In many countries that comprise the global community, women are marginalized economically, culturally, and politically. Within these nations, established norms are resilient to change. It is often the place of international law to provide a more progressive framework than national laws. With this in mind, the United Nations (U.N.) understands that discrimination against women is a global issue, and has sought to create treaties in order to prevent discriminatory actions against women. In analyzing the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the creation of the Optional Protocol, a landmark decision in the case of A.S. v. Hungary, and how this enforces universalism in international law. This essay
…show more content…
Even though it is a widely accepted treaty, when it first came into force there were no formal international mechanisms in place to enforce the rights it provided. Moreover, historically, the U.N. would rarely become involved in nations internal affairs to enforce international human rights law, as that would infringe on the sovereignty of the nation. Coinciding with this practice were countries turning a blind eye to international campaigns on women’s rights by pursuing an argument that states have a right to govern themselves.
Therefore, a formal body to access discriminatory domestic policies by nations was advocated. International advocacy efforts, primarily by women’s rights groups, lead to the creation of the Optional Protocol to CEDAW, which came into force on December 22nd, 2000. The procedures stemming from the Protocol allowed for individuals or groups to complain to a Committee about violations, Article 2 dubbed “The Communications Procedure”, and enable the Committee to conduct inquires allowing for structural recommendations, Article 8 dubbed “The Inquire …show more content…
This has lead to the realization of several other human rights standards, including CEDAW. With the approach adopted through Article 2 of the Optional Protocol, women now have the power to exercise personal autonomy in relation to ‘fundamental rights’. Through a Committee, an international body, as realized in A.S. v. Hungary can enforce a universal standard of human rights on signatory states, thus thrusting the issue of gender mainstreaming into the domestic forum. Arguably, Article 2 allows for a universal standard, and establishes direct accountability on the state. Above all, this approach recognizes that women’s health is a global
Even though it is a widely accepted treaty, when it first came into force there were no formal international mechanisms in place to enforce the rights it provided. Moreover, historically, the U.N. would rarely become involved in nations internal affairs to enforce international human rights law, as that would infringe on the sovereignty of the nation. Coinciding with this practice were countries turning a blind eye to international campaigns on women’s rights by pursuing an argument that states have a right to govern themselves.
Therefore, a formal body to access discriminatory domestic policies by nations was advocated. International advocacy efforts, primarily by women’s rights groups, lead to the creation of the Optional Protocol to CEDAW, which came into force on December 22nd, 2000. The procedures stemming from the Protocol allowed for individuals or groups to complain to a Committee about violations, Article 2 dubbed “The Communications Procedure”, and enable the Committee to conduct inquires allowing for structural recommendations, Article 8 dubbed “The Inquire …show more content…
This has lead to the realization of several other human rights standards, including CEDAW. With the approach adopted through Article 2 of the Optional Protocol, women now have the power to exercise personal autonomy in relation to ‘fundamental rights’. Through a Committee, an international body, as realized in A.S. v. Hungary can enforce a universal standard of human rights on signatory states, thus thrusting the issue of gender mainstreaming into the domestic forum. Arguably, Article 2 allows for a universal standard, and establishes direct accountability on the state. Above all, this approach recognizes that women’s health is a global