Despite their adoption in 1948, it would be over a half a century before the UDHR and the CPPCG would be enforced for the first time. What is the explanation for this long delay in the enforcement of these documents?
Please explain those acronyms.
We'll be glad to help you if we know what they mean -- and what you think about them.
UDHR - Universal Declaration of Human Rights
CPPCG - Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
I have to explain why there was such a delay for the enforcement of both documents. I've been trying to find websites to help me, but I haven't found anything.
Thanks for the explanation.
Have you Googled these documents? What do you find?
The basic reason is that most nations don't want international agreements to intefere with the way they conduct their affairs.
Did you find any information.
I understand what you are saying but how do i put that into a 2 page discussion?
The adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) in the same year marked significant milestones in the field of human rights and international law. However, the enforcement of these documents faced a long delay for several reasons:
1. Lack of Binding Legal Obligations: When the UDHR was adopted, it was a declaration rather than a legally binding treaty. It established principles and standards for human rights but did not create legal obligations for states. Similarly, while the CPPCG was a treaty, it entered into force only after a certain number of states ratified it.
2. Cold War Rivalry: During the Cold War era, the world was divided into two ideologically opposed camps, with the United States leading the capitalist West and the Soviet Union leading the communist East. This rivalry led to competing priorities and diplomatic standoffs, making it challenging to achieve consensus on enforcing human rights norms.
3. Political Realities: Many countries, including those with poor human rights records, were signatories of these documents but did not prioritize their enforcement domestically. Some governments were reluctant to hold themselves accountable and grant rights and protections to their citizens, fearing that doing so might undermine their political control.
4. International Relations and Power Dynamics: The enforcement of international human rights standards often requires cooperation and collective action by the international community. Political considerations, differing national interests, and power dynamics among nations frequently influenced decisions about enforcing these documents.
5. National Sovereignty Concerns: The concept of national sovereignty, which asserts the independence and self-governance of states, can sometimes clash with the principles laid out in the UDHR and CPPCG. Some countries saw efforts to enforce human rights as foreign interference in their internal affairs and resisted compliance.
It is worth noting that the enforcement of human rights norms has gradually improved over time, with the establishment of international courts, regional human rights systems, and increased attention given to human rights violations. However, achieving full enforcement and compliance remains an ongoing challenge.