Global Social Policy Principles: Human Rights & Social Justice Clare Ferguson April 1999 Acknowledgment Contents 1. Introduction 2. Needs and Rights - an Outline Framework for Social Policy Social policy: practical and strategic needs Human rights 3. Social Policy Concerns in UN Human Rights Documents Empowerment Freedom from Violence Democratic Participation Civil Society Livelihood Security Minimum livelihood Employment Labour Standards Service Provision Health Education Social Integration 4. Human Rights: Standard Setting and Accountability 5. Implications of UN Agreements for Global Social Policy Principles Bibliography Annex 1: UN documents included in mapping of social policy concerns Annex 2: Mapping of Social and Economic Issues in UN Documents Annex 3: Ratification of Major UN Human Rights Conventions 31.5.97 Annex 4. Targets
Acknowledgment I would like to thank Andy Norton for his considerable help in the production of this report. I would also like to thank those who responded to early drafts, including Bob Deacon and Annabel Grant. I am very grateful to Sarah Hovell for her assistance in the provision of information and editing the final text. The content of the report is entirely my own responsibility.
Global Social Policy Principles: Human Rights and Social Justice 1. Introduction The processes of globalisation have led, in the last years of the twentieth century, to the demand for the development of a universal set of principles to guide social policy. In the Harvard Lecture of December 1998, the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed the development of such principles not only to ensure minimum standards for every country in times of change but to equip people to make the most of the new opportunities that globalisation engenders (Brown:1998). Social policy has, traditionally, been undertaken and analysed at the national level. Competition between countries to attract trans national corporations and common markets in capital and labour, however, have generated the need for supranational social policies (Deacon 1997). It is suggested in this report that the global architecture (Eyben 1998) of UN conventions, declarations and world conference documents provides the most authoritative available source for the principles on which such principles could be constructed. UN documentation provides an internationally legitimised set of agreements on social, economic and political issues 1. The UN framework is constructed upon the concept of human rights which acknowledges the entitlements and needs of all people on the basis of their common humanity and the obligations of all governments to respect, protect and promote those rights. The object of this report is to assess the implications of this framework for the construction of global social policy principles. Critics of human rights have argued that the concept is ethnocentric, being founded upon western politics and philosophy. The history of the twentieth century, however, clearly shows that the language of rights has been adopted and used by citizens throughout the world as a means of claiming social justice. One of the building blocks of the international women s movement has been the call for the recognition of women s human rights. The 1 Annex one provides a list of UN instruments consulted for this report. Annex two provides a mapping of social issues contained in these documents. Annex three contains information on the ratification of major conventions. Annex four provides a list of the international development targets reaffirmed at Copenhagen. 1
South African freedom movement fought for the recognition of the human rights of all Africans and the new constitution, which incorporates economic and social rights, reflects this objective. There are many other examples of peoples throughout the world who have fought for their survival, freedom and social progress on the basis of human rights. Moreover, the UN system has shown itself to be responsive to the different definitions of human rights put forward by different parts of global society. The human rights framework gives equal weight to all rights, including the social and economic entitlements which have been seen as of primary importance to southern nations. The founding covenants of the human rights framework have been supplemented by conventions which address particular issues of discrimination on the basis of race, culture, gender and age. The history of the development and use of the human rights framework suggests that it does provide an overarching structure of consensus that can encompass the aspirations of the world s most vulnerable people. The founding objective of human rights treaties is the achievement of equality, dignity and justice for all. Specific UN instruments must be interpreted in a way which promotes this goal and not used as tools for the imposition of one particular set of ideas. Universal acceptance of the human rights framework has, in the past, been hampered by government action which has failed to respect the spirit of UN agreements. It has been argued that western governments have shown greater commitment to political and civil rights than the UN s social and economic instruments (Tomasevski 1997). Some of the economic and social policies and mechanisms contained in UN agreements have gained a common acceptance among northern donor organisations The international development targets adopted by the OECD, for example, originate from those objectives affirmed at Copenhagen which are recognised as a measure of governments promotion of social and economic rights (OECD 1996). There has been less active commitment, however, to the charters of human rights which outline a democratic framework for achievement of those targets. The development of a set of principles for a global social policy provides the opportunity for the international community to consider the value of human rights as a means of achieving already agreed goals. 2
It is assumed in this report that national governments remain primarily responsible for social policy. The growing importance, however, of actors from civil society and the private sector in ensuring the well-being of citizens cannot be ignored. These organisations include transnational corporations and non state providers of public services. One of the biggest challenges to the achievement of social justice, in the context of globalisation, is finding ways to ensure that these organisations accept their responsibilities to respect minimum standards in all their activities. Human rights treaties primarily define the legal obligations of states to meet certain standards of action and provision. But the international consensus behind the definition of UN standards gives human rights a legitimacy which extends beyond purely legal obligation. Human rights agreements, then, provide a sound basis for addressing the reponsibilities of all organisations, whether state, civil society or private, to ensure adherence to minimum standards of action. In section two of this report, the concerns of social policy are outlined and the difference between rights based and needs based approaches to social policy is considered. Section three provides an outline of the particular human rights, defined in UN documentation, which address social policy concerns. Section four considers questions of accountability and how universal principles can be implemented in a way which is responsive to different national, regional and local contexts. The concluding section offers a set of principles which could be used as guidelines for the development of a global social policy on the basis of human rights documentation. 3
4
2. Needs and Rights - an Outline Framework for Social Policy Social policy: practical and strategic needs This section provides a brief introduction to relevant debates about approaches to social policy. Competing ideas concerning the definition and content of social policy reflect different visions of society as well as ideas about the best instruments for promoting social change (Ladbury and Kinnear 1995). The focus in this section is on the distinction between rights and needs based understandings of social policy and the complementary roles these two approaches play in achieving the objective of social justice. The recent history of western social policy has largely been shaped by two different, but equally necessary, understandings of the nature of the person. Social scientists have understood individuals to be both active choice-making agents and the site of wants, such as hunger, which require satisfaction. In the language of social policy, the former leads to consideration of rights while the latter prompts concern with questions of need (Dasgupta 1990). The concept of rights provided the basis for the post war international consensus which led to the foundation of the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions. Since the late 1970s, however, the concept of needs has become predominant in debates about social policy. Arguments about the definition, interpretation and implementation of needs have provided one of the primary frameworks for attempts to redefine the role of state and market mechanisms in the redistribution of goods and services. In developed, developing and transitional countries alike, social policy has focused on questions about which, and whose, needs governments should meet. In all cases, there has been a shift away from universal government provision to a narrower focus on the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable. The conceptualisation of people as having needs, rather than being active agents, has shaped understandings of policy processes as well as content. In many cases it has been assumed that the beneficiaries of social policy are passive targets without their own objectives or interests. Social policies have, consequently, been formulated and 5
implemented through top-down technocratic processes. In reality, not only do policy targets have their own strategies and values, but the processes of policy formulation, interpretation and implementation also involve a range of individuals and organisations with particular interests and goals. Contemporary social policy has therefore moved beyond the top-down model of government action as a means of meeting centrally determined ends. The concept of needs remains fundamental to debates about social policy. But, rather than being defined from the top-down, emphases on participation and partnership promote the idea that interventions to identify and meet the needs of the poor should start from the bottom up and promote the involvement of networks and organisations from both civil society and government. The term strategic needs has commonly been applied to issues of agency and power in relation to individuals participation in social, economic and political processes. The term practical needs generally refers to everyday requirements for resources to ensure basic existence. The general concerns of contemporary social policy, then, can be categorised as follows: empowerment: mechanisms to promote individuals ability to participate in and influence the decision making processes, in the household as well as formal public arenas, which shape their lives. livelihood security: provision of the material resources, assets and services including income, required for subsistence and wealth generation. service provision: access to education and health services which respond to people s needs and understandings of quality. social integration: the inclusion of all groups in social, economic and political processes. Concern with integration requires attention to common axes of social differentiation and marginalisation defined by gender, race, age and income. Human Rights The UN framework addresses these social policy concerns in terms of rights. As outlined above, concepts of rights prioritise the idea that individuals are active agents rather than simply having needs that require satisfaction. All rights, whether inscribed in international, 6
national or local institutions, can be understood as legitimised claims. Rights can therefore be distinguished from people s perceptions of their own entitlement which have yet to be legitimised. While needs based approaches help to identify the resource requirements of particular groups, rights based approaches provide a means of strengthening people s claims to those resources. Rights based approaches complement, rather than contradict or replace, needs based understandings of social policy. Human rights are the claims which the international community, under the auspices of the UN, has agreed that people are entitled to make on their governments. The UN framework sets out people s agreed rights to claim resources which meet both their practical and strategic needs. As human rights are embedded in international law, states have obligations to meet agreed standards of action and provision. Non state organisations do not necessarily have the same legal obligations to abide by these standards. However, the fact that the definition and interpretation of human rights depends upon a process of international agreement, which now includes the involvement of civil society organisations, means that the UN framework has a legitimacy which reaches beyond the boundaries of purely legal requirements. A human rights approach to social policy draws on these internationally legitimised rights as a means of strengthening the ability of vulnerable groups to claim social, political and economic resources to meet their needs (Ferguson 1999). The founding charters of the human rights framework are the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR); the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The UDHR, ICESCR and ICCPR set out the rights to claim social, economic and political resources and, concomitantly, governments obligation to meet those claims. Subsequent conventions detail the provisions which governments should respect in order to ensure that particular groups can overcome barriers to claiming these resources. These conventions include the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC); the Convention on 7
the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 2 and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The Declarations, and programmes of action from Vienna (WCHR), Cairo (ICPD), Copenhagen(WSSD) and Beijing (FWCW), do not have the same status in international law as the conventions. These documents, however, are based on international agreement and provide guidelines on some of the policy implications of meeting human rights. The report also draws on the core labour rights defined by the International Labour Organisation, which are recognised as human rights in the UN system. These documents contain the primary instruments which define the social cultural and economic, as well as civil and political, claims that individuals can make on their governments on the basis of their human rights. The principle of the indivisibility of human rights indicates that social and economic rights must be given the same weight as civil and political rights. Rights to health, for example, cannot be realised if people are unable to exercise democratic rights to participation in decision making processes about service provision. Equally, people cannot participate in decision making processes if they do not have the health or general economic well-being to do so. One of the main objections to the use of human rights standards as a basis for social policy has been that, as states have different economic capacities, economic and social rights cannot be universally implemented (Mishra 1998). The work of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has addressed this issue. States are obliged, regardless of the level of economic development, to ensure respect for minimum subsistence rights for all. Other rights must be progressively realised. The state has obligations to respect, protect and promote social and economic rights. This means that the state is required to ensure that rights are enjoyed in practice as well as law. State obligations contain elements of conduct as well as result. The obligation of result ties states to internationally agreed targets, including those outlined in Copenhagen. These 2 The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (DEVAW) is also included in this report. DEVAW has been recognised by the CEDAW treaty body as an elaboration of CEDAW (International Women Tribune Centre 1998). 8
targets use indicators of well-being to measure the extent to which governments have met their responsibilities to ensure the just distribution of resources. Obligations of conduct require states to draw up, and implement, plans of action or policies which could reasonably be expected to lead to the enjoyment of given rights (Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights:1997). The human rights framework requires governments to prioritise resources in accordance with stated principles, rather than make open ended and unrealistic commitments to government provision. Nonetheless, the issue of the concrete meaning and time boundaries of progressive realisation is one which continues to raise necessary questions about national and international obligations to meet social and economic rights. Questions about resources, however, should not overshadow the value of applying the human rights framework in situations where government budgets are severely limited. The concept of rights assumes that people are claim bearing individuals with their own goals and strategies. Human rights approaches to development thus start from the promotion of participation as this is a prerequisite to making all other claims (Hausermann 1998). The objective of the human rights framework, however, is not simply one of promoting individual agency. It is also concerned with particular outcomes. These objectives include the achievement of equality and social justice - the fair distribution of social and economic opportunities and resources. There are, inevitably, conflicts between the promotion of individual agency and the realisation of these social outcomes (Dasgupta 1990). It is the responsibility of the state to ensure that individuals claims to rights are met in relation to these overarching goals (Goonesekere 1998). The human rights framework places individual agency and participation within a context of state responsibility for realising the rights of all citizens without discrimination. Its application, however, does not provide over simplified answers to the complex questions which these conflicting demands may produce. On the contrary, it highlights the necessity to take a holistic approach to the complexities of social, economic and political relations. One illustration of both the value and challenge of applying the concept of human rights lies in the tension between rights to self determination in reproductive decision making and 9
government obligations to meet the social and economic rights of all citizens. The question of whether there are any circumstances which would allow the social good to take precedence over women s rights to choose is one which has fueled a long and on-going debate. Rosalind Petchesky answered this question in 1980 by arguing that the only circumstances in which the social good could take precedence over women s rights were when women had been fully included in the decision making process which determined the policy priorities (Petchesky 1980). A subsequent response has been that, in many cases, observation of women s reproductive rights by family planning programmes improves the up-take and efficient use of contraceptives and, consequently, is more likely to lead to a decrease in fertility levels (Hardon 1997). Neither of these responses provides a definitive answer to the question of individual rights versus social outcomes in population issues. What the human rights framework does make clear, however, is that there are no circumstances under which women s reproductive and other political, social and economic rights should not be taken into consideration in the development of population and family planning policies. Any organisation which adopts a rights based approach has to consider carefully how to negotiate conflicting claims on government in order to best promote equality. If social justice is the goal, however, the starting point must always be consideration of the rights of the poorest and most vulnerable. Human rights principles raise questions about the nature of the relationship between public agents and citizens; the responsiveness of service providers to users needs and the extent to which the policies and practices of public organisations challenge or reinforce the inequalities between different groups of citizens. Whatever rational decisions are made about the distribution of resources at international or national level, it is often public agents working in provincial offices or village clinics who determine the de facto distribution of available resources (Lipsky 1980). It is the practices of these gate-keepers that decide who is registered for a land resettlement programme, whether the elderly or poor are given available drugs and how girls are treated in schools. In countries the world 10
over, lack of regard for the principles of equality and respect for human dignity mean that, in practice, whatever the stated policies of governing organisations, the reality is that the most vulnerable are often the least likely to gain access to the resources which are available. Women who are treated rudely at clinics do not go back. Those who are not educated will be the most intimidated by officials administering claims to land. Girls who are subject to sexual harassment and abuse at school may leave, having learned only to expect the same treatment from their future husband. The power differentials between public agents and people mean that their practices often reinforce, rather than redress, social and economic inequalities between citizens. If progressive realisation of human rights means only that the claims of the poor and vulnerable to available resources are strengthened it would more than make a difference. 11
12
The 3. Social Policy Concerns in UN Human Rights Documents In this section human rights relevant to social policy concerns are discussed. These human rights are derived from international instruments agreed under the auspices of the UN. As set out in the introduction, social policy concerns include empowerment, livelihood security, service provision and social integration. Empowerment The Beijing conference made empowerment its central theme: Platform for Action is an agenda for women s empowerment.this means that the principle of shared power and responsibility should be established between women and men at home, in the workplace and in the wider national and international community (FWCW 1). Freedom from violence Beijing identifies freedom from all forms of gender based violence as being central to women s self determination and empowerment (FWCW 2.112-130).The UDHR sets out the general right to security of the person (UDHR 3). Article 7 of the ICCPR specifies that no one shall be subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (ICCPR 7). The Convention against Torture (CAT) defines torture as any act by which severe mental or physical suffering is intentionally inflicted on a person for reasons including discrimination (CAT 1). This definition indicates that acts of violence against women, based on gender discrimination, are an abuse of human rights. The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (DEVAW) affirms that all forms of gender based violence against women constitute a violation of human rights. Article two of DEVAW identifies instances of violence against women in three spheres: household, including battering, sexual abuse of female children, marital rape and female genital mutilation.the Convention on the Rights of the Child also identifies 13
harmful traditional practices as being acts of discrimination against the girl child and, consequently, a human rights abuse (CRC 24.3) communities, including rape, sexual abuse and sexual harassment state, including the use of rape in situations of armed conflict Measures to combat these forms of violence against women include the development of sanctions to punish the perpetrators of violence and the provision of sanctuary and rehabilitation centres for the victims of violence (DEVAW 4). The FWCW recommends that trafficking in women and children should be addressed through legislative measure to protect women and children and ensure that the perpetrators of crimes are punished (FWCW 130). Not all forms of violence are recognised as human rights abuses. Nonetheless, the predominance of violent crimes may deter individuals from participating in social, economic and political life and realising their recognised rights. Issues of general violence linked to crime were addressed at Copenhagen. The Programme for Action recommends that violent crime and drug abuse should be combated by: implementing community programmes that harness the creativity of youth towards positive ends working with civil society organisations to reintegrate young offenders back into their communities strengthening international cooperation to combat organised crime and drug trafficking (WSSD 2.79) Democratic Participation The FWCW highlights the importance of political empowerment. Democratic participation in decision making is recognised as a right in itself. It is also seen as crucial to the realisation of all other rights as it is the means by which individuals can make claims on 14
governments and other organisations (Goonesekere 1998). UN conventions set out rights to take part in elections and to serve as a member of the governmnent. the right to take part in government processes, to vote and to have equal access to public service (UDHR 21; ICCPR 25; CEDAW 7; ICERD 5c) Beijing emphasises the need to ensure women s equal participation in democratic decision making processes. The conference recommended setting targets and, if necessary, taking positive action to ensure equal representation of women and men in all governmental and public administration positions (FWCW 190). Copenhagen recommends improving the opportunities for people from disadvantaged groups to participate in governmental processes and bodies (WSSD 2.75e). Civil Society The activities of civil society organisations are protected by rights to free association and participation in development planning the right of association and to form civil society organisations (UDHR 20; ICCPR 21; ICERD 5d; CRC 15) the right to participate in the elaboration and implementation of development planning at all levels (CEDAW 14.2a) the right to participate in international organisations and non-governmental organisations (CEDAW 7, 8) The participation of Civil Society Organisation in policy and programme planning and implementation is given as a key mechanism for achieving development goals in both the WSSD and FWCW. Recommended policies to promote civil society action include: encouraging the development of civil society organisations among vulnerable and marginalised groups 15
establishing legislative and regulatory frameworks for involving civil society organisations in planning processes supporting capacity building programmes for civil society organisations in areas such as participatory planning, programme design and advocacy (WSSD 2.72) Livelihood Security Minimum livelihood The right to livelihood security is recognised in a number of international documents. The essence of this right is the guarantee of a minimum livelihood - not necessarily income - in circumstances which jeopardise an individual s survival, including unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood or old age (Tomasevski 1998). the right to an adequate standard of living for the well-being of individuals and their families, including food, clothing, housing and medical care (UDHR 25.1; ICESCR 11; CEDAW 14.2h; ICERD 5e; CRC 27.1) The right to food is critical for guaranteeing minimum livelihood in rural areas. Copenhagen recommends strengthening emergency food reserves as a means of preventing acute food shortages (WSSD 2.40d). Beijing and Copenhagen identify increasing food production through the sustainable development of the agricultural sector, and improvement of market opportunities, as essential to raising rural living standards as well as ensuring food security (WSSD 2.9f; FWCW 58e) Beijing recommends recognition of women s role as agricultural producers as a means of enhancing long term food security (FWCW 166m) CEDAW sets out women s rights of equal access to resources for agricultural production: rural women have the right to agricultural credit and loans, marketing facilities, appropriate technology and equal treatment in land and agrarian reform (CEDAW 14.2g; FWCW 61b, 62, 166c, 274d). 16
The right to financial transfers, in the form of social security, is defined in the Universal Declaration: the right to social security (UDHR 22; ICESCR 9; CEDAW 11:1e,14c,13a; ICERD 5e; CRC 26) Few developing countries have anything that approaches a formal system of welfare payments. Copenhagen recommends basing social security programmes on legislation. It suggests gradual expansion of social protection programmes where this is financially feasible (WSSD 2.38). Informal mechanisms for the protection of the vulnerable, however, are also promoted. These include community based self-help organisations as well as family support systems (WSSD 2.38-40). Human rights conventions set out the obligations of the state to support all forms of the family ( UDHR 16.3; CRC 27.2,3; United Nations Principles for Older Persons 1 and 7; ICPD principle 9). It is also recognised, however, that, women often bear the greatest responsibility for providing care within the family. Women s rights to equality within marriage and the equitable sharing of responsibilities within the household have been progressively clarified through successive conventions: rights to equality in marriage and the equitable distribution of family responsibilities (UDHR 16; ICCPR 23; ICESCR 10.1; CEDAW 16.1a,b,c; ICERD 5d, iv; FWCW 29). Employment The Copenhagen programme of action identifies the pursuit of full employment as one of the primary concerns of social policy (WSSD commitment 3). The right to employment is contained in both the Universal Declaration and the Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: the right to freely chosen employment (UDHR 23.1; ICESCR 6; CEDAW 11a; ICERD 5e,i) 17
Measures to promote full employment recommended in the Copenhagen programme of action include: pursuing policies for full, productive, appropriately remunerated employment (WSSD 2.48) prioritisation of programmes that most directly promote long term job growth when budgetary adjustments are required (WSSD 2.49b) encouraging labour intensive investments in economic and social infrastructure that use local resources (WSSD 2.50a) facilitating the access of small and medium-sized enterprises to credit and supporting informal sector enterprises (WSSD 2.51) promoting adequate education and appropriate vocational training programmes (WSSD 2.52) Labour standards Labour standards ensure that employment decreases, rather than increases, the vulnerabilities of employees. The Copenhagen Declaration reaffirms commitment to core ILO labour standards which set out just and favourable conditions of work (WSSD Com 3,i). The ILO core standards define the labour rights which have also been recognised in the UDHR and ICESCR: 87: Freedom of association; 98: Right to organise and collective bargaining. All workers have the right to form and join organisations of their own choosing. Workers have the right to be protected from acts of anti-union discrimination. Voluntary collective bargaining should be promoted to regulate the terms and conditions of employment (UDHR 23.4; ICCPR 22; ICESCR 8; ICERD 5e,ii; FWCW 165/166, 178h,i). 29 and 105: Abolition of forced labour. Require the state to suppress the use of forced labour (UDHR 4; ICCPR 8.3). 18
100: Equal remuneration. Women have the right to equal pay with men for equal work or work of equal value (UDHR 23.2,3; ICESCR 7a; CEDAW 11;). 111: Discrimination. There should be no discrimination in employment practices on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin (UDHR 23.2,3; ICESCR 7a; CEDAW 11; ICERD 5e.i). 138: Minimum Age. Requires the setting of a national minimum age for access to employment (ICESCR 10.3; CRC 32). Copenhagen recommends gradual expansion of labour standards into the informal sector, along with measures to support the operation of such enterprises (WSSD 2.44). Service Provision The Copenhagen Programme for Action identifies full and equal access to health and education services as central to addressing the causes and consequences of poverty. Copenhagen sets out commitment to ensuring universal access to basic social services with particular efforts to enhance the access of vulnerable groups (WSSD commitment 6). Increased service provision, however, requires additional resources. The objective of the 20/20 agreement was to ensure that sufficient funds were allocated to service provision in national budgets (WSSD 2.88). UN instruments clearly define individuals rights to primary health care and education services. Health Everyone has the right to the highest attainable level of physical and mental health and the right to equal access to health services, including family planning (IESCR 12; CEDAW 12; CRC 24; DEVAW 3f; ICPD principle 8; FWCW 89, 106b) women have the right to special health services with respect to pregnancy, childbirth and the postnatal period (ICESCR 12:2a; CEDAW 12.2; CRC 24: 1d,f) Copenhagen recommends priority commitment of resources to combat public health risks caused by the spread of communicable diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis (WSSD 2.35). It further suggests that health workers and outreach 19
services should operate in low income communities and rural areas in order to facilitate access by the poor (WSSD 2.37f). Education Everyone has the right to an education. Elementary education should be free and compulsory secondary; education should be accessible to all; higher education should be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit (ICESCR 12:2a; CEDAW 12.2; CRC 24: 1d,f) women and girls have the same rights to all forms of education as men and boys (CEDAW 10; CRC 28; FWCW 80-82) women have a continuing right to education throughout their lives (CEDAW 10e,f) any stereotyped concept of the roles of women and men must be eliminated through education (CEDAW 10c). Copenhagen recommends facilitating access to education by providing incentives, such as meals and health care, as incentives for families in poverty to keep children in school (WSSD 2.37). Participatory Poverty Assessments show that quality of both education and health service provision is crucial for ensuring access of the poor and vulnerable (Brocklesby and Holland 1998). Cairo set out a number of criteria for quality of care in family planning services which have been used as a basis for monitoring provision (Hardon 1997). reproductive health care services should provide a wide range of safe and effective family planning methods; provide accessible and complete information about those methods; ensure safe, affordable and convenient services for the user; ensure privacy and confidentiality; ensure a continuous supply of high-quality contraceptives; improve provider training; ensure adequate follow up care (ICPD 7.23). 20
Social Integration Copenhagen defines the aim of social integration as the creation of a society for all, in which every individual, each with rights and responsibilities, has an active role to play (WSSD 2.66). WSSD commitment 4: we commit ourselves to promoting social integration by fostering societies that are stable, safe and just and that are based on the promotion and protection of all human rights, as well as on non-discrimination, tolerance, respect for diversity, equality of opportunity, solidarity, security and participation of all people, including disadvantaged and vulnerable groups and persons. The Declaration on the Right to Development (DRD) links development with social integration. The right to development requires equal inclusion in all social and economic processes: DRD1.1: The right to development is an inalienable human right by virtue of which every human person and all peoples are entitled to participate in, contribute to, and enjoy economic, social cultural and political development, in which all human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realised. The promotion of social integration, as defined in Copenhagen, requires states to sign and ratify all human rights agreements and make the institutional changes - legal and judicial reform - which may be required in order to bring national provisions into line with human rights standards. The founding covenants of the human rights framework are based on the principles of equal dignity of all persons and non discrimination in access to all rights (UDHR 2). Subsequent conventions detail the standards which governments should follow in order to ensure that particular social groups are treated without discrimination. UN instruments which address the rights of vulnerable groups include: Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women Convention on the Rights of the Child International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination 21
International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families Convention on the Status of Refugees Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons United Nations Principles for Older Persons 22
4. Human rights: standard setting and accountability Many governments and multilateral organisations have already stated their commitment to addressing the social policy concerns outlined above. Despite signing human rights agreements and conference documents, however, few governments have systematically used the human rights framework as a basis for social policy. The language of human rights is one which has a global resonance. But the commitment to policy measures in terms of rights is not simply a matter of language. It is a vehicle for increasing the accountability of government organisations to their citizens and, consequently, increasing the likelihood that policy measures will be implemented in practice. Accountability requires that responsibilities are identified, actions are monitored and there are means of claiming redress if obligations are not met. Human rights constitute a set of principles and values which all governments are obliged to respect. These principles are rooted in a system of international law and, thus, mechanisms for ensuring that states can, at least potentially, be held responsible for their actions. Concerns, when conceived of as rights, are elevated from the realm of the State and international promises premised on good faith, to a level of legal entitlement requiring national and international response. Concerns, when conceived of as claims of human rights, become fundamental, immutable and priority claims (Goonesekere 1998:3). Government ratification of human rights conventions links national systems of justice to the international framework of UN instruments. Everyday accountability between state and citizens, however, requires clarity about the concrete obligations and standards that human rights principles legitimate. In the current era of globalisation, the promotion of accountability through standard setting is becoming increasingly important as a means of safeguarding the interests of the most vulnerable. Globalisation means that private flows of capital, rather than subsidised resource transfers, are now perceived by many to be the primary motor for development 23
and change. In order to ensure that the costs of globalisation are not disproportionately borne by the most vulnerable, inter and intra national economic processes have to be based upon adherence to clear principles and standards (Edwards 1998). Standard setting, on the basis of the democratically agreed principles of the human rights framework, provides one means of strengthening the claims of the vulnerable to particular resources. Economic, social and cultural differences require that human rights principles should be flexibly applied 3. Particular standards of government action, and the targets which are used to measure their implementation, need to be democratically negotiated in different contexts. As the Copenhagen Programme of Action states, poor people and the organisations which represent them, should be involved in the setting of targets and standards (WSSD 2.28a). The concrete meaning of human rights has to be democratically agreed at all levels - international, national, regional and local - to ensure that universal principles have local relevance and serve the best interests of the most vulnerable. At the local level, people need to know what their rights are, have the possibility to say what they think particular rights should mean and reach an understanding of the concrete standards and entitlements that particular principles define (Edwards 1998; Ferguson 1998; McGee 1998; Maxwell 1998). The involvement of community based organisations in the negotiation of standards is critical if the concrete entitlements that particular rights legitimate are to be defined in a culturally appropriate, as well as affordable, manner. Accountability further requires systems for monitoring implementation of targets and standards and access to information about government performance (WSSD 2.71). Accountability requires that local processes of monitoring and redress, as well as standard negotiation, are nested within national and international frameworks. While the promotion of these processes is far from being straightforward or certain, evidence suggests that the institutions to facilitate necessary international negotiation and cooperation are already in 3 Some southern governments have opposed the introduction of core ILO labour standards on the ground that they serve a northern protectionist agenda. Chin argues that labour standards should be recognised in order to promote social justice. He suggests, however, that there is a strong case for allowing flexibility in interpretation of standards in order to encourage southern governments to adopt the principles they embody (Chin 1998). 24
existence (Deacon 1997). International agreement can be used as a point of leverage for intra national and local processes (Edwards 1998). Flexibility and multi-level negotiation of concrete standards do not mean dilution of human rights principles. Processes of negotiation around standards must be carefully and clearly embedded in understandings of the principles and objectives of the UN s charters and conventions. A rights based approach to social policy aims to strengthen the claims of the most vulnerable to social, political and economic resources. The human rights framework protects the claims of vulnerable groups which might otherwise be ignored. Participatory negotiation of standards is one means of clarifying, legitimising and promoting the human rights claims of the vulnerable. Other measures include legislative reform and the general promotion of the flow of information about human rights, their meaning and how they can be claimed. Policy makers themselves need to become more aware of the definition and content of UN instruments in order to consider all relevant rights in relation to any given issue. Selectivity or dilution of the core meaning of instruments will devalue the purpose of the human rights framework - the achievement of social justice and equality. 25
26
5. Implications of UN Agreements for Global Social Policy Principles The following table provides a summary of UN agreements in relation to the social policy issues outlined in section three. The central column sets out policy actions agreed at Copenhagen and Beijing. The final column identifies the key human rights instruments in each area and provides references to the relevant sections of the Copenhagen and Beijing programmes of action. These agreements provide the foundations on which a human rights based set of global social policy principles could be constructed. Issue Agreed Policy Actions From WSSD & FWCW Key References in UN Documents security of person legislation to address violence against women - clear legal sanctions against perpetrators of violent crimes against women in the home, community and during periods of conflict support for crisis and counselling centres and rehabilitation programmes for victims of violence support for civil society organisations dealing with issues of violence against women support for research into the spread, causes and impacts of violence at all levels of society policies to address harmful traditional practices and cultural subordination of women and other vulnerable groups policies to combat trafficking in women and girls for prostitution including legislative action international cooperation to address the problems of organised violence and drug trafficking right to security of person UDHR 3 gender based violence DEVAW FWCW 112-130 democratic participation policies which support democratic participation in decision making at local, national and international level inclusion of the marginalised in democratic processes through ensuring access and building their capacity to engage with governance structures commitment to gender balance in all governmental bodies right to take part in democratic government processes UDHR 21 FWCW 4.181-195 WSSD 2.75e 27
civil society promotion of the democratic operation of civil society organisations and their inclusion in processes of public decision making including development planning support for capacity building and increased accountability of civil society organisations support for grass roots organisations which represent marginalised groups promotion of equal participation of women in civil society right to freedom of assembly UDHR 20 right to participate in development planning CEDAW 14.2a WSSD 2.72 minimum livelihood prioritisation of provision of, and equal access to, essential services - water, sanitation and shelter support for family and community coping mechanisms including promotion of equal sharing of rights and responsibilities within marriage and the household social security programmes to be based on legislation progressive extension of social protection schemes to ensure security for elderly, sick, disabled, widowed, pregnant women and those with dependent children and those without access to means of ensuring their own livelihood equal access to credit, technology, marketing facilities and land reform programmes to encourage food security and sustainable rural livelihoods development of emergency food reserves as a means of preventing acute food shortages right to minimum livelihood UDHR 25.1 right to social security UDHR 22 right to support for the family & equality in marriage CEDAW 16.1 WSSD 2.38-40 28
productive employment macroeconomic and sectoral policies to support full employment prioritisation of programmes that most directly promote long term job growth during periods of structural adjustment policies which support labour intensive employment equal access to appropriate vocational training support for small, medium and informal sector enterprises right to freely chosen employment UDHR 23.1 WSSD commitment 3 WSSD 2.42, 2.48-52 labour standards promotion of core labour standards free association abolition of forced labour equal remuneration abolition of exploitative child labour non discrimination in employment practices ILO standards 87, 98 freedom of association 29,105 forced labour 100, 111 non discrimination 138 minimum age WSSD commitment 3I service provision protection of expenditure on basic services promotion of universal primary education promotion of equal access to education incentives for poor families to keep children in school protection of primary health care services including reproductive health services promotion of quality of care standards in the provision of reproductive health care provision of maternal health care services provision of health services and workers in low income communities and rural areas prioritisation of expenditure on communicable diseases such as HIV/AIDs, malaria, tuberculosis right to health ICESCR 12 reproductive health QoC standards ICPD 7.23 right to education ICESCR 12.2 WSSD commitment 6 WSSD 2.35-37 29
social integration adoption and ratification of human rights instruments human rights education programmes for citizens and public employees national level judicial and institutional reform to ensure equal access to legal justice equality of rights UDHR 2 right to development DRD 1.1 WSSD commitment 4 accountable institutions standard setting and use of targets in relation to internationally agreed human rights principles involving civil society and community level organisations in negotiating culturally appropriate and affordable standards for public provision of services ensuring that decisions are based on accurate data and are taken with the participation of those who will be affected utilisation of participatory research methods for the collection of data provision of information on government policies and performance international development targets WSSD 2.36 WSSD 2.71 WSSD 2.28 30