Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Introduction
Authors:
Dr Başak Çali
Alice Wyss
Cristian Anton
Contributors:
Andrew Shaughnessy
Gizem Akyil
Salma Dean
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey is the first survey of its kind. It presents a
global and comprehensive picture of the state of commitment to human rights through
international law. Created by a team of researchers from University College London’s Department
of Political Science, its aim is to document states’ legal commitment to international treaties
concerned with human rights issues, as well as international oversight and judicial mechanisms.
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey documents commitment by focussing on
core treaties that states have ratified. These are eight core international human rights treaties and
optional protocols, four core international humanitarian treaties and additional protocols, two
core international refugee law treaties and two core international criminal law treaties. It codes
ratifications as well as reservations to the eight core international human rights treaties. This is
supplemented by detailing commitment to regional human rights systems in the Americas, Africa
and Europe and the judgments delivered by the two regional Human Rights Courts in the Americas
and Europe.
The Survey recognises that nominal commitment does not necessarily mean real commitment.
There are a myriad of reasons informing a state’s decision to ratify an international treaty
alongside a genuine commitment to implement the provisions of a treaty. These reasons can
include, among others, costs of commitment, external incentives to commit, setting an example to
others, mimicking like-minded states and reputation. We, however, emphasise that nominal
commitment is an important step towards the internalisation of international human rights
commitments and the acceptance of supervision and oversight above and beyond states. Nominal
commitment to human rights also creates important opportunities for non-governmental
organisations to hold states and non-state actors to account.
We hope that this survey will assist researchers and students of international law and
international relations to analyse the global picture of legal commitments to human rights and to
compare countries globally, as well as within and across regions.
UCL School of
Public Policy
The Rubin Building,
29/30 Tavistock Square
London
WC1H 9QU
United Kingdom
spp@ucl.ac.uk
The dataset on international treaties is up to date until August 1, 2009. The dataset on judgments
and violations before regional courts is up to date until July 1, 2009. In comparing regions, the
Survey uses the regional groups of the United Nations, namely the Europe, North America and
Others Group; the Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC); the Middle-East & North Africa
Group; the Asia-Pacific Group and the African Group.
The universal set of states parties is 194. This includes the 192 current members of the United
Nations, the Holy See and the Cook Islands.
We define a reservation in accordance with Article 2 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties: ‘A unilateral statement, however phrased or named, made by a State, when signing,
ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify
the legal effect of certain provisions of the treaty in their application to that State’.
December 10, 2009
1
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
I. International Human Rights Treaties.
The data below presents an overview of the current status of ratification of international human rights
treaties up to August 1, 2009.
Table I covers the 8 core international human rights treaties, as defined by the United Nations and their
optional protocols. The table displays the number of states party to the 8 treaties and the corresponding percentage this
represents. The final column shows the number of reservations made, as well as the percentage of those states who are
party to the treaty, but have entered at least one reservation.
By "reservation" we follow the definition in Article 2 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the counting
method developed initially in the working paper Reservations to human rights treaties, submitted by Ms Françoise
Hampson' pursuant to Sub-Commission decision 1998/113, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/28, Annex, 28 June 1999, Sub-Commission
on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. Reservations (even if named as declarations, or statements) that fit the
definition criteria are also counted. The significance of each reservation varies greatly; whilst some reservations explicitly
exclude the duty to provide and guarantee particular rights, others simply refer to procedural limitations.
Table I
No. Ratifications
Ratification %
No. Reservations
Min. 1 Res. %*
ICCPR
164
85%
204
34%
ICCPR-OP1
112
58%
-
ICCPR-OP2
71
37%
-
ICESCR**
160
83%
91
25%
ICERD
173
89%
94
29%
CEDAW
186
96%
167
32%
OP-CEDAW
97
50%
-
No. Ratifications
Ratification %
No. Reservations
Min. 1 Res. %
CAT
146
75%
57
22%
OP-CAT
49
25%
-
CRC
192
99%
173
31%
CRC-OP-AC
128
66%
-
CRC-OP-SC
132
68%
-
ICRMW
42
22%
29
29%
CRPD
64
33%
13
13%
OP-CRPD
41
21%
-
*Percentage of those party to the treaty with at least one reservation or declaration
**The optional protocol to ICESCR is not displayed as it is open for signature only in September 2009.
Chart I shows the percentage of states who have ratified or acceded to each of the 8 core international human rights
treaties and their optional protocols. This uses the data from Table I. The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has
the highest ratification rate at 99% - a treaty which only two states have failed to ratify, Somalia and the United States of
America.
The least ratified of the core international treaties is the International Convention on the Protection of Migrant Workers
and Members of Their Families (ICRMW) at only 22%, despite its adoption on December 18, 1990. Particularly noticeable
here is the low ratification by European and Asian states. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (ICESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) have similar ratification rates.
Chart I
Table II
Most ratified treaties
CRC
CEDAW
ICERD
99%
96%
89%
Least ratified treaties
OP-CRPD
ICRMW
OP-CAT
21%
22%
25%
Chart II shows the percentage of states who are party to a particular treaty and have entered at least one reservation,
however named. The International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) has the highest percentage of
reservations. An average of 34% of states have modified the legal effect of this treaty during ratification. The states with
2
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
the highest numbers of reservations are states from the Western European and Others Group, with the United States
having the highest number of reservations and interpretive declarations to a single treaty, the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights.
Chart II
II. International Criminal, Humanitarian and Refugee Law. The ICC.
International Criminal Law
The chart below examine states' adherence to international criminal law. Chart III shows the percentage of
states who have ratified the Rome Statute recognising the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
Over fifty percent of states have now ratified the Rome Statute. 30 of these are African States, 14 Asian
States, 17 are from Eastern Europe, 24 are Latin American and Caribbean States and 25 are Western Europe
and Other States.
Chart III
Genocide Convention
Chart IV shows the percentage of states who have ratified the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide (Genocide Convention). Over seventy percent of all states have ratified the Genocide Convention, which was
adopted on December 9, 1948. 42% of the non-ratifiers are from the African group and 30% of them are from the AsiaPacific group.
Chart IV
3
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
International Refugee Law
Chart V shows adherence rates to the 1952 Convention on the Status of Refugees (CSR) and the 1967 Protocol, which
removed geographical and temporal restrictions from the Convention to qualify as a refugee. The number of states parties
to the Convention and its Protocol are the same, but the list of states is not identical. Cape Verde, the United States and
Venezuela have not ratified the Convention, only the Protocol. Whereas Madagascar, Monaco and Saint Kitts and Nevis
have ratified just the Convention. Of those states who have not ratified either the Convention or its Protocol, 53 % are
from the Asia-Pacific region (25 States), with the Middle-East and North Africa region the next highest at 23% (11 states).
Chart V
International Humanitarian Law
Chart VI shows the percentage of states party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols of 1977 and
2005. The 1949 Geneva Conventions are universally ratified. Montenegro and Nauru became, in 2006, the latest states to
ratify the Conventions (Montenegro in the same year that it achieved independence). The two Protocols Additional to the
four 1949 Geneva Conventions were adopted in 1977. Protocol II, as the first-ever international treaty devoted exclusively
to situations of non-international armed conflicts has a ratification rate closer to Protocol I, which governs international
armed conflicts. Protocol II, however, has far fewer provisions and protections compared to Protocol I. Afghanistan,
Andorra, Azerbaijan, Bhutan, Eritrea, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Kiribati, Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Myanmar, Nepal,
Papua New Guinea, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Turkey and Tuvalu have ratified neither Protocol I nor Protocol II.
Chart VI
III. Regional Human Rights Treaties
Organisation of African Unity (OAU)
The treaties examined for ratification in the African region are: The African Charter on Human and People's
Rights (ACHRP), the Protocol to the Charter on the Rights of Women in Africa (ACHRP-P), The African Charter
on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC) and the AU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of
Refugee Problems in Africa (OAUCR).
Chart VII refers to the percentage of African States who have ratified a specific treaty. The ACHRP, the primary human
rights document of the region, has been ratified by all members of the African Union. Regional Chart VIII shows that the
majority of African Union states have ratified 3 or more of the relevant African human rights treaties. The final table below
ranks the African states according to the number of relevant African human rights treaties they have ratified. Morocco
ranks at the bottom with no ratifications to date.
4
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Chart VII
Chart VIII
Table III
Rank
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
Country
Benin
Burkina Faso
Cape Verde
Comoros
Gambia
Lesotho
Libya
Malawi
Mali
Mauritania
Mozambique
Nigeria
Ratif.
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Rwanda
Senegal
Seychelles
Tanzania
Togo
4
4
4
4
4
Rank
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
Country
Algeria
Angola
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Chad
Congo
Cote d'Ivoire
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Ratif.
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Ghana
Guinea
Kenya
Namibia
Niger
Sierra Leone
South Africa
Tunisia
Uganda
Zimbabwe
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Rank
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
4.
4.
5.
Country
Central African Republic
Congo D.R.
Djibouti
Eritrea
Guinea-Bissau
Liberia
Madagascar
Mauritius
Sudan
Swaziland
Zambia
Sao Tome & Principe
Ratif.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
Somalia
Morocco
1
0
The Organisation of American States (OAS)
The below charts examine the ratification rates of regional human rights treaties. The first refers to the
Americas and the core human rights treaties and optional protocols pertaining to human rights in the InterAmerican system. The relevant treaties and protocols selected are: the American Convention on Human
Rights (ACHR), Additional Protocol on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ACHR-OP), Protocol to the ACHR
to abolish the death penalty (ACHR-P), Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (IACPT),
Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearances (IACFD), Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment
& Eradication of Violence Against Women (IACPW) and the Inter-American Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities (IACPD).
The first two charts map the percentage of states who have ratified a particular treaty. The IACPW has the highest
percentage ratification, with a total of 32 states parties. The second chart examines the number of treaties ratified by
state. Notably the United States, Canada and Cuba have not ratified any of the human rights treaties or protocols of the
Inter-American system.
Table IV shows a ranking of those states within the Inter-American human rights system by the number of ratifications of
regional treaties and relevant optional protocols listed.
5
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Chart IX
Chart X
Table IV
Rank
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
Country
Argentina
Costa Rica
Ecuador
Mexico
Panama
Paraguay
Uruguay
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Guatemala
Ratif.
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
Rank
2.
2.
3.
4.
4.
4.
5.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
Country
Peru
Venezuela
El Salvador
Dominican Republic
Nicaragua
Suriname
Honduras
Barbados
Dominica
Grenada
Haiti
Jamaica
Ratif.
6
6
5
4
4
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
Rank
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
8.
8.
8.
Country
Trinidad and Tobago
Antigua & Barbuda
Bahamas
Belize
Guyana
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Canada
Cuba
United States of America
Ratif.
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
Council of Europe (CoE)
The below charts examine the European Human Rights System. Ten human rights documents have been
selected when collecting the data. These are: The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Protocol 1
to the ECHR (covering in particular the right to peaceful enjoyment of property, the right to education and the
right to free elections by secret ballot), Protocol 4 (this extends the rights of the ECHR including: right to
liberty of movement and freedom to choose one's residence, prohibition of a State's expulsion of a national, prohibition of
collective expulsion of aliens), Protocol 7 (this includes the right of aliens to procedural guarantees in the event of
expulsion from the territory of a State; the right not to be tried or punished in criminal proceedings for an offence for
which one has already been acquitted or convicted; equality of rights and responsibilities as between spouses), Protocol12
(provides for a general prohibition of discrimination), Protocol 13 (concerning the abolition of the death penalty in all
circumstances), Protocol14 (amending the control system of the Convention), The European Social Charter (ESC); the
Additional Protocol to the ESC providing for a system of collective complaints and the European Convention on Torture.
The ratification rate of regional human rights treaties in Europe is high, with more than sixty percent of the states ratifying
8 or more human rights treaties. Amongst these, the European Social Charter Additional Protocol creating a collective
complaint mechanism for economic and social rights has the lowest number of ratifications, followed by Protocol 12
prohibiting discrimination.
Russia is the only country that is yet to ratify Protocol 14, which aims to amend the working methods of the European
Court of Human Rights to address the challenges of its increased workload. The final table below ranks the states according
to the number of relevant European human rights treaties they have ratified. Russia, Spain, Switzerland the United
Kingdom jointly have the lowest ranking.
6
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Chart XI
Chart XII
Table V
Rank
1.
1.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
Country
Cyprus
Finland
Albania
Andorra
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Croatia
France
Georgia
Ireland
Italy
Netherlands
Norway
Portugal
Romania
Sweden
Ukraine
Ratif.
10
10
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
Rank
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
4.
4.
Country
Armenia
Belgium
Bulgaria
Estonia
Hungary
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Moldova, Republic of
Montenegro
San Marino
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Ratif.
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
Rank
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
6.
6.
6.
6.
Country
Czech Republic
Denmark
Greece
Iceland
Liechtenstein
Macedonia, FYRO
Germany
Latvia
Monaco
Poland
Turkey
Russian Federation
Spain
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Ratif.
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
IV. Individual Petition Mechanisms
Individual petition mechanisms allow individuals to bring complaints against states before a supranational
human rights body. Individual petition is an important supervisory mechanism over human rights
commitments as they allow for a real test of states' commitment to human rights provisions and respect for
decisions of supervisory bodies. Individual petition is available before five of the Human Rights Bodies of the
United Nations. These are: the ICCPR, the CERD, the CAT, the CEDAW and the CRPD. Provided that a state recognises the
competence of the relevant UN Committee, any individual who claims that their treaty rights have been violated may bring
a communication before these Committees. Complaints may also be brought by third parties on behalf of individuals
provided they have given their written consent or where they are incapable of giving such consent.
Regional human rights petition mechanisms include three courts - the African Court on Human and People's Rights (not yet
fully operational), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. Three quasi-legal
petition mechanisms exist alongside - the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights, the Inter-American
Commission of Human Rights and the European Social Charter Committee.
Chart XIII displays the number of petition mechanisms states have accepted. 28% of states have not accepted any
individual petition mechanisms. Chart XIV shows the regional human rights mechanisms in Africa, the Americas and Europe
and the percentage of states recognising their jurisdiction. In Europe it is compulsory for members of the Council of Europe
to recognise the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, hence the figure of 100%. In Africa, membership of
the Court was only opened to signature in 1999, whereas the Inter-American Court was established in 1979.
7
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Chart XV below shows the individual petition mechanisms to United Nations Human Rights Treaties. It displays the number
of states who have accepted the right to individual petition. Over half of the states party have accepted the right to
individual petition to the ICCRP and CEDAW. The ICERD has attracted a much lower proportion of states (44%) .
Chart XIII
Chart XIV
Chart XV
Table VI ranks UN member states in relation to their acceptance of the individual petition mechanisms (the Additional
Protocol to the European Social Charter allows for collective complaints). States outside of the African, American and the
European Human Rights systems have no opportunity to become party to regional individual petition mechanisms and so
their total scores are inevitably lower. Nonetheless, as the petition mechanisms are broken down in the chart it provides
an informative view as to which states currently accept this form of supervision. Of interest is that a total of fifty states
have not accepted any international supervision. This list includes two permanent members of the Security Council - China
and the United States.
Table VI
Rank
1.
1.
1.
2.
2.
State
Belgium
Italy
Sweden
Argentina
Austria
International
5
5
5
5
5
Africa
Americas
Europe
2
2
2
1
1
Total
7
7
7
6
6
8
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Rank
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
5.
5.
5.
5.
State
Azerbaijan
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cyprus
Ecuador
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary
Ireland
Mexico
Netherlands
Norway
Peru
Portugal
Serbia
Slovenia
South Africa
Spain
Andorra
Bolivia
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
Czech Republic
Georgia
Greece
Guatemala
Iceland
Liechtenstein
Luxembourg
Montenegro
Paraguay
Poland
Russia
Senegal
Ukraine
Uruguay
Venezuela
Algeria
Australia
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
Burkina Faso
Denmark
Kazakhstan
Mali
Malta
Niger
Panama
Korea, Republic of
Romania
San Marino
Slovakia
Switzerland
Macedonia, FYRO
Tunisia
Turkey
Albania
Armenia
Cameroon
Canada
International
5
5
4
4
5
4
4
5
5
4
5
4
4
5
4
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
3
Africa
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
4
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
1
Americas
Europe
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Total
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
9
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Rank
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
State
Colombia
El Salvador
Ghana
Lesotho
Libya
Lithuania
Mauritius
Monaco
Mongolia
Morocco
Namibia
New Zealand
Moldova, Republic of
Rwanda
Togo
Uganda
Angola
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Burundi
Cook Islands
Cote d'Ivoire
Congo, Democratic
Republic of
International
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
Estonia
Gabon
Gambia
Guinea
Haiti
Honduras
Kyrgyzstan
Latvia
Maldives
Mozambique
Nepal
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Philippines
Seychelles
Sri Lanka
Suriname
Tanzania
Turkmenistan
United Kingdom
Antigua & Barbuda
Belize
Benin
Botswana
Cape Verde
Central African
Republic
Chad
Comoros
Congo
Equatorial Guinea
Guyana
Kenya
Madagascar
Malawi
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
Africa
Americas
1
1
Europe
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Total
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Rank
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
State
Mauritania
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Solomon Islands
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Tajikistan
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Trinidad and Tobago
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Yemen
Zambia
Afghanistan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bhutan
Brunei
Cambodia
China
Cuba
Dominica
Egypt
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Fiji
Grenada
Guinea-Bissau
Holy See
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Israel
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kiribati
Kuwait
Laos
Lebanon
Liberia
Malaysia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Myanmar
Nauru
Korea, Democratic
Republic of
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Papua New Guinea
Qatar
Saint Lucia
Samoa
Sao Tome and Principe
International
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Africa
1
Americas
1
Europe
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Rank
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
State
Singapore
Swaziland
Tonga
Tuvalu
United Arab Emirates
United States of
America
Vietnam
Zimbabwe
8.
8.
International
0
0
0
0
0
0
Africa
Americas
Europe
0
0
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
V. Judgements and Violations
Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR)
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights was established in 1979, and its objective is the application and interpretation
of the American Convention on Human Rights and other treaties concerning the same matter. The Court does not have
compulsory jurisdiction and only 22 (63%) members of the Organisation of American States have so far accepted it. Chart
XVI below displays the states with the highest number of violation judgements before the Court up to December 31, 2008.
These figures include judgements where the state accepted responsibility subsequent to the cases referral to the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights. Table VIIII and IX simply outline the total number of judgements issued in relation to a
state, this includes judgements on preliminary objections, costs and reparations, competence and interpretations, and the
number of violation judgements. Only Honduras to date has had a judgement where no violation was found.
Chart XVI
Table VIII
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Country
Peru
Guatemala
Colombia
Honduras
Ecuador
Argentina
Venezuela
Suriname
Paraguay
Nicaragua
Table IX
Judgements
55
23
19
14
12
9
8
8
7
6
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Country
Peru
Guatemala
Colombia
Ecuador
Argentina
Paraguay
Venezuela
Honduras
Suriname
Nicaragua
Violations
23
12
10
8
6
6
5
5
4
3
European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)
The European Court of Human Rights was established in 1959 and has the jurisdiction to deal with applications from
individuals or states complaining of violations of the civil and political rights laid out in the ECHR. Accepting the Courts
jurisdiction is a compulsory requirement for entry into the Council of Europe. In Europe, only Belarus remains outside of
the Council of Europe system.
Chart XVII below displays the ten states with the highest number of judgements against them in which at least one
violation was found from the Courts inception until December 31, 2008. Table X shows the states with the highest numbers
of applications pending before the Court as of December 31, 2008. The European Court of Human Rights has a high case
load and the figures below only provide a snapshot of human rights judgments. There are a number of reasons for the high
number of judgments. These range from a high rate of human rights violations, lack of domestic remedies, lack of domestic
filter mechanisms to well-informed lawyers and citizens, and systemic problems that produce repetitive cases.
Below Table XI looks at the states with the highest proportion of non-violation judgements as compared to violation
judgements. Denmark has the highest ratio with 47% of cases decided on merits where no violation was found.
12
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Table X
Highest number of applications pending
Russian Federation
27,246
Turkey
11,085
Romania
8,901
Ukraine
8,270
Italy
4,195
Table XI
Highest ratio of non-violation judgements
Denmark
47%
Germany
32%
Spain
32%
Sweden
31%
Ireland
28%
Chart XVII
VI. Overall Ranking
The table below provides a ranking of states by the number of international treaties they have ratified and individual
petition mechanisms they have accepted. This ranking is comprised of the 8 core United Nations International Human
Rights Treaties and their Optional Protocols, individual petition mechanisms under ICCPR, ICERD, CAT, CEDAW and CRPD,
the Genocide Convention, the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its two Additional Protocols, the Refugee Convention and its
Protocol and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Argentina is, at this time, the only state that has ratified all of the treaties and accepted all the individual petition
mechanisms. The Latin American and the Caribbean Group (GRULAC) has the highest number of ratifications, with 8 out of
st
nd
the 12 states ranking 1 and 2 coming from the region. Western European and Others Group make up the other four
states ranked second. The bottom end of the chart is made up predominantly of Asian states or small island states. Bhutan
and Kiribati have the lowest ranking at just three ratifications each. Both have ratified the Convention on the Rights of the
Child, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
Two of the five permanent members of the Security Council - France and the United Kingdom - are in the top five and two
current non-permanent members - Costa Rica and Mexico - are joint second. Of the permanent members, the United
States scores the lowest with a ranking of 17. The Top 5 of the United Nations Development Index of 2008 are also in the
top five of the Ratifications by Country list.
Chart XVIII
13
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Chart XIV
Table XII
UN Security Council P5
UN Security Council 2009 (Elected)
UN Human Development Index 2009 Top 5
Country
Rank
Country
Rank
Country
Rank
China
11
Austria
3
Norway
5
France
4
Burkina Faso
5
Australia
4
Russian Federation
8
Costa Rica
2
Iceland
5
United Kingdom
6
Croatia
3
Canada
6
United States of America
17
Japan
11
Ireland
6
Libya
10
Mexico
2
Turkey
8
Uganda
6
Vietnam
15
Table XIII. Ratifications by Country
Rank
1.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
5.
5.
Country
Argentina
Chile
Costa Rica
Ecuador
Germany
Mexico
Paraguay
Peru
Serbia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Uruguay
Austria
Belgium
Croatia
Denmark
Italy
Australia*
Azerbaijan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Brazil
France**
Guatemala
Mali
Montenegro
Senegal
Albania
Bulgaria
Intl.
8
8
7
8
7
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
7
7
7
6
8
8
6
7
7
6
OPs
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
4
4
3
3
4
3
4
3
4
3
3
4
3
4
3
Petition
5
4
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
4
4
5
4
5
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
2
4
Genocide
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Geneva
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Refugee
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
ICC
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
TOTAL
24
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
23
22
22
22
22
22
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
20
20
14
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Rank
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
Country
Burkina Faso
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Macedonia, FYRO
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Liechtenstein
Namibia
New Zealand
Norway
Panama
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
South Africa
Korea, Republic of
Ukraine
Canada
Colombia
Finland
Greece
Ireland
Kazakhstan
Lesotho
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Rwanda
Switzerland
Uganda
United Kingdom
Venezuela
Algeria
El Salvador
Kyrgyzstan
Lithuania
Malta
Moldova, Republic of
Niger
Philippines
Tunisia
Armenia
Estonia
Guinea
Mongolia
Morocco
Russian Federation
Timor-Leste
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Belarus
Belize
Benin
Burundi
Cambodia
Congo, Democratic Republic of
Egypt
Gabon
Ghana
Intl.
8
6
6
6
6
8
7
6
6
7
7
6
7
6
6
6
6
6
7
6
6
7
6
6
6
6
8
6
6
8
8
6
8
7
6
7
8
7
6
6
6
8
8
7
6
6
8
7
8
6
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
7
7
OPs
2
3
3
4
3
4
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
2
2
4
3
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
4
3
3
2
4
3
2
2
3
3
3
4
1
3
2
3
3
0
2
2
1
3
3
3
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
1
0
Petition
3
4
4
4
4
1
5
4
4
3
3
4
3
4
4
3
4
5
4
4
3
2
4
3
4
4
2
4
4
1
2
3
2
1
4
3
2
2
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
1
2
3
3
4
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
2
Genocide
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
Geneva
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Refugee
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
ICC
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
TOTAL
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
15
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Rank
9.
9.
9.
9.
9.
9
9.
9.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
11.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
12.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
13.
14.
14.
14.
14.
14.
14.
14.
Country
Latvia
Monaco
Nigeria
San Marino
Seychelles
Tajikistan
Togo
Yemen
Andorra
Bangladesh
Cape Verde
Chad
Liberia
Libya
Maldives
Mozambique
Saint Vincent & Grenadines
Sierra Leone
Tanzania
Botswana
Cameroon
China
Dominican Republic
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kenya
Madagascar
Mauritius
Sudan
Syria
Uzbekistan
Afghanistan
Antigua and Barbuda
Congo
Cote d'Ivoire
Djibouti
Equatorial Guinea
Gambia
Malawi
Mauritania
Nepal
Sri Lanka
Zambia
Angola
Bahrain
Central African Republic
Dominica
Ethiopia
Haiti
Israel
Kuwait
Lebanon
Suriname
Trinidad and Tobago
Bahamas
Barbados
Cuba
Guyana
Swaziland
Thailand
Zimbabwe
Intl.
6
6
7
7
7
7
6
7
5
7
7
6
6
7
6
5
6
6
5
5
6
6
5
7
6
7
7
6
6
5
8
6
6
4
6
6
5
6
5
6
7
6
7
6
4
6
5
4
6
5
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
7
5
OPs
2
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
1
2
2
2
0
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
3
2
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
3
2
0
2
2
0
2
0
0
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
Petition
1
2
1
4
2
1
2
1
4
1
1
1
0
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
2
2
1
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
Genocide
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
Geneva
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
3
Refugee
2
1
2
0
2
2
2
2
0
0
1
2
2
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
2
1
0
2
0
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
2
2
2
0
0
0
2
0
2
ICC
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
TOTAL
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
16
Nominal Commitment to Human Rights: A Global Survey
Rank
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
15.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
16.
17.
17.
17.
17.
18.
18.
18.
18.
18.
19.
19.
19.
19.
20.
20.
20.
20.
21.
21.
21.
21.
22.
22.
Country
Fiji
Holy See
India
Laos
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Solomon Islands
Vanuatu
Vietnam
Comoros
Cook Islands
Iran
Iraq
Oman
Papua New Guinea
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Samoa
Eritrea
Guinea-Bissau
Somalia
United States of America
Grenada
Indonesia
Korea, Democratic Republic of
Sao Tome and Principe
United Arab Emirates
Brunei
Pakistan
Saint Lucia
Tonga
Micronesia
Nauru
Singapore
Tuvalu
Malaysia
Marshall Islands
Myanmar
Palau
Bhutan
Kiribati
Intl.
3
3
6
4
5
5
4
4
5
3
3
4
5
4
5
3
3
5
3
4
3
4
6
4
2
3
2
4
3
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
OPs
0
2
2
2
2
0
0
2
2
1
0
1
2
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Petition
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Genocide
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
Geneva
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
1
1
3
1
3
3
1
3
1
1
3
1
2
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
Refugee
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
1
2
0
2
2
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
ICC
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
*Iceland – UN HDI Top 5
** France – UNSC P5 member
17