Should States Ratify Human Rights Conventions?

Med hensyn til om stater bør ratifisere menneskerettighetskonvensjoner, er et sentralt funn at noen av de viktigste innvendingene ikke stå seg ved nærmere granskning. Hva gjelder populære diagnoser om et legitimitetsunderskudd, har vi funnet at flere av de bekymringene som får mest oppmerksomhet ikke skyldes menneskerettighetsorganene selv, men det komplekse forholdet mellom dem og statene - som i siste instans er ansvarlig for å respektere menneskerettighetene. Noen utfordringer må tas på alvor, særlig for de menneskerettighetsdomstolene som skal korrigere slike uhell som kan oppstå selv i velfungerende demokratier. Minst tre temaer er sentrale utfordringer for den europeiske menneskerettighetsdomstolen (EMD) i særdeleshet, utfordringer som også andre menneskerettighetsorganer møter: a) hvordan filtrere innkommende klager for å unngå å bruke ressurser på ubegrunnede saker, og samtidig gi rask, rettferdig og begrunnet beskyttelse når menneskerettigheter er blitt krenket; b) hvordan kan domstolen best samhandle med stater som har svært ulike tradisjoner og forpliktelser til rettssikkerhet, et uavhengig rettsvesen og et demokratisk folkestyre; c) hvordan domstolen kan tolke traktaten dynamisk slik at den fortsetter å beskytte menneskerettighetene under skiftende omstendigheter - uten å misbruke sin uavhengighet og skjønn.

The project 'Should States ratify Human Rights Conventions' is a multi-disciplinary, basic research project at the Norwegian Centre for Advanced Study (CAS) 2009-2010. The proliferation of global and regional human rights conventions in recent decades rai ses important questions about their impact and legitimacy. The conventions restrict states' legislative, executive and judicial powers. The conventions also establish different supervisory mechanisms with committees and courts, and are 'living instruments ' in that these organs develop the interpretation of the conventions over time. The multidisciplinary research group brings together some of the best Norwegian and international legal scholars, social scientists, and normative political theorists. It will adress three central puzzles in the field of human rights conventions: (1) the motivations of states when they enter into the conventions, (2) the effects of these conventions on states, and, in the light of these findings, (3) whether such conventions a re normatively legitimate. The project will result in empirical findings and develop normative guidelines for assessing the ratification of human rights conventions. It will also provide new insight in the democratic challenges in a globalized world. The inter-disciplinary character of the project create special challenges. It has therefore been decided to arrange three workshops in advance to address key issues, such as effectiveness, legitimacy and the legal character of international supervisory organs . Four workshops are planned as part of this CAS project. The Norwegian Research Council is asked to fund two post-doc positions to adress particular aspects of this complex questions, one in law and one in one in philosophy/political science. During 2009 -2010, the post-docs will work as part of the CAS team. They will remain affiliated with the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights in the following period, each pursuing their own research within the project.