What Is The Main Problem That Interferes With Enforcing International Agreements

Another distinction must be made between the mechanisms for protecting human rights: the global and the regional. There are also individual national laws within states which, in this essay, claim that they are the result of vertical respect for the internalization of international human rights standards, which arise from international and regional declarations and alliances. This essay concludes that, while there are incompatible political issues inherent in an anarchic society of unequal power and development, the acculturation power of international law is the dominant protector of human rights. While the fundamental principle of modern international society – non-interference and state sovereignty – will always be an obstacle to the application of international human rights if cases of humanitarian intervention could be taken into account, legal instruments for the protection of international human rights are essential. They have had and will continue to be a relative success in enforcing human rights legislation. The most effective step in combating INT fishing would be to fill the gap in international law that allows states to designate flags of convenience on vessels with which they do not have a real connection and which cannot then exercise control over these vessels. A combination of existing instruments, negotiating new instruments and litigation before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea could be used for this purpose. When a state violates international law, it is obliged to immediately stop illegal acts and to offer reasonable assurances that it will not repeat illegal activities in the future. The state also has a responsibility to fully repair the damage caused, including property and moral damage. First, it is to be expected that human rights treaties will be adopted ad hoc in an international system characterized by sovereign states with different political systems. The spread of liberal democracy remains a modern and continuous concept.

If the development of international human rights law is due to the spread of liberal democracy and acculturation, human rights law will rise reactively with liberal democracy – the law is rarely preventive. Justice Joseph Story, in his comments on the conflict of laws (1834), dealing with the question of which department of state government, in the absence of a clear explanation of the sovereign will, is the authority to determine to what extent the laws of a foreign state must be effective, and observe that this varies from state to state, depending on the organization of each government departments. , says: the application of international law can be subdivided into what the state that violates itself must do and what others, namely states, must do. The Universal Periodic Review, which first took place in April 2008, shows the power of mutual pressure to enforce human rights. States` commitments to human rights are being reviewed with regard to the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, all state-ratified conventions and any voluntary commitments a state may have made (Weissbrodt 2011: 23). The idea behind the universal periodic review stems from the argument put forward above: the universality of the process makes it applicable to all UN member states. The process of legal obedience generally tends to ensure that liberal, democratic and developed states do better in terms of cooperation and policy coherence. For this reason, the logic of self-interest advanced by rational election theories suggests that states that are not yet part of the “liberal democratic group” will pursue this objective, and one method to do so is to respect the UPR and obtain a positive assessment from the working group.

What was possible became the 2005 Hague Convention on the Choice of Judicial Agreements.