Special Features

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Marking the 66th Anniversary)

66 years ago today, on December 10, 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. While often described as “soft law,” the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was born out of our experiences during the Second World War,  serves as a constant reminder of the International commitment commitment to work to prevent mass atrocities and violations of Human Rights. In honor of International Human Rights Day the text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights can be found below.

Eleanor Roosevelt, who played an important role in the drafting of the docupment, displays the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights

 

 THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1.

  • All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2.

  • Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.

  • Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.

  • No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.

  • No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.

  • Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7.

  • All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8.

  • Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9.

  • No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10.

  • Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11.

  • (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
  • (2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12.

  • No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
  • (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
  • (2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
  • (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16.

  • (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
  • (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
  • (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
  • (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18.

  • Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

  • Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
  • (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
  • (2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
  • (3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22.

  • Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
  • (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
  • (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
  • (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24.

  • Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
  • (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26.

  • (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
  • (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
  • (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27.

  • (1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
  • (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28.

  • Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29.

  • (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
  • (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
  • (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30.

  • Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

 

ICTJ | In Focus: Ending Violence Against Women

Today, November 25th, ICTJ joins the global observations of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, and the start of the “16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence Campaign.” On this day, we recognize the ongoing efforts to protect women from violence in different parts of the world.

It is also a time to reflect on the many ways this deeply complex and often culturally entrenched problem is being addressed in countries reckoning with past human rights abuses. For women who have been victims of sexual or other forms of violence during armed conflict or repressive rule, peace treaties or regime change doesn’t necessarily bring an end to their suffering, or guarantee justice for crimes committed against them.

In ICTJ’s work where widespread violence has disproportionately affected women, we’ve seen how challenging it is for victims of gender-based violence to seek justice or redress: the myriad of obstacles facing women in the justice system often deter them from telling authorities about crimes in the first place, preventing any future efforts to see justice done.

Public institutions—including police forces and the judicial system—have a key role to play to ensure women are protected from abuse and that gender-based violence does not go unreported or unpunished. Even simple reforms of police at the basic level, such as ensuring victims can speak to a female officer at a police station, or covering the cost of basic medical exams, can make a huge difference to make victims feel secure. Police officers who are implicated in incidents of sexual violence should be thoroughly vetted, and those taking statements from victims—including police officers, lawyers or other legal authorities—should receive detailed training on how to conduct the interview without risking re-traumatization.

While changing the ways of bureaucratic systems can be cumbersome, without such change other progress to protect women’s rights is at risk. Citizens’ trust in public institutions forms the foundation for society’s transition to peace and the rule of law.

Spotlight: Reforming the National Police in Kenya

Kenya is still dealing with the repercussions of post-election violence that erupted across the counrty in 2007 and included many cases of rapes and sexual assaults. Kenyan police officers were widely implicated in incidents of sexual violence, either by sexually assaulting women or failing to fulfill their duty to investigate such cases during the crisis and up until now. However, not a single case has been prosecuted.

The disturbing impact of police attitudes towards sexual and gender-based violence was reflected in a recent ICTJ report, The Accountability Gap on Sexual Violence in Kenya: Reforms and Initiatives Since the Post-Election Crisis. Of the 48 women interviewed, only nine had reported their sexual assault to the police.

Endemic corruption and a culture of tolerance towards violence against women combine to protect these officers from accountability. And many victims are afraid to come forward, as they fear social stigmatization and additional abuse from police.

Those who did not report to the police attributed their inaction to the hostility they expected from police officers. For example, one woman reported:

“The police in Molo were harsh and cruel. It was also shameful, being an old woman . . . I was embarrassed to tell my husband, and my daughters were also raped. They left for Nairobi and have never returned.”

ICTJ’s Gender Justice Program is assisting the National Police Services Commission of Kenya and the country’s civil society to reform police practices. The police vetting process offers the best chance to remove perpetrators from the forces, as well as those at higher levels who tolerate sexual violence.

In June and October, ICTJ held training workshops to enhance public awareness of Kenya’s police vetting program and how to engage with it, as well as to provide concrete recommendations to improve its capacity to reveal police misconduct related to sexual violence.

Read more about ICTJ’s work in Kenya in the latest ICTJ Program report here

Photo: A woman looks into a polling station before voting in a general election in Ilbissil, Kenya, March 4, 2013 (AP Photo/Riccardo Gangale)

Civil Unrest in Western and Central Africa

Magnitsky’s Mother Goes to the Russian Supreme Court to Overturn the Second Posthumous Case Initiated Against Her Murdered Son

21 November 2014 – Sergei Magnitsky’s mother has filed a complaint with the judicial collegium of the Supreme Court of Russia in relation to the second posthumous proceeding organized against her son by the Russian Interior Ministry.

Under this second posthumous case, Sergei Magnitsky has been named after his death as a “co-conspirator” in the $230 million tax refund fraud that he had in fact uncovered and exposed.

“…Investigator Urzhumtsev in violation of the principle of presumption of innocence, in violation of the constitutional right for defence, in the absence of a court order, in the absence of preliminary investigation, had stated in his decree [from December 2010] that Sergei Magnitsky who died a year before [in November 2009] in Matrosskaya Tishina detention center, committed a serious crime… the theft of 5.4 billion rubles [$230 million]… The conclusion itself must be qualified as slander in relation to knowingly innocent person,” says the complaint.

“He [Investigator Urzhumtsev] knew very well, that Magnitsky not only was not complicit in the theft of 5.4 billion rubles, but that Magnitsky was the first person who had uncovered the crime committed against the three companies of his client, and who had exposed the criminal activity of perhaps one of the largest criminal groups which specializes in unlawful tax refunds,” says the complaint.

Interior Ministry Investigator Oleg Urzhumtsev was included on both the investigative team on the case against Sergei Magnitsky under which Magnitsky was arrested and ill-treated in custody; and on the case to investigate the $230 million theft that Magnitsky had uncovered. The second investigation led by Investigator Urzhumtsev finished by exonerating all Russian Interior Ministry and tax officials from liability for the $230 million theft, and naming Sergei Magnitsky as co-conspirator posthumously and in secret from his relatives. Urzhumtsev also was responsible for assigning the blame for the crime to a “jobless” person named Vyacheslav Khlebnikov in a fast-track proceeding which ended with a lenient sentence of five years for the $230 million theft. As part of that proceeding conducted after Magnitsky’s death, Khlebnikov gave a false testimony against Magnitsky from detention.

“As member of the investigative group [on the case Sergei Magnitsky was detained], Urzhumtsev knew that Magnitsky was arrested soon after his testimony implicating officials in the theft of 5.4 billion rubles, and that some of those officials were included on the same investigative team,-  points out the complaint. – Magnitsky stated that his criminal prosecution was a measure of repression aimed to punish him for the assistance he provided to his client during the identification of circumstances of the theft of his client’s companies – Rilend, Makhaon, and Parfenion.”

The complaint says that Investigator Urzhumtsev has concealed the real perpetrators by blaming the $230 million theft on Sergei Magnitsky, and two other deceased individuals (Mr Gasanov and Mr Korobeinikov), neither of whom were alive and could be questioned at the time of the investigation.

“The evidence in the case file objectively demonstrates that Investigator Urzhumtsev acted in the interests of persons who perpetrated the theft of 5.4 billion rubles [$230 million], and who using his own terminology, “found” two deceased individuals in order to put on them the liability for the theft of budget funds, and in order to provide the service of concealment for the real perpetrators of the crime,” says the complaint.

It was since uncovered that Mr Gasanov died on 1 October 2007, two months before the $230 million was committed. Mr Korobeinikov died in September 2008, “falling of a balcony” of a building under construction, according to the Russian investigation.

Ms Magnitskaya asks the Russian Supreme Court to examine the lawfulness of investigator Urzhumtsev’s actions and annul previous decisions by lower-level Russian courts who rejected her complaints.

“The court must check the lawfulness and the justification for the Investigator’s decree… The previous rejection violates the constitutional principle of the presumption of innocence because deceased Magnitsky was named by Investigator Urzhumtsev as a co-conspirator in a crime,” says the complaint.

“The court had an opportunity to check the arguments using the criminal case files, and by inviting investigator Urzhumtsev to give testimony, but it failed to do so…As a result, the conclusion of the court [of lower instance] is not supported by the factual circumstances, which is … the ground to cancel the court decision,” says the complaint in conclusion.

Previous complaints from Ms Magnitskaya addressed to lower instance courts have been rejected by Moscow district judge Tatiana Neverova, and Moscow city court judges Andrei Titov and Lyubov Ishmuratova

In the United States, 26 Russian officials and private individuals involved in Sergei Magnitsky’s detention and ill-treatment in custody and in the criminal conspiracy Magnitsy had uncovered have been sanctioned under the US Magnitsky Act. The list includes several colleagues of Investigator Urzhumtsev on the Russian Interior Ministry’s investigative team in the Magnitsky case.

For more information, please contact:

Magnitsky Justice Campaign

+44 2074401777

info@lawandorderinrussia.org

lawandorderinrussia.org