In August 2006, the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network hosted a ground-breaking meeting of experts on HIV/AIDS, law and human rights, including civil society leaders from Africa, the Americas, Asia and central and eastern Europe. The meeting, held as a satellite to the XVI International AIDS Conference in Toronto, resulted in the identification of needs for experience-sharing and technical support with respect to rights of sex workers, rights of women, rights of people who use drugs, HIV and prisons, protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation, and human rights issues related to HIV testing. Ideas for sharing of information and experiences were suggested, including the Center for HIV Law and Policy's clearinghouse model of collection, banking and disseminating materials. The report is also available in French, Spanish and Russian at www.aidslaw.ca/aids2006.
This commentary, published by the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network and endorsed by more than 40 organizations around the world, including the Center for HIV Law and Policy, is a comprehensive, excellent critique the the April 2007 UNAIDS Guidane Note on HIV and Sex Work. Noting the Guidance Note's inconsistency with prior UN statements on the importance of protecting of sex workers' basic rights, the commentary addresses UNAIDS' failure "to consider seriously the precarious human rights situation of sex workers, and the way abusive and violent poicing and ill-conceived national laws undermine sex workers' rights. It also fails to discuss the human rights of sex workers as workers, including their right to work, their right to a livelihood of their choosing, and their right to workplace safety."
At the 2006 United Nations High Level Meeting on HIV/AIDS, world leaders reaffirmed that the full realization of all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all is an essential element in the global response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic. Yet, 25 years into the AIDS epidemic, this essential element remains the missing piece in the fight against AIDS. This document, endorsed by the Center for HIV Law and Policy, was published by the Law and Health Initiative of the Open Society Institute's Public Health Program with input from HIV human rights specialists from around the globe. It sets out 10 reasons why law and human rights should occupy the center of the global HIV/AIDS struggle
Language from the document itself, created by the Center for Reproductive Rights, explains that, “this briefing paper addresses the fundamental human rights standards that governments must uphold in creating PMTCT programs. These standards include requirements of informed consent, provider-patient confidentiality, and health-care access without discrimination. The briefing paper concludes with recommendations for government action to ensure that women are treated with dignity and respect through every phase of HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care.” The paper also discusses the disproportionate effect that HIV has had on women, and how that effect is exacerbated when women are pregnant.
This report summarizes discussion from two international electronic fora in which advocates, service providers, and HIV-positive women discussed services and policies related to the sexual and reproductive health of HIV-positive women. While the discussions spanned numerous countries and cultures, common threads appeared regardless of the geographical or cultural context. These threads provide lessons for all advocates seeking to promote the well-being of HIV-positive women. Issues such as confidentiality, domestic abuse, and reproductive rights were discussed, with the overarching issue being the high degree of stigma and discrimination experienced by HIV-positive women. Most strikingly, the discussions revealed widespread violations of the human rights of HIV-positive women as a result of the stigma and discrimination that they faced. These violations provided a backdrop to virtually all other topics discussed, creating major obstacles to the attainment of appropriate care and services by HIV-positive women. Another major theme was the lack of the most basic services responsive to the needs of HIV-positive women. Women described significant barriers at the domestic, community, regional and national level in realizing their rights and sexual and reproductive health. Among those mentioned included: inaccessibility of health centers; lack of respect for female patients' rights and judgmental attitudes among health care workers. The report is published by EngenderHealth, Harvard University, International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS, Ipas, and the United Nations Population Fund.
This report prepared by the Center for Health and Gender Equity focuses on the role that female condoms can play in HIV prevention, and how the U.S. needs to be the leader in global distribution of, and education about, female condom use.
The document’s executive summary explains that, “as international donors and country governments move forward with plans to make male circumcision more accessible and invest millions of dollars into developing microbicides and vaccines, they cannot afford to overlook the only available HIV prevention intervention that was designed to allow women to initiate protection: female condoms.”
This UNAIDS policy paper is aimed at those with a leadership role in HIV prevention, treatment and care. It highlights the need for strengthening HIV prevention, key actions for an effective response, and core principles underlying these actions. While it appears to be intended primarily for low-income countries, the content is relevant for any efforts to overcome barriers to increased prevention efforts. The paper addresses barriers such as limited capacity to track and demonstrate the results of HIV-prevention programs; the lack of effective and efficient coordination of stakeholders; and limited institutional and human capacity to manage and deliver HIV-prevention programs. The paper also identifies essential policy actions, such as building and maintaining leadership from all sections of society, including people with HIV, and supporting the mobilization of community-based actions. To the extent that the policy position paper focuses on problems inherent in low-income countries, it provides a useful framework for those working in resource-poor areas of any country, including the United States.
This guide aims to provide sexual and reproductive health program planners, managers, and providers with the information necessary to integrate voluntary counseling and testing (VCT) for HIV within their services. VCT is not merely the simple assent to testing, but rather "the process by which an individual undergoes confidential counselling to enable the individual to make an informed choice about learning his or her HIV status and to take appropriate action." Counseling for VCT consists of pre-test, post-test, and follow-up counseling. VCT is a human-rights based approach to HIV testing and treatment that enables patients to make informed decisions; it has been shown to be an effective strategy to facilitate behavior change for HIV prevention, as well as to reduce the stigma and discrimination associated with HIV. The guide discusses the benefits of VCT and the barriers to implementation, and provides specific steps for each stage of implementing VCT, including the initial assessment of community need, planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. The guide was produced by the United Nations Population Fund and the International Planned Parenthood Foundation.
Because many women do not access health services outside of pregnancy, maternal health services provide an excellent resource for HIV interventions tailored to the needs of pregnant and postpartum women. Such services also provide the opportunity to provide treatment, care, and support for HIV-positive mothers and their families. This guide focuses on the prevention of HIV infection among pregnant and post-partem women, with some discussion of related issues such as prevention of unintended pregnancies, mother-to-child transmission, and treatment for HIV-positive women. The guide can be used to strengthen the integration of HIV prevention into existing maternal health services and build the capacity of health workers to address the prevention needs of pregnant and postpartum women. The guide is particularly useful for planners, program developers, and trainers who are looking for opportunities and guidance to address the underlying gender inequities that present obstacles to successful HIV prevention interventions. For example, it provides guidance for helping women negotiate condom use, advocating with policymakers to change discriminatory legislation, and working with community leaders to raise awareness about common harmful practices. The guide was produced by the United Nations Population Fund and EngenderHealth.
HIV-positive women need access not only to appropriate health care and antiretroviral medications, but also to HIV treatment support. This paper discusses the unique barriers women face to Access to Care, Treatment, and Support (ACTS). Issues include the limitations of health centers as points of access, the lack of research on the effects of antiretrovirals that is specific to women, and the stigma and discrimination that keep women from obtaining the care and support they need. The paper argues that HIV-positive women are in the best position to understand these issues, and that they therefore should be involved in attempts to identify and address these barriers. The paper could be useful for HIV-positive women and their advocates, as well as health-care providers, who seek to understand and reduce gender inequalities and obstacles to HIV treatment. Produced by the International Community of Women Living With HIV/AIDS.
This policy vision paper outlines the key priorities for women with HIV as identified by a group of young HIV positive women from across Eastern and Southern Africa who met in Durban in April 2004. The meeting was a dialogue organized by the International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS (ICW) in partnership with Youth Against AIDS Network (YAAN) and Gender AIDS Forum (GAF). Three primary priorities are identified: 1) Access to sexual and reproductive rights, 2) Access to screening, treatment, and prevention, and 3) meaningful participation and action of women with HIV in decision-making at the community, national, and regional levels. Within these three priorities, several specific issues and examples are identified, citing experiences of real women with HIV. The vision paper then provides a call to action, identifying specific steps that must be taken to remedy these shortcomings. The paper provides a useful starting-point for HIV-positive women and advocates seeking to identify, address, and mobilize around HIV issues specific to women, or anyone seeking to understand the unique obstacles facing HIV-positive women. While many of the issues are identified by women around the world, the themes of disenfranchisement, marginalization, and stigma are universal. Produced by the International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS.
This fact sheet, created by the American Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR), describes the rising rates of HIV/AIDS among women in the United States and worldwide, and outlines the factors that have contributed to this rise. For example, it describes economic and social factors that increase women's vulnerability to HIV, such as disproportionate earning power and assets due to prescribed gender roles, and limited access to education, healthcare, and other resources that help women prevent and treat HIV/AIDS. Other factors that may lead to the disproportionate rise in HIV/AIDS among women include biological factors, gender-based violence, and sex differences in HIV treatment. The fact sheet advocates ten policies to address these factors, such as making women a priority in national HIV/AIDS strategies, increasing public knowledge and decreasing stigma and discrimination, reducing barriers faced by women in disadvantaged populations, and investing in the development of female-controlled prevention methods. The fact sheet is a useful resource for those seeking to illuminate the rising HIV/AIDS rates among women and the factors that contribute to it, and those advocating policy changes to address these factors. It is also useful to view it in conjunction with the amfAR survey on the stigma faced by HIV-positive women in the United States, which is posted separately in CHLP's Women's Advocacy Resource Collection.
This document summarizes the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and describes the status of CEDAW in the United States, and describes CEDAW’s impact on several issues, including HIV/AIDS. It provides excellent insight into how CEDAW has been received by the federal government, and state and local government declarations with regard to CEDAW. It also specifically discusses the issues unique to women and HIV/AIDS and how CEDAW addresses these problems.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (“CEDAW”), addresses women’s rights within the political, social, economic, cultural, and family life. It calls for state parties to overcome barriers of discrimination against women in areas of legal rights, education, employment, health care, politics, and finance, and sets benchmarks. Particularly relevant to HIV/AIDS issues are: the definition of discrimination against women (Article 1); a mandate that states condemn discrimination in all its forms and ensure a legal framework that provides protection and embodies the principle of equality (Article 2); mandate of the end of discrimination in employment, including the right to work, employment opportunities, equal renumeration, free choice of profession and employment, social security, and protection of health, including maternal health (Article 11); requirement of steps to eliminate discrimination in health care, including family planning access (Article 12); a focus on the unique problems that rural woman face in access to health care and adequate living conditions (Article 14); requirment of steps to ensure equality in marriage and family relations, including the right to freely determine the number and spacing of children (Article 16). Article 18 requires parties to submit reports periodically to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women on measures they have taken to give effect to the Convention.
As a treaty, CEDAW is binding on all parties that ratify it; those who sign but do not ratify it are obligated not to act contrary to the purpose of the convention under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention. CEDAW also has an optional protocol that allows individuals to submit complaints to the Committee arguing that their rights have been violated by the state party, and which allows the Committee to investigate grave or systematic violations of CEDAW. Although the United States has signed CEDAW, it has failed to ratify it, placing it among a small minority of countries including Iran, Sudan, and Somalia.
The UNAIDS Reference Group on HIV and Human Rights is an independent, advisory body, established in 2002 to advise the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) on all matters relating to HIV and human rights. The group issued this independent "Statement and Recommendations on Scaling up HIV Testing and Counselling" expressing that HIV testing and counseling should be implemented in ways that maximize benefits to individuals and public health, and respect, protect and fulfill human rights. As the group notes, Efforts to increase access to HIV testing and counselling are not occurring in a vacuum. Rather, they take place in an environment in which evidence-informed and human rights-based policies and responses to HIV are being widely undermined. Furthermore, even as vastly increased funding for HIV has become available, those most vulnerable to HIV and its impact continue to receive the least access to HIV prevention, care and treatment services.
A meeting of African lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender organizations, with fifty-five participants from twenty-two groups representing sixteen countries across the continent, adopted a statement addressed to African member governments of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and of the United Nations. The statement authors seek support of a resolution before the Commission on sexual orientation, gender identity and human rights. Among multiple other abuses and forms of extreme bias and discrimination, LGBT Africans are denied access to health care and basic health information targeted to their lives and needs. They are blamed unjustly for the spread of HIV/AIDS yet are omitted from HIV prevention programs. The brave contributions of LGBT Africans to HIV prevention and treatment are ignored or actively harassed. The statement makes plain the connection between homophobia, and education programs which deny or condemn the existence of gay people, and the fueling of serious health and safety issues, including HIV.
In this letter, Human Rights Watch addresses the damage done by the current U.S. administrations insistent export of abstinence-until-marriage HIV programs in Uganda and the Uganda presidents view that, We don't have homosexuals in Uganda. The letter points out the unassailable evidence that these programs deny young people accurate information on HIV transmission and on sexual health and intrinsically discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. With a legal ban in place against gay or lesbian relationships, the programs promote only permanent abstinence and are uniformly silent about safer sexual practices. Promoting abstinence until heterosexual marriage evidences a continuous will on the part of your government to drive lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people underground, or deny that they exist.
General Comment No. 3 was issued by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child to promote the realization of the human rights of children in the context of HIV/AIDS as guaranteed under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (“CRC”). General Comment No. 3 identifies and elaborates on several rights of children and corresponding obligations of state parties with regard to HIV/AIDS issues such as discrimination, HIV-prevention information, health services, counseling and testing, mother-to-child transmission, and children affected and orphaned by HIV/AIDS. For example, General Comment No. 3 explains that under Articles 24, 13, and 17 of the CRC, children should have the right to access adequate information related to HIV/AIDS prevention and care through both formal and informal channels. It also states that “accessibility of voluntary, confidential HIV-counseling and testing services, with due attention to the evolving capacities of the child, is fundamental to the rights and health of children.”
General Comment No. 3 is especially useful for those seeking to understand how HIV/AIDS impacts children and families and what states’ obligations are to respond; it is best read alongside the CRC, available separately in the Resource Bank.
The following synopsis is condensed from NY Law School Professor Art Leonards excellent discussion on Leonard Link, http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leonardlink/: In Jean-Pierre v. U.S. Attorney General, 2007 WL 2712108 (11th Cir., September 19, 2007), a Haitian man with AIDS who is subject to deportation from the U.S. because of his three drug convictions won a new hearing before the Board of Immigration Appeals, a unanimous panel of the 11th Circuit finding that the Board (and the Immigration Judge) had failed to decide the crucial legal issue of his case. The petitioner is seeking refuge in the U.S. under the Convention Against Torture, under which the U.S. has committed itself to give refuge here to individuals who would more likely than not face torture if deported to their home country. The petitioner entered the U.S. in 1992 on a temporary visa and overstayed. Residing in Florida, he was convicted on drug offenses in 1995, 1997 and 2004. While he was serving time in a Florida jail on this third conviction, the Homeland Security Department began removal proceedings against him. There is no doubt that he is deportable due to his criminal record, so his only hope for refuge in the U.S. is the Convention Against Torture. The petitioner introduced evidence showing that under Haitian policy, he would be immediately sent to prison for an indefinite term and that in light of his medical condition, it was highly likely that he would be subjected to physical torture by prison guards. The basis for this assertion is a somewhat complicated chain of reasoning. The petitioner has AIDS and has already suffered consequences of toxoplasmosis, an opportunistic infection that can cause mental instability if not kept in check. All evidence indicates he would not receive treatment for this in a Haitian prison, and that his resulting abnormalities of behavior would provoke the guards to various depradations that would likely cause his death after intense suffering. The IJ, taking a very literal interpretation of the protections under the CAT, focused on the requirement of proof that "the Haitian government deliberately creates and maintains those conditions as a means of torturing inmates," referring to the substandard conditions generally in Haitian prisons. The IJ accepted the argument that there was no evidence that the Haitian government specifically targets people with AIDS for torture in prison, or that this impoverished country provides substandard housing and healthcare in prisons in order to torture the prisoners. The BIA endorsed this ruling, relying on past 11th Circuit decisions that had denied relief to Haitian petitioners who had argued that sending them back to Haitian prisons would subject them to torture because of the substandard conditions in those prisons. The 11th Circuit panel concluded that the BIA had really missed the point of the case. It wasn't just that there were substandard conditions in the Haitian prisons, but rather that because of the petitioner's particular medical condition, it was highly likely that he would attract the kind of retaliation from the guards for "acting out" that was well-documented to include physical assaults and mistreatment that clearly met the definition of torture -- and, after all, this would be at the hands of the guards, government agents, acting intentionally. The court concluded, however, that the matter would have to be remanded to the BIA for reconsideration rather than being disposed of by the court, since the BIA was entitled to first crack at the legal issues as reframed by the court.
In a case brought by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, two organizations (AOSI and Pathfinder International) that received funding under the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (the Leadership Act) sued the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), among others, seeking to enjoin their narrow reading of the Leadership Act’s provision requiring funded organizations to have a policy expressly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking. In May, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that this requirement violated the organizational plaintiff’s First Amendment rights, restricting their privately-funded speech and forcing them to adopt the U.S. government’s views in order to be eligible for funding. The opinion may also be useful to those looking for a source in which to discuss HIV among marginalized groups. The opinion discusses the larger context in which the debate takes place, citing the high rates of HIV among some populations sex workers and the difficulties in reaching this marginalized community.
The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit remanded in view of proposed new HHS and UNAIDS guidelines to determine whether a preliminary injunction is appropriate. In February 2008, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint to add Global Health Council and InterAction (international development and public health groups) as plaintiffs; Global Health Council and InterAction then moved for a preliminary injunction on behalf of their members. HHS represented to the court that its July 2007 guidelines will go through a notice and comment process by April 2008, after which the court will assess the constitutionality of the revised guidelines. For copies of pleadings and other information, go to http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/aosi_v_usaid/
On the advent of World AIDS Day, CHLP emphasized that rights violations that impede the response to the AIDS epidemic globally are also a critical problem in the United States: [T]he United States response to AIDS should be a model of commitment to both human rights and the public health. But instead, our HIV/AIDS policies are increasingly ineffective and punitive, because they are driven by ideology and bigotry, not by sound science. For example, U.S. prisons, jails, and detention facilities, like those in post-Soviet countries, provide virtually no comprehensive prevention education, and access to condoms and clean needles for injecting drug users is widely proscribed. The statement accompanied the release of a declaration, "Human Rights and HIV/AIDS: Now More Than Ever," endorsed by more than 30 leading AIDS organizations around the world and calling for a major shift in the global response to HIV/AIDS.
In a case brought by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, two organizations (AOSI and Pathfinder International) that received funding under the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (the Leadership Act) sued the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), among others, seeking to enjoin their narrow reading of the Leadership Act’s provision requiring funded organizations to have a policy expressly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking. In May, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York had ruled that this requirement violated the organizational plaintiff’s First Amendment rights, restricting their privately-funded speech and forcing them to adopt the U.S. government’s views in order to be eligible for funding. The Court of Appeals remanded in view of proposed new HHS and UNAIDS guidelines to determine whether a preliminary injunction is appropriate.
In February 2008, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint to add Global Health Council and InterAction (international development and public health groups) as plaintiffs; Global Health Council and InterAction then moved for a preliminary injunction on behalf of their members. HHS represented to the court that its July 2007 guidelines will go through a notice and comment process by April 2008, after which the court will assess the constitutionality of the revised guidelines. For copies of pleadings and other information, go to http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/aosi_v_usaid/
Seven health care professionals, advocates, and HIV-positive women respond to the question, "What do you consider to be the most important treatment or health issues facing women with HIV today?"
This document includes discussion of medical and psychological needs in women with HIV, challenges to establishing and maintaining appropriate treatment for HIV-positive women, and the need for more clinical studies focused on women. Advocates and health care professionals may find this information particularly useful.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (“CEDAW”), addresses women’s rights within the political, social, economic, cultural, and family life. It calls for state parties to overcome barriers of discrimination against women in areas of legal rights, education, employment, health care, politics, and finance, and sets benchmarks. Particularly relevant to HIV/AIDS issues are: the definition of discrimination against women (Article 1); a mandate that states condemn discrimination in all its forms and ensure a legal framework that provides protection and embodies the principle of equality (Article 2); mandate of the end of discrimination in employment, including the right to work, employment opportunities, equal renumeration, free choice of profession and employment, social security, and protection of health, including maternal health (Article 11); requirement of steps to eliminate discrimination in health care, including family planning access (Article 12); a focus on the unique problems that rural woman face in access to health care and adequate living conditions (Article 14); requirment of steps to ensure equality in marriage and family relations, including the right to freely determine the number and spacing of children (Article 16).
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the “ICCPR”) represents one-third of what is informally referred to as the “International Bill of Rights.” The other two thirds consist of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the “ICESCR”) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The ICCPR outlines universal civil and political rights; particularly relevant for HIV/AIDS issues are: the right to marry and found a family (Article 23); the right to privacy (Article 17); freedom of expression and information (Article 19); freedom of assembly and association (Article 22); freedom of movement (Article 12); the right to liberty and security of person (Article 9); and freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 7). State parties to the convention must also guarantee that any person whose rights under the convention are violated shall have an effective remedy and shall have her right to such a remedy determined by a competent authority provided by the legal system of the state, and that the state will develop the possibilities of judicial remedy specifically.
As a convention, the ICCPR is binding on all parties that ratify it; those who sign but do not ratify it are obligated not to act contrary to the purpose of the convention under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention. Article 40 of the covenant requires state parties to submit reports on the national human rights situation every five years, which are studied and commented on by the United Nations Human Rights Committee. Article 41 establishes an optional procedure by which states grant other states the right to bring a complaint against them before the Committee alleging a violation of human rights; the result is an attempt at a “friendly solution.”
There is also an optional protocol, available separately in the Resource Bank, to allow individuals who are victims of violations of ICCPR to present complaints before the Committee against a state that has ratified the convention and violates its obligations.
The United States is a party to the ICCPR, but not to the optional protocol, and has made several “reservations” – a declaration that purports to exclude or modify the meaning of certain provisions of the treaty. However, the validity of some of these reservations is subject to debate; many states objected to the reservations as contrary to the object and purpose of the ICCPR, and as impermissibly citing domestic law to dodge obligations under the Convention.
Commonly referred to as “Protocol One,” this is an optional protocol to the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”) that allows individuals who are victims of violations of ICCPR to present complaints before the United Nations Human Rights Committee against a state that has ratified the ICCPR and Protocol One and has violated its obligations under the ICCPR. The individual must first exhaust all available domestic remedies before writing to the Human Rights Committee. The Committee will then allow the state party six months to provide information. After considering all the information submitted to it, the Committee will issue its views to the state party and the individual.
The United States is a party to the ICCPR, but not to Protocol One.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (“CERD”) is an international treaty designed to protect individuals from discrimination based on race that is both intentional or the result of neutral policies. Particularly relevant to HIV/AIDS issues are: the requirement that state parties take concrete measures in social, economic, cultural, and other fields to ensure the adequate development and protection of certain racial groups or individuals belonging to them for the purpose of guaranteeing them the full and equal enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms (Article 2); and the requirement that state parties undertake to prohibit and eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone to equality before the law in the enjoyment of rights including the right to work and to free choice of employment, the right to housing, the right to public health, medical care, social security, and social services, and the right to education and training (Article 5).
As a treaty, CERD is binding on all parties that ratify it; those who sign but do not ratify it are obligated not to act contrary to the purpose of the convention under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention. State parties must submit periodic reports to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination detailing how they are giving effect to CERD. Moreover, under Articles 11-13, if a state party is not giving effect to the provisions of CERD, another state party may bring this to the attention of the Committee, which will collect information from the relevant state parties and, if the dispute cannot be reconciled, will form an ad hoc commission to investigate and issue recommendations. Under Article 14, a state party has the option of allowing the Committee to receive and consider complaints from individuals claiming that the state party has violated their rights under CERD, and the Committee will issue recommendations to the state party accordingly.
The United States has ratified CERD, but has not exercised the option set forth in Article 14.
This document, published by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, provides each country’s ratification or signatory status as of April 2004 for the major international human rights treaties and the optional protocols to those treaties.
The Political Declaration, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in June 2006, renews the General Assembly’s commitment to the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS issued in 2001. It commits to several actions as part of a human rights-based approach to HIV/AIDS, including: promoting prevention, treatment, care, and support; overcoming legal or other barriers to block access to effective HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support; ensuring pregnant women have access to antenatal care, including voluntary and confidential counseling and testing with informed consent; intensifying efforts to enact, strengthen, or enforce legislation and other measures to ensure those with HIV have full enjoyment of all human rights; eliminating gender inequalities and protecting women’s rights; and addressing the vulnerabilities of children affected by and living with HIV/AIDS.
The Declaration undertakes to provide comprehensive reviews of its progress in these areas in 2008 and 2011 within the annual reviews of the General Assembly.
It requests that the Secretary General of the United Nations include in his annual report the status of the implementation of the 2001 Declaration of Commitment.
The United Nations General Assembly Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS represents “a global commitment to enhancing coordination and intensification of national, regional and international efforts to combat [HIV/AIDS] in a comprehensive manner.” It was unanimously adopted and signed by the 189 Member States at the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS in June 2001. This Special Session marked the first time that the General Assembly gave its exclusive attention to the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
The Declaration notes contributing factors to the spread of the epidemic, including discrimination, denial, lack of confidentiality, gender inequality, poverty, and illiteracy. It also reaffirms a human rights approach to HIV/AIDS, and declares a commitment to take action in the following categories, with a timeline for achievements by 2003 and 2005:
Fostering leadership at all levels of society
Prevention efforts
Care, support, and treatment
Realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms
Reducing vulnerability by empowering vulnerable groups such as women
Assisting children orphaned and made vulnerable by HIV/AIDS
Alleviating social and economic impact of HIV/ADIS
Furthering research and development
Responding to the HIV/AIDS needs created by conflict
Creating new, additional, and sustained resources
Maintaining the momentum and monitoring progress
While the Declaration is a UN document, the primary responsibility for imeplemtning its commitments rests with the states, who are required to conduct national periodic reviews of their progress. However, as declaration, this document is non-binding on states that have signed it.
This document is useful to those seeking to understand the many social, economic, cultural, and legal issues underlying the HIV/AIDS epidemics, as well as a human rights based approach to HIV/AIDS. It is also useful to demonstrate international responses to HIV/AIDS.
Five years later, the United Nations General Assembly reaffirmed its Commitment to the Declaration of Commitment in the Political Declaration on HIV/AIDS, available separately in the Resource Bank.
A revised and consolidated version of the original guidelines published in 1996, the purpose of the Guidelines is “to assist States in creating a positive, rights-based response to HIV that is effective in reducing the transmission and impact of HIV and AIDS and is consistent with human rights and fundamental freedoms.” The Guidelines are a joint project of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and UNAIDS. The consolidated guidelines include the revised Guideline 6, which reflects the human rights dimensions of access to HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support. The document consists of three parts: 1) twelve guidelines for state action; 2) recommendations for dissemination and implementation of the Guidelines; and 3) a description of the human rights principles underlying a positive response to HIV. The primary users are intended to be states, but it is also meant to inform intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, networks of people living with HIV, community-based organizations, networks on ethics, law, human rights, and HIV, and AIDS service organizations. It is also useful for any person looking for interested in a rights-based approach to HIV/AIDS and specific steps needed to implement such an approach.
This Handbook is intended to guide a human-rights based response to HIV for national human rights institutions, civil society organizations, networks of people living with HIV, and national AIDS programs. Government institutions and other partners of national institutions may also find it useful. It provides a useful outline of international legal principles that underlie a rights-based approach to HIV/AIDS, as well as specific steps institutions can take to further these principles. Such steps are outlined in the context of: outreach and in-reach for assessing national institutions and their partnerships, workplans, and priorities; integrating HIV into existing activities and programs; education and raising awareness on HIV and human rights; working with national AIDS programs; and achieving universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support. The Handbook is intended to be read alongside the International Guidelines on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights. The annex includes the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS and the Political Declaration on HIV/AIDS.
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the “ICESCR”) represents one-third of what is informally referred to as the “International Bill of Rights.” The other two thirds consist of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”), and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The ICESCR outlines universal economic, social and cultural rights; particularly relevant to HIV/AIDS issues are: the right to the highest attainable standard of health (Article 12); the right to education (Article 13); the right to work (Article 7); the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications (Article 15); the right to social security (Article 9); the right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing, and housing (Article 11); and the right to participate in cultural life (Article 15).
As a convention, the ICESCR is binding on all parties that ratify it; those who sign but do not ratify it are obligated not to act contrary to the purpose of the convention under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention. Like the ICCPR, parties to the ICESCR are obligated to make periodic reports on their compliance with the convention to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Committee also prepares “General Comments” interpreting the ICESCR and exchanges general views on the rights of the ICESCR.
However, unlike the ICCPR, the ICESCR has no optional protocol that would allow victims of violations of ICESCR to present complaints before the Committee on ESCR against a state that has ratified the convention and violates its obligations; however, in April 2008, a UN working group approved a draft of such an optional protocol, and sent it to the UN Human Rights.
The United States has signed, but not ratified, the ICESCR.
