Instant Access To 100,000+ Essays!

Traditionally, international law sees international disputes as a matter to be resolved between the contracting parties. International system of adjudication is inexorably horizontal. Only states have interest in settling a dispute and individuals do not have a role in adjudication. Here an attempt has been made to discuss the adjudication part of the human rights instruments. In international law, a nicety can be maintained between human rights instruments and non-human right instruments. This distinction has two dimensions. First, non-human rights treaties generally do not have treaty bodies for adjudication of dispute. On the other hand, many human rights instruments create treaty bodies and entrust them with the functions of adjudication. Thought the effectiveness of such treaty bodies is sometimes questionable, there is at lest some forum to resolve humanitarian matters. Secondly, in case of non-human rights treaties there is a very good culture of compliance1. Apart form the two paradigm exceptions in the Nicaragua and Iran Hostage cases; state parties generally comply with their treaty obligations. However, the same is not true for human rights instruments. There are endless examples of human right