The use of Human Rights as a Weapon

 
By: Alfred de Zayas
The arsenal of armed human rights also includes unconventional wars, such as economic wars and sanctions regimes, apparently justified by the alleged violations of the human rights of the target State.

The use of human rights as a weapon has transformed the individual and collective right to assistance, protection, respect and solidarity, based on our common human dignity and equality, in an armory hostile to competitors and political adversaries. In the reserve of human rights as a weapon, the technique of "naming and shaming" has become a kind of ubiquitous Kalashnikov.

However, experience shows that naming and shaming does not alleviate the suffering of victims and only satisfies the strategic objectives of certain governments, non-governmental organizations and a growing human rights industry that exploits human rights in order to destabilize others and often enough to facilitate "regime change," regardless of how undemocratic it may seem and notwithstanding the principle of customary international law of non-intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign States. This strategy is based on the false premise that the "nominator" somehow possesses moral authority and that the "named" will recognize this moral superiority and act accordingly. Theoretically, this could work if the "Nominator" practiced "naming and shaming" in a non-selective manner and abstained from obvious double standards. Unfortunately, the technique is often counterproductive, because the "naming" has its own skeletons in the closet. This classic example of intellectual dishonesty generally reinforces the resistance of the "named", who will be even less willing to take action to correct real or presumed violations. Or, what can be supposed, the "appointee" actually wants the "appointed" to reinforce the resistance and refuse to make concessions, so that the "named" can be denounced even stronger. This fits in with the concept of human rights as a foreign policy tool, which does not aim to improve people's lives but to facilitate geo-economic objectives.

Another technique of the war of norms is what is called "lawfare", by which "law" is used to subvert the rule of law, and international criminal law is instrumentalized to demonize certain leaders and not others. A judge who respects himself would not betray the profession by playing this kind of game, but some do, and instead of safeguarding the spirit of the rule of law, these politicized judges corrupt him (remember Roland Freisler's Volksgerichtshof! ) Undermining the credibility of the entire system.
 
The arsenal of armed human rights also includes unconventional wars, such as economic wars and sanctions regimes, apparently justified by the alleged violations of the human rights of the target State. The result is that, far from helping the victims, entire populations are taken hostage, victims not only of violations by their own governments, but also of "collective punishments" by the sanctioning States. This can lead to crimes against humanity, when as a consequence food security is affected, medicines and medical equipment become scarce or available only at exorbitant prices.   

Demonstrably, economic sanctions kill. Under certain conditions, "naming and shaming" implies new violations of human rights and the rule of law, against Arts. 6, 14, 17, 19 and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and could reach the threshold of what is called "hate speech" (Article 20).

Conclusion: although in specific cases, "naming and shaming", particularly by NGOs, has yielded positive results, it is not a panacea for all human rights abuses. In more complex situations, "naming and shaming" has aggravated a situation or proved to be a completely ineffective instrument of change. The States would do well to revisit Matthew VII, 3-5 and replace the obsolete technique of "naming and shaming" with proposals of good faith and constructive recommendations, accompanied by the offer of advisory services and technical assistance. in order to concretely help the victims on the ground.

 
Sowing honesty and friendship is the best way to reap cooperation and progress in terms of human rights. What is needed most today is a mature diplomacy, results-oriented negotiations, a culture of dialogue and mediation, instead of this petulant culture of greatness, intransigence and more sacred than it seems that it does not help anyone.