Professor Rebecca J. Cook
2005
1. Overview
Hilary Charlesworth and Christine Chinkin, Women and the International Legal System in The
Boundaries of International Law , Manchester University Press, 2000, 1-22
See also: United Nations Millennium Project Task Force on Education and Gender Equality,
Taking Action: Achieving Gender Equality and Empowering Women, www.unmilleniumproject.org/report/ last visited 2 Apr 05
2. Feminist Theories and Explanations of Women’s Oppression & Liberation
Charlesworth and Chinkin, Feminist Theories and International Law in
The Boundaries of the Law , supra, 23-61
3. The CEDAW Convention
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
Andrew Byrnes, The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women in W. Benedek, E. Kisaakye & G. Oberleitner, eds. Human Rights of Women:
International Instruments and African Experiences, Zed Books, 2002, 119-172
CEDAW General Recommendations on Reporting: http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/recommendations.htm
See also:
Cook, R.J. Effectiveness of the Beijing Conference in Fostering Compliance with International Law
Regarding Women in United Nations-Sponsored World Conferences: Focus on Impact and Follow-
Up , Schechter M.G. (ed.), United Nations University Press, 2001, pp. 65-84
4. The Principles of Treaty Interpretation, Feminist Methods and the Object and Purpose of the CEDAW Convention
Rebecca Cook, Reservations to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women, Virginia J. of Int’l Law 30: 643, 660-663 (1990)
Feminist Methods
Susanne Baer, Citizenship in Europe and the Construction of Gender by Law in the European
Charter of Fundamental Rights in K. Knop ed., Gender and Human Rights , Oxford U. Press,
2003, 97-106
1

Phyllis Goldfarb, A Theory-Practice Spiral: The Ethics of Feminism and Clinical Education
(1990-1991) 75 Minn. L. Rev. 1599, 1625-1646
Hillary Charlesworth, Feminist Methods in International Law (1999) 93 The American Journal of International Law 379, 381-385
The Object and Purpose of the CEDAW Convention
CEDAW, General Recommendation 25, Temporary Special Measures, 2004,
CEDAW/C/2004/I/WP.1/Rev.1, 30 Jan 2004 (Advance Unedited Version) paras 1- 14
Sandra Fredman, Beyond the Dichotomy of Formal and Substantive Equality: Towards a New
Definition of Equal Rights in I. Boerefijn et al eds., Temporary Special Measures , Intersentia,
2003, 111-118 reread Byrnes, supra 123-126
See also: Human Rights Committee, Equality of Rights between Men and Women, General
Comment 28, 2001: www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/crc.htm
5.
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (Art. 1)
Kerry Rittich et al, The Gender of International Law, ASIL Proceedings, 1999 ,
206-209
See also:
Thlimmenos v. Greece (2001) 31 E.H.R.R. 15, paras: 1-3, 34-49, http://www.echr.coe.int/
All Forms: Sex and Gender
Petrovic v. Austria (1998) 33 EHRR 307 (excerpt)
See also:
Broeks v. The Netherlands (1987) HRC Communication No. 172/1984, UN Doc.
CCPR/C/OP/2 at 196 (1990). http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/crc.htm
Advisory Opinion on the Proposed Amendments to the Naturalization Provisions of the Political
Constitution of Costa Rica (1984) 5 Hum. Rts. L.J. 161. http://www.corteidh.or.cr/stars.html
All Forms: ethnic and race discrimination
Yilmaz-Dogan v. The Netherlands (1988) CERD Communication No. 001/1984,
Annual Report cite: A/43/18 (1988), Annex IV, pp. 59-64; CERD/C/36/D/1/1984
2

CERD, General Recommendation 25: Gender Related Dimensions of Racial Discrimination,
UN GAOR, 2000, Doc. No. A/55/18
See also:
Abdulaziz, Cabales & Balkandali v. U.K. (1985) 94 E.C.H.R. (ser. A), www.echr.coe.int
All Forms: age discrimination
Rebecca Cook, Bernard Dickens and Mahmoud Fathalla, Age Discrimination, 203-205, Obstetric
Fistula, 182-3 in Reproductive Health and Human Rights , Oxford U. Press, 2003
See also: Strategic Objective L on the girl child, Beijing Platform for Action, 1995 http://www.un.org.womenwatch/daw/cedaw/
All Forms: discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation
Marta Lucia Alvarez Giraldo v. Colombia , Admissibility Decision, Rep No. 71/99, Case 11.810,
4 April 1999 (Inter-American Commission on Human Rights) 5pp
See also:
Joslin v. New Zealand, Comm. 902/1999, 30 July 2002, UN Doc. ICPR/C/75/D/902/1999
(Human Rights Committee), http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/crc.htm
Loveday Hodson, Family Values: The Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships in International
Law, Netherlands Q. of Human Rights 22: 33-57 (2004)
All Forms: Violence
CEDAW, General Recommendation 19, Violence against women (Eleventh session, 1992), U.N.
Doc. A/47/38 at 1 (1993)
6. State Responsibility (Article 2)
Cognizability: Legal Recognition of Harms
Rebecca Cook, State Responsibility for Violations of Women’s Rights, Harvard Human Rights J.
7: 125, 130-137 (1994)
Rape as torture:
Raquel Martín de Mejía v. Perú,
Case 10.970, Report No. 5/96, Inter-
Am.C.H.R., OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91 Doc. 7 at 157 (1996), (excerpts)
Facts: 123-128, characterization of rape as torture: 130 - 134
The Nature of State Responsibility
3

ICESCR, Article 2
CESCR, General Comment 3, The nature of States parties' obligations (Fifth session, 1990),
U.N. Doc. E/1991/23, annex III at 86 (1990)
ICCPR, Article 2
Human Rights Committee, General Comment 3, Article 2 Implementation at the national level
(Thirteenth session, 1981), Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations
Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 at 125 (2003)
Andrew Byrnes and Jane Connors, Enforcing the Human Rights of Women:
A Complaints Procedure for the Women’s Convention? Brooklyn J. of Int’l L. XXI:
679, 707-32 (1996)
Limitations on State Responsibility
Cook, State Responsibility for Violations of Women’s Rights, supra,
147-152 (issues); 172-174 (limitations)
See also:
Act of State Doctrine, Fogarty v. U.K.
, ECHR, 2001 (Application no. 37112/97), 21/11/2001 , www.echr.coe.int
Margin of Appreciation Doctrine, Lindsay v. United Kingdom , 9 Eur. H.R. Rep. 555 (1986), www.echr.coe.int
7. Understanding Why Women Lack Access to Justice
Generally - Ayesha Imam, Gender Issues in the Challenge of Access to Human Rights,
International Council on Human Rights Policy, 2003, Enhancing Access to Human Rights ,
Versoix, Switz (2004), full text available at: www.ichrp.org
, 11pp
Patriarchy - Ato del Avellanal v. Peru , 1986, Communication No. 202/1986,
U.N. Doc. Supp. No. 40 (A/44/40) at 196 (1988) Equality before the Law
( Art. 15) esp. para 2.1
Janet Rifkin, Toward a Theory of Law and Patriarchy (1980) 3 Harv. Women’s L.J. 83,
83-95
Albie Sachs, Protecting Human Rights in a New South Africa , (Oxford University Press, 1990),
53-60
4

Discourse of Rights - Radhika Coomarswamy, To Bellow like a Cow: Women, Ethnicity and the Discourse of Rights in R. Cook ed. Human Rights of Women:
National and International Perspectives , U Penn Press, 1994, 39-57
Experience of Rights - Sally Engle Merry, Rights Talk and the Experience of Law:
Implementing Women’s Human Rights to Protection from Violence, Human Rights
Quarterly 25: 343, 343-348, 378-381 (2003)
8. The CEDAW Optional Protocol
CEDAW Optional Protocol and its Rules of Procedure
Laboni Hoq, The Women’s Convention and Its Optional Protocol, Columbia Human Rights L.
R. 32: 677, 693-694 (2001)
Communication Procedure – Articles 1-7
A.T. v. Hungary , Communication No. 1/2003, 14pp
Model Form for submission of Communications to the CEDAW Committee under the CEDAW Optional Protocol
Hoq, The Women’s Convention and Its Optional Protocol, supra, 694-97, 709-715
See also:
B.-J. v. Germany , Communication No. 1/2003, 14pp, http://www.un.org.womenwatch/daw/cedaw/
Admissibility Requirements: CEDAW Committee, Issues arising under the
CEDAW Optional Protocol, CEDAW/C/2004/IWP.2, 19 Nov 2003 (the Boerefijn Report) 1-19 http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/
Inquiry Procedure - Articles 8-9
Hoq, The Women’s Convention and Its Optional Protocol, supra 697-699
See also: CEDAW/C/2005/OP.8/Mexico, Report on Mexico produced by CEDAW under Art. 8 of the Optional Protocol, and the reply of the Government of Mexico, 27 Jan 05, http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/
9. State Responsibility for Effective and Gender Sensitive Remedies (Article 2(b))
Raquel Martín de Mejía v. Perú
, supra, focus on remedies
CEDAW Committee, the Boerefijn Report, supra, 19-32.
5

Rebecca Cook, State Responsibility for Violations of Women’s Rights, supra, 169-171
Changes in Domestic Laws (Arts 2 & 24)
X & Y v. The Netherlands , ECHR, 1985, 16/1983/72/110, App no.
00008978/80, 26/03/1985, 10pp
R. v. Ewanchuk, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 330 Supreme Court of Canada, 1999, paras 68-74
Anne Warner La Forest, “Domestic Application of International Law in
Charter Cases: Are We
There Yet?” (2004) 37 U.B.C. L. Rev. 157, 157-160, 161-170, 186-190
See also:
M.C. v. Bulgaria, ECHR, 2003 (App no. 39272/98) 04/12/2003, http://www.echr.coe.int/
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) 6 Supreme Court Cases 241 (India) http://www.judis.nic.in/
Legal Aid
Airey v. Ireland , (Just Satisfaction) ECHR (1979) App no 6289/73, 06/02/1981
See also: Airey v. Ireland, ECHR (1979) App no 6289/73, 09/10/1979, www.echr.coe.int
Criteria for Gender Sensitive Remedies
Loayza Tamayo v. Peru, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Reparations,
Judgment of Nov 27, 1998, (ser. C) No. 42 (1998), paras: 107-192
See also:
Dinah Shelton, Remedies in International Human Rights Law, 2 nd
ed., (Oxford: Oxford U. Press,
2005) Theories of Remedies: 7-21, Remedies in National Law: 22-49, Non-Monetary Remedies:
269-290, International Tribunals including sexual harassment remedies: 226-230, Historical
Injustice claims: 429-439 including sexual servitude for the Japanese Imperial Army during
WWII: 436-439.
10. Use of Temporary Special Measures (Art. 4)
CEDAW Committee, General Recommendation 25: Temporary Special Measures, 2004, supra, paras 15-39
6

Rebecca Cook, Obligations to Adopt Temporary Special Measures under the CEDAW
Convention in I. Boerefijn et al eds., Temporary Special Measures , Intersentia, 2003, 119, 119-
135
Carol Bacchi, The Practice of Affirmative Action Policies: Explaining Resistances and How
These Affect Results in I. Boerefijn et al eds., Temporary Special Measures , supra, 75-95
11. Elimination of Discrimination and Sex Role Stereotyping (Art. 2(f) & 5)
Pamela Davies, Marriage, Divorce, and Inheritance Laws in Sierra Leone and their
Discriminatory Effects on Women, Human Rights Brief 12(3) 17-20 (2005)
Rikki Holtmaat, Towards Different Law and Public Policy , The Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, 2004, 71-80
Religious Discrimination and Stereotyping
Courtney Howland, Safeguarding Women’s Political Freedoms under the ICCPR in the Face of
Religious Fundamentalism in C. Howland ed., Religious Fundamentalisms and the Human
Rights of Women , St Martins Press, 1999, 93-104
Headscarves and Equal Exercise of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Art. 3) and
Political and Public Life (Art. 7)
Leyla Sahin v. Turkey , No. 44774/93, ECHR, 29 June 2004, 17pp
(Case Pending before Grand Chamber)
Québec Commission des Droit de la Personne et des Droits de la Jeunesse, The Effects of Dress
Rules in Schools on the Exercise of the Right to Equality and the Freedoms of Conscience and
Religion: Legal Aspects, in
Religious Pluralism in Québec: A Social and Ethical Challenge
,
1995, 21-31
See also:
Dahlab v. Switzerland, Admissibility Decision, ECHR, 15/02/2001, 13pp, http://www.echr.coe.int/
Hudoyberganova v. Uzbekistan , Communication No. 931/2000, 18/01/2005, http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/crc.htm
Ayelet Shachar, Religion, State, and the Problem of Gender: New Modes of Citizenship and
Governance in Diverse Societies, McGill Law Journal 50: 49-88 (2005)
Madhavi Sunder, Piercing the Veil, Yale L. J. 112: 1399 (2003)
12. Elimination of Discrimination in the Family (Art. 16)
7

Polygyny and Equal Exercise of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Art. 3) and
Family (Art. 16)
CEDAW, General Recommendation 21, Equality in marriage and family relations (Thirteenth session, 1992), U.N. Doc. A/49/38 at 1 (1994) – section regarding polygamy
Susan Deller Ross, Polygyny as a Violation of Women’s Right to Equality in Marriage: An
Historical, Comparative and International Human Rights Overview (2002) 24 Delhi Law Review
22
Amira Mashhour, Islamic Law and Gender Equality – Could There be a Common Ground? A
Study of Divorce and Polygamy in Sharia Law and Contemporary Legislation in Tunisia and
Egypt” (2005) 27 Human Rights Quarterly 562, 568 – 571
Itwari v. Asghari (1960) A.I.R. 684 (Allahabad)
R. B. v. the United Kingdom , Appl 19628/92, 29 June 1992
See also:
Ali v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (1998), 154 F.T.R. 285.
Felicity Kaganas, & Christina Murray, Law, Women and the Family: The Question of Polygyny in a New South Africa (1991) Acta Jur 116 at 127
Susan Moller Okin, Is multiculturalism bad for women?
(Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
Press, 1999), 7-26
Leti Volpp, Feminism versus Multiculturalism, Columbia Law Review 101: 1181-1218 (2001)
13. Cultural Discrimination and Stereotyping
Patriarchal Notions of Culture and the Equal Exercise of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms (Art. 3)
Charlesworth and Chinkin, Feminist Theories and International Law in The
Boundaries of International Law , supra, 222-225
Lovelace v. Canada (1981) HRC 36 U.N. GOAR Supp. (no. 40) Annex XVIII;
U.N. doc A/36/40 (1981), 10pp
See also:
Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez , 436 US 49 (1978) (U.S.S.C.)
Patriarchal Approaches to the Health Services (Art 12): Spousal Authorization
8

Re-read Rifkin and Sachs, supra
Rebecca Cook, Bernard Dickens and Mahmoud Fathalla, 177-178 in Reproductive Health and
Human Rights , Oxford U. Press, 2003
Paton v. United Kingdom 3 EHRR 408 (1980)
Tremblay v. Daigle [1989] 2 S.C.R. 530, para 78-79
Patriarchal Approaches to the Family (Art 16) & Property Rights (Arts 2(f), 14(h), 16(h)
Muojekwo & Ors v. Ejikeme & Ors, [2000] 5 NWLR 402; [1999] 3(1) CHRLD 116.
(Nigeria, Court of Appeal (Enugu))
Bhe and Others v. The Magistrate, Khayelitsha and Others Case CCT 49/03; Shibi v Sithole and
Others Case CCT 69/03; South African Human Rights Commission and Another v
President of the Republic of South Africa and Another Case CCT 50/03 (2004) (South African
Constitutional Court) (excerpts)
Celestine Nyamu, How Should Human Rights and Development Respond to Cultural
Legitimization of Gender Hierarchy in Developing Countries? (2000) 41 Harv. Int’l L. J.
381-418
See also:
Magaya v. Magaya, [1999] 3 LRC 35; (1999) 2 CHRLD, p. 414. (Zimbabwe, Supreme Court), abstracted in Legal Grounds: Reproductive and Sexual Rights in African Commonwealth Courts: www.crlp.org/pub_bo_legalgrounds.html
14. Market Discrimination and Stereotyping – Trafficking in Women and Exploitation of
Prostitution of Women (Art. 6)
International Law Association Committee on Feminism and International Law,
Women and Migration: Interim Report on Trafficking in Women, 2004
Audrey Macklin, At the Border of Rights, Migration, Sex Work, and Trafficking, 161-191 in N.
Gordon ed. From the Margins of Globalization: Critical Perspectives on Human Rights,
Lexington Books, 2004
See also:
Janie Chuang, Redirecting the Debate over Trafficking in Women: Definitions, Paradigms, and
Concerns, Harvard Human Rights J. 11: 65, 80-107 (1998)
9

Joan Fitzpatrick, Trafficking as a Human Rights Violation: The Complex Intersection of Legal
Frameworks for Conceptualizing and Combating Trafficking, Michigan J. of Int’l L. 24: 1143-
1167 (2003)
Dina Haynes, Used, Abused, Arrested and Deported: Extended Immigration Benefits to Protect the Victims of Trafficking and to Secure the Prosecution of Traffickers, Human Rights Q. 26:
221-272 (2004)
1999. CRDD T98-06186. Re: GVP , ImmRefAppBd, November 2
Annex
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
(CEDAW Convention)
CEDAW General Recommendations on Reporting: www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/recommendations.htm
CEDAW, General Recommendation 25: Temporary Special Measures, U.N. Doc.
CEDAW/C/2004/I/WP.1/Rev.1, 30 Jan 2004 (Advance Unedited Version)
CERD, General Recommendation 25, Gender Related Dimensions of Racial Discrimination
(Fifty-sixth session, 2000), U.N. Doc. A/55/18, annex V at 152 (2000), reprinted in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies,
U.N. Doc. HRI\GEN\1\Rev.6 at 214 (2003)
CEDAW, General Recommendation 19: Violence against Women (Eleventh session, 1992),
U.N. Doc. A/47/38 at 1(1993) reprinted in Compilation of General Comments and General
Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 at
243 (2003)
ICESCR, Article 2
CESCR, General Comment 3, The nature of States parties' obligations (Fifth session, 1990),
U.N. Doc. E/1991/23, annex III at 86 (1990)
ICCPR, Article 2
Human Rights Committee, General Comment 3, Article 2 Implementation at the national level
(Thirteenth session, 1981), Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations
Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 at 125 (2003)
Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women
Rules of Procedure of the CEDAW Optional Protocol
Model Form for submission of Communications to the CEDAW Committee
10

under the CEDAW Optional Protocol
CEDAW, General Recommendation 21, Equality in marriage and family relations (Thirteenth session, 1992), U.N. Doc. A/49/38 at 1 (1994), reprinted in Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc.
HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 at 250 (2003)
CEDAW, General Recommendation 24, Women and Health (Twentieth session, 1999), U.N.
Doc. A/54/38 at 5 (1999), reprinted in Compilation of General Comments and General
Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies, U.N. Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 at
271 (2003)
Researching International Women’s Rights on the Internet
Women Watch: http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/
Bora Laskin Law Library, University of Toronto, Women’s Human Rights Resources: http://www.law-lib.utoronto.ca/diana/index.htm
University of Minnesota Human Rights Library: http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/
Women’s Link Worldwide: http://www.womenslinkworldwide.org
Compilation of general comments and general recommendations adopted by Human Rights
Treaty bodies: 12/05/2004. UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev. 7 (General Comments): http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/ca12c3a4ea8d6c53c1256d500056e56f?Opendocument
11