Arab Charter on Human Rights – Ratification – Revision – Divisions – Gender

https://wunrn.wpengine.com

 

“When
this second draft came before the Arab Commission on Human Rights, however, the
Commission made substantial changes. These were mainly intended to accommodate
positions of some Arab states in relation to issues in international law such
as the death penalty, women’s rights, rights of non-citizens, and freedoms of
expression and religion.”

 

https://www.carnegieendowment.org/arb/?fa=show&article=23951

 

https://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/loas2005.html

Mervat
Rishmawi October, 2009

 

Among the remnants of the wave of reform that is said to have hit the Arab
world earlier in this decade is the Arab Charter on Human Rights, adopted at a
summit of the League of Arab States in May 2004. The Charter came into force in
March 2008 and has been accepted by ten Arab states:  Algeria, Bahrain,
Jordan, Libya, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United Arab Emirates,
and Yemen.  

The Charter, which revises a 1994 document, is part of a larger process of
modernization of the Arab League, which includes the creation of a Peace and
Security Council as well as the establishment of an interim Arab Parliament.
The Charter’s significance lies in the fact that it is an instrument from the
region, negotiated by states of the region. It therefore has the potential to
diminish and eventually end the continued questioning by Arab states of their
duties to respect, protect, and promote human rights in many areas. 

The process of revising the Charter revealed tensions among Arab states,
Arab civil society organizations, and states outside the region regarding human
rights. The Arab League Secretary General said from the outset that the main
purpose of the revision was to bring the Charter in line with international
human rights law, of which the 1994 version fell far short. The first draft by
the Arab Commission on Human Rights (an Arab League body formed of
representatives of Arab states), however, was still far below those
standards—although many Arab states had accepted them in ratifying
international human rights treaties. After pressure from the international
community and civil society organizations, the Arab League agreed to task Arab
independent human rights experts (themselves members of UN expert human rights
bodies) with producing a draft. After input from Arab and international
organizations, they produced a draft that was largely consistent with
international law and that human rights groups in the region welcomed.

When this second draft came before the Arab Commission on Human Rights,
however, the Commission made substantial changes. These were mainly intended to
accommodate positions of some Arab states in relation to issues in
international law such as the death penalty, women’s rights, rights of non-citizens,
and freedoms of expression and religion. The resulting final Charter does
recognize many important rights that are consistent with international human
rights law as reflected in treaties, jurisprudence, and opinions of UN expert
bodies.

The Charter begins by affirming the universality and indivisibility of human
rights, therefore putting an end finally to the continued questioning of
universality of human rights by some Arab states. It recognizes the right to
health, education, fair trial, and freedom from torture and ill-treatment, the
independence of the judiciary, the right to liberty and security of person, and
many other rights.

At the same time, the Charter does not prohibit cruel, inhuman, or degrading
punishments, nor does it extend rights to non-citizens in many areas. It also
allows for the imposition of restrictions on the exercise of freedom of
thought, conscience, and religion far beyond international human rights law,
which allows for restrictions only on the manifestations of a religion or
belief, but not on the freedom to hold a religion or belief. Moreover, the
Charter leaves many important rights to national legislation. For example, it
allows for the imposition of the death penalty against children if national law
allows it. It also leaves the regulation of rights and responsibilities of men
and women in marriage and divorce to national law. Thus the Charter mirrors to
a large degree the areas of acceptance and reservations regarding international
human rights treaties by member states of the Arab League.

Nearly half of the members of the Arab League have yet to ratify the
Charter. In Lebanon there was a concern that the Charter offered less
protection for rights than did Lebanon’s own laws. This was the same reason why
some Tunisian organizations, including women’s rights organizations, called on
the government not to ratify the Charter. In many other states, there is little
debate or consideration about whether the Charter should be accepted. Many
Arab, regional, and international organizations take the position that they
will not lobby actively for the ratification of the Charter because it
conflicts with international law in many fundamental areas. 

States that ratify the Charter undertake to change their laws and policies
in accordance with its provisions, but none has actually done so thus far. A
Committee to supervise implementation of the Charter was formed in January
2009, composed of members from the first seven states to ratify the Charter
(Jordan, Syria, Bahrain, Libya, UAE, Algeria, and Palestine). The Committee
will receive reports from states, examine the implementation of the Charter,
and issue its conclusions and recommendations in public reports. So far the
Committee has stressed that it is an independent body, and its members do not
take instructions from governments or Arab League bodies. It also demanded its
own independent professional secretariat and the required financial and
technical support from Arab League headquarters. 

In the end, the success of the Charter will depend on how seriously Arab
states and Arab human rights organizations decide to take it.  Aside from
the obvious question of whether Arab states will follow through in making
actual changes in law and practices to conform to the Charter, there is the question
of whether Arab civil society organizations will engage in the process in the
same way they do with other regional and international systems. For the Charter
to succeed in furthering human rights, Arab governments would have to be
willing to re-open the debate on some provisions that clearly contradict
international standards. Another measure of the significance of the Charter
will be whether, once states submit their reports on measures they have taken
to conform to the Charter, serious debates on human rights start to take place
within the walls of the Arab League.  

Mervat Rishmawi is a legal advisor at the International Secretariat of
Amnesty International. She wrote this article in her personal capacity and it
does not necessarily reflect the position of the organization.