council made up of five permanent members and ten non-permanent members, elected to the Security Council for two-year terms (1945). The main objectives of the United Nations were to foster co-operation and build alliances between nations (United Nations, 1945). Both these objectives were uncontroversial where principle was concerned. However, when put in practice these principles were not as sound. The promise of the United Nations to promote global human rights was drawn into question. Under this promise, the United Nations had to hold its member nations to standards beyond the control of those member nations. Primarily, the concern has been about Chapter VII of the Charter, which allows the United Nations to hold member countries to binding agreements (1945). The later years of the commission saw it embroiled in a web of controversies about the basic operation of the council. The membership of the Security Council has been seen as a “relic”, not representing the division of power in the world today, but since changing the permanent members of the Security Council would require the approval of all members of the current council, this is unlikely to happen (United Nations Security Council, 2010). This lack of check on the power of the security council to decide its own membership is enough to engender controversy, but it is not the only point of contention. Some believe that the commission lost its credibility because it failed to deliver what it had promised but others felt that the commission lost is credibility because of its failure to condemn governments that were responsible for the egregious cases of human rights violations. They felt that those governments were given a free ticket to do anything even if it meant violation of human rights. Membership was sought as a way to protect a nation against accusations of human rights violations, not as a way to improve human rights within that country (Terlingen, 2007). Additionally, the UN has been seen as refusing to declare sides on human rights violations, as with the International Criminal Court's warrant against Sudanese president al-Bashir. Due to the number of members of the United Nations with economic considerations in Sudan, the UN refused to refer to the issues in Darfur as genocide and was even called on to suspend the warrant (Forelle and Lauria, 2009). Implementation of Human Rights Declarations As explained in the aforementioned paragraphs, the decision to implement these principles was always left largely to the various political leaders. However in the light of circumstances that had prevailed world over, there was a lot of political and capital gain momentum that the various human rights declarations received. The main procedural principle of contemporary international law is national jurisdiction. The covenants are not and were never binding on any nation (United Nations, 1945). They only became obligatory on those states who were signatories and agreed to become parties to the treaties. However, the United Nations treaties did cause a gradual evolution in human rights laws the world over. After the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948 various other regional instruments were passed. The instruments addressed human rights related issues at the regional and national level. Many parts of the world have laid down the foundations of their human rights machinery in their respective regions on the basis of what was passed by UN. They have all now established numerous non-state actors such as multi-lateral commissions and courts (Yasuaki, 1996). Asian states have been particularly active in the last few years in furthering human rights in their regions. There are statements and documents which show that the Asian states have been trying to uphold the regional human rights treaties they have passed and to uphold the Vienna Declaration of 1993, a declaration that was noted for its new support for the rights of women and children (United Nations, 1993; Asian NGO, 2003). This in itself explains how important the regional arrangements are in promotion and protection of human rights, as the ability to pass regional declarations allows national leaders to feel that they are still in control of the laws of their countries. When regional declarations are passed, many signatories will then also choose to uphold other regions declarations, or world-wide declarations such as the International Civil and Political Rights Convention. Implications of the Passage of International Standards One of the most important activities in the category of increasing human rights has been the ratification of the Convention on The Rights of Children on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. In recent years, many countries have adopted the standards of this declaration (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2007). In this arena, states have adopted various laws in collaboration with the Beijing Platform for Action, which is a regional attempt to improve the state of human rights for women (Fourth World Conference for Women, 1995). The biggest point of contention for this political moment is if all these efforts will eventually pave way for institutionalization of the world political system. Institutionalization is the process of formulating a structured organization; these naysayers fear that these standards are leading to a single world government. This fear comes from the fact that nations that are exposed to the most external influences when attempting to formulate a political system have the highest rates of failure in those systems (Provizer, 1978). Human Rights Declarations in Asia While these the major regional systems differ in their interpretation of human rights, treaties and protocols, their perspective is more or less the same. However, they do differ in the way they have implemented these treaties and protocols. An example of a region that differs in its application of human rights laws is southeast Asia. Implementation of human rights changes in Asia was never an easy task. This is primarily because Asia is a huge land and is home to the world’s greatest population. It is the largest continent out there. Asian countries are mostly heterogeneous; their populations are internally extremely similar in race, ethnicity, and religion. However, as a group there is immense cultural and ethnic diversification among Asian countries (Central Intelligence Agency, 2011). It is because of this kind of diversity that exists in Asian states that most Asian politicians have voiced their disapproval of Western bias and seek self-determination. They seek to be recognized as different from both their neighboring countries and from the Western world (Yasuaka, 1996). Despite their objections, the need still remains for these countries to be held to an international standard for human rights. Respect for human dignity cannot be changed according to the surrounding environment. The advocates of Asian values are of the view that collectivism is an important Confucian discipline. The individuals in each national should follow the rules of their group because the group is more important. In opposition to this view, one Confucian scholar points out “the argument that an individual’s worth is found only in the group, and that people are content with subordination to the group, originates from misinterpretation of what is described in Confucianism.” (Kim, n.d.) According to this argument, the rights of the individual are just as important as the rights of the nation, and should be respected. The Role of Non-state Actors with Regard to Human Rights and Terrorism The term ‘Non-state actors’ can be explained as a broad category of performers in the world of politics that are driven by their respective interests and ideologies, can influence the global affairs and cannot be attributed as a part of any sovereign state.(Highbeam Research, 2002). Non-state actors include International Government Organizations like the United Nations and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), as well as the Non-Governmental Organizations such as nationalist, militant groups like the Afghan Taliban and multinational corporations (Arizona, n.d). The Cotonou Agreement that took place between the European Union and the developing countries, describes non-state actors as part of the civil society and the private sector (Development and Relations with African, Caribbean and Pacific States, 2010). The Non-State Actors Working Group defines them as "organizations with less than full international recognition as a government who employ a military strategy." (Non- State Actors and Their Significance, c.2002) As such, the common interpretation that the term refers solely to violent and terrorist groups is negated, and one can infer that non-state actors have a vital contribution not only in promoting terrorism, but also in alleviating it. Terrorism is complex phenomenon to define. This is due to the different beliefs of states on what criminal behaviour is and what is not. An act may be perceived as a terrorist act by one nation based on their regulations, while it may be classified as a fight for freedom by another (Flemme, 2004: 38). Guerrilla groups in Kashmir fighting and resisting Indian invasion are termed as terrorists in India, where as people in Kashmir and Pakistan revere them for taking a stand for their independence and integrity (Gorman, 2009). A commonly accepted interpretation of terrorism is given by Primoratz, who explains it as “the deliberate use of violence, or threat of its use, against innocent people, with the aim of intimidating some other people into a course of action they otherwise would not take” (Primoratz, 2004). It is the use of fear to intimidate individuals, societies and governments and compel them to yield to the terrorists’ objectives. The objectives can be political, ideological or religious (Terrorism Research n.d). As is obvious from the above discussion, state’s power over the NSA may be more limited than it seems, as rights may be violated despite state’s attempt to tackle it fairly. National laws for example may not be able to protect the victim if the non-state organisation is more powerful than even the nation's laws. The criminal may escape to another country which does not have any extradition deal with the country, in which case guilt lies with the non-state actor only and the country does not deserve to be accused. This has been practically observed in many cases like that of the Mastromatteo vs. Italy case ruled by European Court of Human Rights (Netherlands Institute of Human Rights, 2002), when the country could not protect a man’s life, but was not considered responsible by international law because it had applied all means to prevent such acts with due diligence. Most of the wars fought in the latter half of the twentieth century involve stateless, non-state and anti-state actors that are outside the control of governments recognized by the UN. These actors range from rebel groups, irregular armed groups and de facto territorial government bodies to drug cartels. The Sri Lankan Government, for instance, faces constant opposition from Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which is a non-state insurgence group that is struggling for an independent homeland for the ethnic Tamil minority in the country. This has resulted in a loss of 9,500 lives since 1996 only (MAIC, c.2004). The Nicaraguan Counter rebels had formed a de facto regime in the country against the government, with help of heavy military and financial assistance from the US government. Case was filed against the US by Nicaraguan Authority in the International Court of Justice in 1986. Decision was taken against the US and the court ordered it to "cease and to refrain" from the "unlawful use of force" against the other country. According to the draft article 8 of ILC, “The conduct of a person or group of persons shall be considered an act of a State under international law if the person or group of persons is in fact acting on the instructions of, or under the direction or control of that State in carrying out the conduct”. This was therefore regarded as a national responsibility rather than that of the non-state rebels. The Non-state Actor Working Group estimates that there are about 190 terrorist non-state actors that have been recognized so far (Non- State Actors and Their Significance, c.2002). The forum that currently plays a central role in making legislations and ensuring their implementation for the promotion of peace, the United Nations, is also an non-state actor. The United Nations regards terrorism as a threat to international peace and security, and deems it contrary to its principles and purpose (UN Action to Counter Terrorism, 2008). The UN not only has multilateral conventions for member nations to combat terrorism, but has also established laws on how to deal with violent non-state groups. The intensity of many terrorist activities showed that they were probably being backed by sympathetic political leaders. This led UN to devise means of inhibiting the relation between the terrorist non-state groups and their political backers. In December 1999, the UN adapted a resolution that bound all member states to suppress all means of financing and assistance to these non-state terrorist groups (UN Action to Counter Terrorism, 2008). Consequences of violation could be penalty through economic sanctions and diplomatic efforts. UN sanctioned Iraq in December of 1979 because of its potential involvement in aiding numerous terrorist groups including Al Qaeda and the Palestinian Liberation Front (PLF). Libya was also subjected to sanctions in 1992, due to its perceived support of nearly 50 international terrorist organizations and 40 other radical governments in Africa, Asia, Europe, and America (Gorman, 2009). These restrictions were regulated by the UN and resulted in successful withdrawal of the nations' political support for the violent non-state actors. Multi-National Corporations as Non-State Actors The seemingly commercial multi-national corporations can also play a dominant role in global affairs. History records a classic example of how a mere British trade company in India rose to take control of the nation- through the use of force. The Honourable East India Company entered India in 1612 as traders of cotton, silk, dye, saltpetre and tea. With the Mughal Empire’s help and the autonomy given by British monarchy, East India Company’s status in India was enhanced. East India Company now had the rights to autonomous territorial acquisitions, to form alliances, command troops and to practice civil and criminal authority over the areas acquired (Landow, 2010). It even raised its navy and minted its own currency to be used for trade by Indian population (Wild, 2000). The company officers enjoyed sprawling profits and obtained power over military and political grounds that enabled them to defeat the French and Dutch forces that were competing for trade power in India. East India Company also continued to counter resistance from local rulers through military actions. They invaded many strong states and gradually took over the entire Southern, Eastern and Western Indian regions (Holmes, 2005). The actions of the Hounorable East India Company could be considered an indirect form of terrorism; the Indian peasants they controlled were paralyzed economically and politically. The law of Permanent Settlement was passed by Lord Cornwallis, which was an agreement between the East India Company and Bengali landlords to collect fixed revenues from land (Hunter, 2005). Since the tax demand was high, the land owners were soon burdened with loans. Landlords and British official focused on the plantation of cash crops like dye and cotton rather than rice and wheat, leading to severe famines in the regions. According to Abbe Raynal, who wrote on the Bengal famine of 1770 - 1971, the chief agent of the East India Company and the Council of Calcutta were ‘kept locked up in their magazine a part of the harvest, and carried on the most odious and the most criminal of all monopolies.’ (cited in Guha, 1982). Additionally, the East India Company manipulated the value of the local currency. This quickly led to a decline in local living standards (Mukherjee, 2005). This kind of influence by a non-state actor soon transformed the Indian Mughal Empire to British Raj in 1858 through through so-called white collar terrorism. It is this conduct that is responsible for the riots that led to Indian Mutiny of 1857, which ended in a deadly massacre and humiliation of Indians at hands of the British (Mukherjee, 2005). Multinational corporations continue to dominate the world affairs even today. A fact widely accepted by many in the United States and across the world is that the war in Iraq was launched to acquire the country’s oil reserves, which are the second largest in the world, and was not due to terror threats. Haliburton Oil Company was awarded two contracts in Iraq to help rebuild their oil wells, contracts it describes only as “multimillion dollar” (Daily, 2010). These investments are being given to American companies, for working on Iraqi land. These immensely lucrative multi-national corporations are run by influential elites like former vice-president Dick Cheney and former president George Bush, who have been pursuing their non-state motives through state measures. A former member of President George W. Bush's cabinet claimed that Mr. Bush had decided to invade Iraq in April 2001, which was before the September 11 attack (Suskind, 2004). His cabinet had agreed that “Iraq remains a destabilising influence to the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East” and that US military intervention was necessary to prevent any risks in future (The Debate, c. 2003). While the United States may refer to the war as war against terrorism, the fact remains that millions of Iraqi citizens have died in order to achieve economic stability for the United States and most possibly hidden economic objectives that are greatly driven by oil giants of the world’s non-state corporate. Ironically as well, the war has had a highly de-stabilizing effect on the United States economy, due to the high expenses of a long-term military campaign (Baker, 2007). The Media as a Non-State Actor Another non state player that has emerged recently in the terrorism crisis is the international media, which shapes the strategies of both states and non-states on the critical issue. Terrorist non-state actors exploit the media to spread fear among the public, communicate their demands to the world and threaten governments of severe consequences if their demands are not met. This is done not only through audio video messages, but also through the coverage and attention given to terrorist acts in the mainstream talk shows and daily news reports (National Intelligence Council, 2007). Spreading these messages helps the terrorist groups create fear in the world population. Martha Crenshaw (cited in Perisin and Cvrtila, 2009) rightly concluded that “the most fundamental goal of terrorism is to be awarded and receive attention.” The intention of the media however, is to cover all the sensational developments that increase its ratings and attract viewership, along with practicing their and the publics’ right of freedom to speech. Whatever the reason, the media should realize the social responsibility of its actions as well as the spin-offs that fall in favour of the violent non-state actors, and modify its conduct accordingly to prevent the success of terror techniques (National Intelligence Council, 2007). Conclusion Thus, as explained in the aforementioned paragraphs, the Human Rights Declaration by the United Nations had far reaching implications on the world. They gave way for new treaties, sub-treaties and new laws, especially where terrorism was concerned. Concerns that the United Nations was attempting to control the governments of the world seem to be unfounded, as the members of the commission are still allowed to decide whether to implement any such treaty. Future international lawmakers, however, have many new points to take into account when formulating such treaties. They must recognize that the actions and laws of national and regional governments are not the only factors that have an effect on human rights in the world today. The activities of both United Nation-recognized leaders and the many current non-state actors must be allowed for when writing the new standards. The role of international organisations is only increasing. The power of the many non-state actors in the world can only be controlled by another, larger, non-state actor such as a more powerful United Nations. Fighting the use of terror as a political tactic and increasing human rights in the world will require the continued passage and enforcement of new international standards for behaviour. References and Bibliography Asian NGO (2003). Bangkok Statement on Vienna +10. In: UN/ESCAP, 15-16 December 2003, Bangkok. [online] Available from . Last accessed 20 January 2011. Baker, D. (2007). The Economic Impact of the Iraq War and Higher Military Spending. [online] Available from . Last accessed 20 Jan 2011. BBC News (2003) Oil firms 'discuss Iraqi stake' [online] available from [24 October 2010] Bernard S. C., The Initial British Impact on India: A case study of the Benares region, The Journal of Asian Studies. 19,(4). Bodansky, D. & Crook, J. (2002) Symposium: The ILC’s State Responsibility Articles The American Journal of International Law [online] 97, (773) available from [28 October 2010] Brownlie, Ian (1983), System of the Law of Nations State: Responsibility Part I, New York: Oxford University Press. Cameron, Iain, “Human Rights and Terrorism” in Peace and Security: Current Challenges in International Law edited by Amneus, Diana and Svanberg-Torpman, Katinka, Studentlitteratur, 2004, Lund, Sweden Crawford, J. & Olleson, S (2003) The Nature and Forms of International Responsibility in International Law. 1st ed., New York: Oxford University Press Inc. Crawford, J., Simon, O., and Peel, J. (2001) Responsibility of Internationally Wrongful Acts. EJIL. 12 (5) 963-991. Central Intelligence Agency (2011). The World Factbook [online]. [Accessed 20 January 2011]. Available from: . Cvrtila, V., Peresin, A., (2009) ‘The Transformation of Terrorism and New Strategies’ Politicka misao, [online] 46, (5) 121-139 available from [20 October 2010] Daily, M.. (2010).Halliburton wins Eni contract in Iraq. [online] Available from . Last accessed 31 August 2010. The Debate (c.2003) War on Iraq [online] available from [24 October 2010] European Commission (2010) The Cotonou Agreement [online] available from [23 October 2010] “East India Company" (1911). Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. 8, p.835 Foreign Policy (2010) This Week at War: Is Mexico’s Drug War Doomed? [online] available from [October 2010] Flemme, M. (2004) Due Diligence in International Law Unpublished Masters Thesis: University of Lund. Forelle, C. and Lauria, J. Sudan President Charged With Darfur War Crimes. (2009). Wall Street Journal, 5 March, p.A8. [online] Available from . Last accessed 20 January 2011. Fourth World Conference on Women (1995). Beijing Platform for Action. In: Fourth World Conference on Women, September 1995, Beijing. [online] Available from: . Last accessed 20 January 2011. Gorman, F. (2009) Non-State Actors, Terrorism and the United Nations: A Critical Analysis through three Case Studies Examining the United Nations’ Effectiveness in Addressing the Threat Imposed by Violent Non-State Actors. Thesis submitted to: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Highbeam Research (2002) Dictionary definition: Non-state actors [online] Available from [21 October 2010] History Guy (n.d.) Iran-US Hostage Crisis:1979-1981 [online] Available from Holmes, R. (2005). Sahib: the British soldier in India, 1750-1914. London: HarperCollins. Guardian News (2010) Iraq war logs: military privatization run amok. [online] Available from [28 October 2010] Guha, R. (1982). A rule of property for Bengal: an essay on the idea of permanent settlement. 2nd. ed. India: Orient Blackswan. The Huffington Post (2009). There is No Z in Blackwater. [online] available from [24 October 2010] Kim, J. (n.d.). Development of Regional Human Rights Regime: Prospects for and Implications to Asia [online]. [Accessed 20 January 2011]. Available from: . Loveman, E (c. 2004). Non-State Actors in Sri Lanka [online] available from [22 October 2010] Lysen, G., (1997) State Responsibility and International Liability of States for Lawful Acts: A Discussion of Principles, Sweden: Iustus Forlag AB. Margaret Buse (c.2002) Non- State Actors and Their Significance. [Online] Available from [21 October 2010] Mukherjee, A. (2005) Colonial India and Imperial Britain (Part 1) [online] available from [24 October 2010] National Intelligence Council (2007). Nonstate Actors: Impact on International Relations and Implications for the United States. In: NIC-Eurasia Group Seminar, August 2007. [online] Available from . Last accessed 20 January 2011. Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (2002) Mastreomatteo vs. Italy, Utrecht School of Law. [online] available from . Last accessed 20 January 2011. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2007). International Law [online]. [Accessed 20 January 2011]. Available from: . “Press Briefing from the United Nations regarding the Implementing the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.” [Online] Available from . Primoratz, I., (2004) What Is Terrorism? Terrorism the Philosophical New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Provizer, N. (1978). Analyzing the Third World. 1st. ed. Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing Group. Scahill, J. (2007) Blackwater's Black Ops [online] available from [ 23 October 2010] Scahill, J. (2009) Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder [online] available from [24 October 2010] Sen, B., (1988) A diplomat’s handbook of international law and practice, 3rd ed., Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Shaw, M., (1997) International Law, 4th ed., The United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Terlingen, Y. (2007). The Human Rights Council: A New Era in UN Human Rights Work? [Commentary]. Ethics and International Affairs [online]. [Accessed 20 January 2011 ], n.p. Available from: . Suskind, R. (2004). The Price of Loyalty. 1st. ed. New York: Simon and Schuster. Terrorist Groups: An Overview. (n.d.) South Asia Terrorism Portal. [Online] Available from [28 October 2008] Terrorism Research (n.d.) What is Terrorism? [Online] available from [2 October 2010] UK Parliament (1971) East Pakistan: India Pakistan Relations and the United Nation. [Online] Available from [28 November 2008] UN Action to Counter Terrorism. Welcome to the UN. [online] Available from . [4 Dec. 2008] United Nations (1948), The universal declaration of human rights. [online] Available from . Last accessed 20 January 2011. United Nations (1976). International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights. [online] Available from . [20 January 2011] United Nations (1945). Charter of the United Nations. [online] Available from . Last accessed 20 January 2011. United Nations (1993). Report of the World Conference on Human Rights. In: WORLD CONFERENCE ON HUMAN RIGHTS, 13 October 1993, Vienna. [online] Available from . Last accessed 20 January 2011. United Nations Security Council [online]. (2010) [Accessed 20 January 2011]. Available from: . Yasuaki, O. (1996). Cultural Sources of Human Rights in East Asia. Human Rights Dialogue [online].1, 5 [Accessed 20 January 2011 ], np. Available from: . Read More