Today, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) published a legal paper analyzing comparative examples and practices illustrating how Uzbekistan and other jurisdictions can strengthen the domestic implementation of the UN Human Rights Committee’s (HRC) Views.
The paper demonstrates that the effectiveness of international human rights protection depends on whether States provide remedies for violations recognized under international law—remedies that are prompt, accessible, adjudicated by an independent legal authority, and capable of leading to the cessation of the violation and reparation for any injury sustained. Where domestic remedies are unavailable, ineffective, or fail to provide timely and adequate relief, victims must be able to access regional or international mechanisms to ensure that violations of their rights are effectively remedied.
The effectiveness of international human rights protection depends on whether States provide remedies for violations recognized under international law. Remedies must be “prompt and accessible, adjudicated by an independent legal authority, and capable of leading to the cessation of the violation and reparation for any injury sustained.” As as the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) explains in General Comment No. 31, the obligation to provide an effective remedy “is not discharged merely by the existence of domestic laws or procedures.” States must ensure that remedies are effective in practice and capable of delivering redress.
Where national remedies are unavailable, ineffective, or fail to provide timely and adequate relief, victims must be able to access regional or international mechanisms to ensure effective remedies for the violation of their rights .
The paper examines legal frameworks and comparative examples from Colombia, the Netherlands, Kyrgyzstan, Norway, Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, Peru, Ecuador, Sweden, Australia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Spain. These examples illustrate approaches such as direct incorporation of treaties, treaty-based constitutional interpretation, administrative consideration of international obligations, and the possibility of reopening proceedings based on the Committee’s Views.
As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and its Optional Protocol (OP-ICCPR), Uzbekistan recognizes the right of individuals to submit complaints to the HRC alleging violations of Covenant rights. It serves as the principle international avenue for redress and a key measure of the State’s adherence to its international obligations.
The publication offers practical guidance for judges, legal practitioners, and policymakers in Uzbekistan and other similar jurisdictions, aiming to strengthen the domestic effect of the HRC’s Views and ensure access to effective remedies.
Attachment: Briefing paper Examining Treaty Body Views Implementation through Selected Examples
