Declarations and "interpetive guidelines" (~1,200 words; 4 -5 minute read)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is, as with all such declarations - no matter how moving their wording - not directly legally enforceable. 

In the case of the UDHR, the "Twin  Covenants" which came afterwards ARE directly legally enforceable, and activists make - in my opinion - a major mistake when they refer to the UDHR rather than the relevant part of the ICCPR or the ICESCR. 

Similarly, the Yogyakarta Principles (both sets) are interpretative  guidelines, and thus are not directly legally enforceable. When I was first told about them, my query as to their legal status was met with a terse and angry "yes, of course, their legally enforceable" - but they're NOT.

Not being legally enforceable does NOT mean they are not useable in lobbying - apart from anything else, their wording is likely to be more poetical and appealing and thus more persuasive than legal wording. 

It does, however, mean that their usage - including reference to status - must be appropriate.

Angrily telling people - especially bigots - they're breaking the law when they're not not only does NOT help, it gives the bigots ammunition to resist any future lobbying - much as the scientists who emailed falsified information damaged the cause of managing the climate crisis. 

The Yogyakarta Principles are sound, well constructed, and are based  on existing human rights law - that are not, in and of themselves, human rights law.

Some (mostly) human rights links and thoughts

Black Lives Matter! Be Anti-Racist, Anti-Sexist, and Actively Inclusive in ALL Areas.
The Climate Crisis is real, urgent and existential!

The Pandemic is Real, and Vaccinations save lives. Stay safe - wash your hands, practice social distancing and wear a face mask in public, and follow informed medical advice - and be considerate towards those at risk or in situations of vulnerability (including economic) while the COVID-19 pandemic is a problem.

Some mostly human rights (including significant, relevant links in other fields - such as geopolitics, democracy, or authoritarianism) links: 

• on the climate crisis (noting the UNFCCC) and environment (noting multiple  international agreements): 
• some of the actions being taken to repair the world;   a social media platform has banned “ads that contradict science on climate change”;   Indonesia has banned palm oil exports;   the growing - and ignored - risks of extinction of species in the current mass extinction event;   “the EU’s pledge to cut emissions to net zero by 2050 will require large amounts of metals and minerals to roll out electric vehicles and wind turbines - but a supply gap looms”;   the devastating effect of leaded fuels;   “humanity is suffering from a “broken perception of risk”, spurring us into activities and behaviours that cause climate change and a surging number of disasters around the globe”;   South Africans have successfully stood up against an oil project;   Australian business has been indifferent to an attempt to create a beat up about carbon tax;   the problem of noise pollution;   addressing land degradation;   “we cannot afford greenwashing”;   “dear politicians, young climate activists are not abuse victims, we are children who read news”;   a heatwave in South Asia;  
   
• on the COVID-19 pandemic (noting WHO advice, Article 12 of the ICESCR, and public emergency provisions of the ICCPR and the ICESCR) and other health matters: 
• the benefits of wearing a mask even when the self-centred, selfish and uncaring IPOCs around you aren’t;   some people in China are using code words to protest against the extreme lockdowns;   growing indifference to others’ deaths;  
   
  
• on Rashist  Putin and his cronies’ illegal (it is contrary to Chapters VI and VII of the UN Charter  and international law [and the 1928 Pact of Paris which was successfully used in post-WW2 trials], and possibly includes conduct contrary to the "laws" of war and international humanitarian law (IHL)) invasion of Ukraine: 
• as Russia continues to rattle its nuclear sabre, China cautions Russia against going nuclear, a timeline of commentary on this aspect is published;   as it warned it would do, Russia has stopped  some gas supplies (this was predictable, and shows the short-sightedness of not going to renewables as much as anything else);   lack of international coordination on responses and actions could see Putin (sort of) win;   a reminder that freezing assets is not seizing assets;  
  
• mutinies and other acts of disloyalty (including a Russian unit murdering their commanding officer after a bloody loss) in Russia's militaries - and others;   Russian separatists are conscripting anyone of military age;   notable figures going to Ukraine are going into a war zone, so explosions nearby are par for the course, IMO - as are deaths,m including of a journalist;   debunking of a video claimed to show partisans in Russia;  concerns about a sham referendum in a Russian occupied city;   Russia is increasing its speed of attacks in south and eastern Ukraine (I'm not surprised by the gains in the east, but hadn't expected Russia's gains in the south);  
  
• the medical needs of refugees;   the continuing impact on global food availability / prices;   more on the racist differences in responses to refugees;   there are risks of trafficking and/or exploitation of refugees in Poland - partly as a result of well-meaning by ignorant people;  
  experiences of those in Ukraine here, here, here;
  on human rights abuses, see here (on mass starvation), here, here, evidence confirms women were raped by Russian soldiers before being murdered;
   
• on international affairs (noting the UN Charter [particularly Chapters VI and VII] and numerous  international  treaties): 
• “the 193 members of the United Nations General Assembly adopted by consensus ... a resolution requiring the five permanent members of the Security Council to justify their use of the veto”;   a rejection of claims Australia's intelligence agencies didn't know in advance of the China-Solomon Islands agreement;   Indonesia is adopting the divide-and-rule approach in West Papua;  
  
• as Russia's disinformation campaigns in Africa are mapped, Cameroon has signed up to receiving Russia’s notorious human-rights-abusing mercenaries - and China is “helping” with debt restructuring . . . ;  
  
• noting particularly Chapters VI and VII of the UN Charter, the 1928 Pact of Paris used in post-WW2 trials, the "laws" of war and IHL and Article 20 of the ICCPR:   “world military expenditure passes [US] $2 trillion for first time”;   Shakespeare’s anti-war writing;   the problem of landmines in Libya;   the increasing complexity of peacekeeping;   achieving peace in Yemen requires talks with misogynistic bigots;  
   
  
•  on corruption (noting international  agreements and monitoring) and misgovernance: 
• a descendant of one of the most corrupt leaders in recent decades may be elected to political office . . . ;   a criticism of Australia's intelligence agencies;   a charity’s CEO has been stood down after endorsing a political candidate in a way that appeared to involve the charity (which I consider appropriate - the charity hadn't made any decision on the matter);   the Prime Minister's office is refusing to release correspondence between the PM and conspiracy extremists despite being ordered to do so;   gravely concerning revelations about a progressive party's internal culture in my home state;   in the same way that crime can be an outcome of poor economic conditions, an argument that addressing piracy requires requires addressing economic problems in the areas pirates come from;  
   
• on democracy (noting Article 25 of the ICCPR and monitoring  projects): 
• why a conservative US Senator stood up for minorities against a conservative elected representative’s hate rants;   POTUS45 has been found in contempt for refusing to obey a court order to release documents;   an opinion that Hungary's current government had twisted the system in its favour before the recent elections;   the EU has an action plan on human rights and democracy;   “Robert Golob and his liberal green party’s shock win over three-time Slovenian Prime Minister ... in Sunday’s parliamentary election signals a vote against increasing authoritarianism”;   the need for East Timor's government to listen;   a commentary on democracy in Nicaragua;  
   
• a criticism of the two major political parties in Australia over economic management;   a reposted criticism of mainstream media over gullibly being duped over “stopping the boats” claims;   a rebuttal of claims by neoliberals about Medicare;   “ 'dole bludger' narrative has always been destructive and that's why some people like using it”;   the demands of being a politicians;   a call to avoid online voting - which I agree with;   a political party is being investigated over its allegations of fraud;   “climate change, the environment and the cost of living” topped the list of electoral concerns/issues of one major paper’s readers;  
  noting the Yogyakarta Principles, on the attacks on transwomen in sport (which are actually attacks on all TGD people), see this defence, this support, this response which a media outlet refused to publish, this myth-busting, this on medical aspects, this summary of the science - and this summary,  this, legal action over unauthorised use of images etc by neochristian transphobes, this, this objection to a sportswoman’s image being used without her permission by transphobes, ... and, on the other hand - assuming this is true (NSW police have not received a complaint, and Federal police are refusing to comment), this unacceptable and stupid behaviour DOES NOT HELP!;  
  
  
• suppression of dissent in Hong Kong,   Turkey,   Mali (although “mirror sites” are helping),  NSW,   Afghanistan;  
  
• on human rights (noting the various rights and treaties summarised here, IHL, Article 5 of the Rome Statute founding the ICC): 
• human “rights experts call for action to address rising violence in Israel and occupied Palestinian territory” - see also here, here;   the ICC will ignore Venezuela’s attempt to obstruct its investigation;   the home aged care crisis is continuing;   renewed calls to release an aid worker Israel has been holding for years without trial or evidence of wrongdoing;   “the Australian government has missed a deadline to decide on compensation for victims of alleged war crimes in Afghanistan”;   a reminder not to lose focus on Syria;   “the Pakistan government should amend provisions of the criminal law that treat murder and other serious offences as private disputes”;   “European Union: rules for batteries should cover bauxite, copper, iron”;   “Anti-Semitism continues to rise across the world”;  
  
  
• as the AU seeks better funding for its mission to Somalia, violence in Darfur, Sudan (again!!!),   Mali and Burkina Faso,   South Sudan,   Pakistan,   Syria,   Ethiopia;
  
  
• noting the Genocide  Convention:  concerns about a possibly developing genocide of Muslims in India;  
  
  
• noting the conventions and the Global Compact on refugees:  “Tigrayan Ethiopian blue helmets in Sudan apply for asylum”;  
  
  
• noting the Yogyakarta Principles:   a breakthrough court decision moves South Korea towards decency;   the RSL of a town in a shire with an LGBTIQphobic mayor has stood up against the mayor and for inclusion;   homophobia in my home state;  
  
  
• noting ICERD and DRIP:   my home state’s “Indigenous truth-telling commission has opened public hearings”;   racist comments on social media are stifling expression;   a shield using in Indigenous martial arts (stick fighting) has been returned to country;   soldiers thinking blackface and wearing a KKK outfit are funny ... are these the sort of clueless morons we want representing Australia overseas - even in warzones?;  
  
  
• noting CEDAW:   “Brittany Higgins complains that AFP unlawfully disclosed evidence in her sexual assault case to defence team”;   Qld police appear to have backed away from a promise to reform how they handle police accused of domestic violence;   “silent treatment: how the justice system shuts out sexual assault victims, even after convictions”;   
  
  
• noting the CRPD:   the experiences of a person with a disability;  
  
  
• noting Article 19 of the ICCPR:   concerns over possible hate speech given the sale of a social media platform - but this would still apply;   “nearly 200 NSW police officers investigated for alleged social media breaches since 2019”;   “the Belarusian Association of Journalists ... was named . . . as the winner of this year‘s UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize”;  
  
  
• noting Article 6 (1) of the ICCPR,   Article 11 of the ICESCR,   Article 5 (e) (iii) (see here and here) of the ICERD,   Article 14 (2) (h) of the CEDAW,   Article 27 (3) of the CRC,   Article 28 of the CRPD,   and   Article 20 of the DRIP:    the problem of unaffordable housing - and an opinion that “this is partly because many politicians are landlords and have a vested interest in supporting demand for rental properties in the private market”;  
   
• on natural and other disasters (noting Article 1(3) of the UN Charter): 
• another fatal explosion at another illegal oil refinery in Nigeria;   a vaccination campaign is underway to deal with an Ebola outbreak in the DRC;   drought in Ethiopia;  
   
• a ride sharing company has been fined for misleading customers over cancellations - and a phone company has been fined for overcharging; 
• have just found a website showing global maps on specific topics/aspects;
  
• “breed is not a good predictor of an individual dog’s behaviour” - stereotypes are WRONG.
  

(Should you elect to write to your elected representatives or others on these matters, it may be useful to familiarise yourself with the links shown in blue - or to at least refer to them. Don't forget to check whether your nation has ratified the treaty concerned.)

The start and finish of human rights, and . . . copyright

From my post “Human rights and the start and end points of humanity”: 

I have a project where I am looking at the question “when did human rights begin?”, given that humans have not always existed. It's a project that will have to wait until I retire (if I can one day actually get to retire), but, to cheat a little, I suspect that what it is going to reveal is: 

• the rights described as “human”, just as the rights that are described as “animal”, have always existed; 
• the problem is that we have often lacked the awareness that such is so, and have then struggled to develop the means to communicate that reality in an effective manner.

. . . 

That covers the start of humans/humanity/the human species . . . what about when we evolve into something else? 

Well, again, in my opinion the principles that are described as certain rights would continue to exist and be applicable to the new species. It would get messy during the transition, as both species would have rights and the desire to know they will not be treated or thought of lesser than the other - and the way to do that is to live by the principles of what I will now start referring to as “sentient being rights”. 

To some extent we're practising for that now, in how we manage the issues associated with machine learning (aka “artificial intelligence”). The focus at the moment is - quite rightly, in my opinion - on protecting human rights, as those using or advocating for the technology are too inclined to be lacking in life experience and the awareness of other beings that life experience brings, as well as motivated towards being salespeople for personal reasons (wealth, kudos, etc).

I’ve now just come across a video discussing the legal aspects of NFTs which includes a discussion on copyright. The discussion states that (at around 18:50; you can view the relevant section of the video - from a little earlier, to set the context - at https://youtu.be/C6aeL83z_9Y?t=1074, but the rest of the video is interesting and useful as well - just keep in mind it is based solely on US law, so I don't know if it applies elsewhere, or to what extent if there are similarities in other jurisdictions) that only humans can own copyright.

Without going into the details of the court’s decision, this raises a whole new aspect to the topic I was examining: 

when humans evolve into a different species, what would be involved in deciding that the new species can have copyright, and how would possibly competing copyright claims be resolved? 

Having sorted that, what level of sentience or other attribute would be required for us to recognise that other species - who are also evolving, just as we are - have, or at some future date have come into, the right to hold copyright? 

This, fairly obviously, is a sub-section of my previous enquiry into start and end points of rights (and what we should term them anyway), but it is a specific and thus possibly quite useful test. 

It also raises the issue of malice / bad faith. It seems to me that many copyright cases are initiated on the basis that someone else has necessarily stolen the other’s idea - or, at the very least, that there is an aspect of bad faith or malice involved, whereas the TRUTH is that people can independently have identical or closely similar thoughts, and do so all the time.

Is there room for court cases on copyright to reach such determinations?

(I have a vague recollection that the potential exists, but is so rare as to be of little import.) 

Voting in Times of Uncertainty and Fear

When “the times” are uncertain (“a-changin’”, as Bob Dylan termed it) or fearful (and the climate crisis, risk of nuclear war arising from Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, and still ongoing pandemic would make our times qualify), there is a tendency for many people to hanker back to times that they - often falsely - perceived as safer or at least simpler.

Thus, some conservative males hanker back to “the picket fence era of the 1950s and 1960s” - when things like domestic violence were so well hidden that those naïve little souls think it didn’t exist . . . others hanker back to times when human rights issues were less obvious, perhaps also falsely thinking those issues didn't exist then (they did exist, but weren't being addressed in any good way) . . . and many (not all) conservative and well-off elites want things to stay the same because that suits their sense of comfort (which, sadly, is a bias too many non-elite people also favour - albeit the latter are possibly inclined to do so out of exhaustion).

It is a backwards emotional reaction - it isn’t thinking (let alone one of the many GOOD emotional reactions), and it isn’t healthy or constructive. 

Those who suffered at the time are less likely to hanker back to those times (although that isn’t impossible . . . I wonder if that is a weird political perversion of Stockholm Syndrome?), but in any case, I consider the better approach is to seek to be a mature adult - someone who is prepared to do what they can, including finding out what the facts are and improving themselves as much as possible so they can be better informed and think more effectively on issues, and someone who is prepared to make their own informed and thoughtful choice based on the real complexity of this ever-changing world. 

Just as we would no longer take a child’s approach to solving a daily life problem, no matter that we may give ourselves mental holidays in happier times, we need to be mature adults about voting.

Nostalgia can be a nice mental health tonic (for many - not all), but it is neither an appropriate nor an adequate basis for approaching the complexities and challenges we now face - least of all in an election.

The missing aspect of the transwomen in sport topic: pain

In the current coverage of attacks on transwomen, there is an aspect that is missing: pain. 

I have no doubt, despite mainstream media’s predominant silence on this aspect of the issue, that this attack is putting the lives of all trans and gender diverse (TGD) people (not solely TGD children) at risk: it’s more than the very real “risks to mental health” - it is also a risk of suicide. 

In my opinion, this cannot be considered as simply some political ploy as a means to keeping power: it must be viewed as a direct attack on a minority group - and the constraints being proposed would create a severe curtailment on the quality of life of (and possibly the existence of some) TGD people (especially the denial of care to TGD children - which, incidentally, does NOT involve surgery nor any other permanent changes). I am aware that, apart from those telling blatant lies, there are some conspiracy fantasists who think conversion abuses work and thus these attacks are somehow acceptable if they drive TGD people into those abuse systems, but the reality is that conversion abuses (they are NOT “therapy”) DON’T work - they never have, never will, show a mindset that needs to be corrected rather than any flaw in reality, and are being banned for good and valid reasons in decent jurisdictions.

In my opinion, those who are doing this knowingly for political reasons should NEVER be forgiven. (On the other hand, I feel that those who are doing this because they haven’t made themselves familiar with reality could possibly be forgiven, but that would depend on what they do next.)

Having made that point, there are other pains involved in this - in my opinion (as someone who has lost people to suicide caused by discrimination) lesser pains, but pains nevertheless. Those pains include: 

• The pain of confusion for those who do not understand the difference between sex and gender.
  This is a major point, one that can take some effort to come to terms with but is well accepted in academia, but one which has not yet fully made the transition into everyday life as yet - although there have been some good attempts at incorporating this into the education system.
  Those attempts were opposed by a small number of people, which leads us to ...
  
  
• The pain of fear: 
• ... fear that one’s own personal sense of gender could be undermined or called into question by others affirming states of being that one hasn’t considered to date.
  This fear leads to questions along the lines of “Am I really what I think I am?”
  This (which I often term “the social dinosaur fear”) is closely related to ...
  
  
• ... the fear of: what will others think of me?
  This is the fear of being a social outcast - it has nothing to do with right or wrong, only belonging or not belonging. It is a fear exemplified by McCarthyism and Soviet social control alike.
  It was also infamously exemplified by the alleged (I've not been able to track down a source to confirm this) Bob  Menzies’ comment (claimed to have been made after the attempt to ban the communist party in Australia failed) to the effect that the control exerted in suburban living rooms was more significant than any law.
  
  
• ... the fear that one may be worse at growing up than others if they considered things one didn’t at their age - or that one may generally be less astute as a person.
  This is an unduly harsh self criticism, and simply emphasises the need for sound education, as opposed to education aimed at enforcing conformity - and it is a much healthier reaction than those who simply angrily deny that others could possibly have thought of stuff they didn’t at similar age, which unhealthy and angry reaction leads into ...
  
  
• ... the fear that my child might not be a “mini me”. 
  This is a gravely concerning fear, as (in my opinion) it possibly raises some questions about the motivations of parents who have this attitude - that is, are they focused on what is best for their child, or are they focused on their ideological / genetic legacy?
  
  
• ... the fear that the CISgender STEREOTYPE one has lovingly tended to and built up so one could partake of it might be taken away from one, and that one might have to depart this state of blissful ignorance to partake of messy and imperfect reality . . .
  
  
• There is also the pain of loss: there may be a loss for people whose partners / children / parents have transitioned, which is what organisations such as PFLAG and others exist for - to provide constructive support, not to attempt to suppress / reverse / deny reality. 
• There is the pain of what could be - and even if the effects of this were actually limited to sport (which they're not, at the moment, as everything has, in my opinion, skipped several steps past sport to attacking the existence of TGD people), it would necessitate at least three additional competitions: transwomen, transmen, and nonbinary people, so we would go from two to FIVE sports competitions ... and it would open cisgender women to all sorts of challenges - the notion of separate sports competitions is the most unbelievably foolish (I’ve edited that word down quite considerably) thing I’ve come across in a very long time.
  

None of this is new. TGD people have been talking about this for DECADES, and it feels that others have been wilfully refusing to hear. 

It brings to mind the comment by Benjamin Franklin (about the dangers of lead):

“... you will observe with concern how long a useful truth may be known and exist before it is generally received and practiced on.”

How much longer will diehards continue to cause harm - and put themselves on the wrong side of history - by resisting the truth and reality of TGD people?

I wish to acknowledge the contributions of Sharlot Clark-George to this post - particularly its conception.