CYIL vol. 12 (2021)

jana petrková – zuzana trávníčková

CYIL 12 (2021)

About the authors: Ing. Jana Peterková, Ph.D. graduated of the University of Economics in Prague with doctoral studies in International Political Relations. She is engaged in the area of diplomatic studies, especially in issues of public and cultural diplomacy, as well as in the topic of economic diplomacy. JUDr. Ing. Zuzana Trávníčková, Ph.D., graduated in International Politics and Diplomacy at the University of Economics in Prague, and in Law at the Charles University Faculty of Law in Prague. She lectures in international law and diplomatic and consular law at the University of Economics in Prague. 1. Introduction The international law of human rights (HR) is well known for its elaborated compliance system. Compliance with states’ human rights obligations is ensured by a network of multi- level measures across different human rights treaties.Those measures can be structured into two categories: treaty-based procedures and procedures based on general human rights of specific international organizations (including, e.g., special procedures established by the Human Rights Council, Inter-American Commission for Human Rights within the framework of the Organization of American States or the Vienna and the Moscow Mechanisms adopted by the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe at the turn of 1990’). 1 Further, treaty-based procedures in the human rights field include three different methods: regular evaluation by treaty bodies based on self-reporting by State Parties, procedures based on complaints, and inquiries carried out by treaty bodies. 2 A common sign of these measures is that they are based on treaty provisions. However, their availability and attainability differ. On a universal level, ex officio inquires can be maintained only 3 by the Committee Against Torture, 4 CEDAW, 5 and the CRC 6 . Complaint-based procedures may assure a high standard of compliance with states’ human rights obligations, but they are optional on the universal level. We can identify very effective procedures of dealing with individual, collective, and interstate communications under regional law; however, their availability is limited only to members of a particular regional community (Council of Europe, Organization of American States, African Union). On the other hand, the evaluations maintained by bodies created by universal human rights conventions, based on states’ reports, applies worldwide to all State Parties. The reporting obligation can be found in each of the eleven universal human rights conventions. From the point of view of compliance, the reporting and subsequent evaluation of reports by the 1 BOTHE, M. Compliance. Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Law. Oxford Public International Law, par. 76–79, 87–88. 2 BOTHE, M. Compliance. para. 77–86 3 STOLL, P.-T. Human Rights, Treaty Bodies. Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Law. Oxford Public International Law, par. 32. 4 See Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, UNTS vol. 1465, p. 85, Art. 20. 5 See Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, UNTS vol. 2131, p. 83, Art. 8 6 See Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure Human Rights, UNTS vol. 2173, p. 222, Art. 13.

86