Since its foundation, the International Progress Organization has been committed to the full realization and universal application of human rights. As a consultative organization of the United Nations, we consider it necessary to harmonize the current system of international law -- as incorporated in the UN Charter -- with the universally valid norms of human rights.

We deeply regret that, since the Declaration of 1948, human rights have in many instances been used by certain governments and groups as a pretext for political propaganda against rival governments and political systems rather than as unequivocal guidelines for all political and legal decisions of the Security Council, the General Assembly, and individual member states.

We have the firm philosophical conviction that human rights are the basis of validity for any legal system -- including the system of international law -- and that those basic principles can only be implemented in a political framework which is genuinely democratic. Accordingly, traditional principles of international law -- e.g. the sovereign equality of states -- must be reshaped along the lines of the basic rights of any human being as a sovereign citizen.

As we have outlined in our programmatic document, "The Principles of International Law and Human Rights -- The Compatibility of Two Normative Systems" (1981), human rights are indivisible and constitute a universal normative system that comprises domestic and international law as its sub-systems. In addition, human rights are of trans-cultural nature and must not be exploited for ideological propaganda in support of whichever religious or political system. A "Eurocentric" approach would be totally incompatible with their universal nature. The hermeneutical process of interpretation of the general principles of human rights must be reconciled with the multitude of social and cultural value systems on our globe. "Ideological imperialism" is incompatible with the universality of human rights. Thus, we are deeply worried about human rights being used as a tool in a new ideological confrontation between North and South. This may further intensify the already existing antagonism in the political and economic fields.

The International Progress Organization attributes special importance to item 10 of the provisional agenda ("Consideration of the relationship between development, democracy and the universal enjoyment of all human rights") and would like to state that the indivisibility of human rights requires that traditional human rights as perceived and defined by the West -- namely "classic" civil and political rights -- are integrated into the broader context of social, cultural and economic rights. Political rights are meaningless if they are not connected with basic social and economic rights. The latter are a necessary condition for the validity of the former. There are no political rights as long as the right to development is denied to peoples in many countries.

The same nexus exists in regard to the political system. As we have made clear in our earlier publication "Democracy and Human Rights -- Do Human Rights Concur with Particular Democratic Systems?" (1990), a democratic system of decision-making is conditio sine qua non for making human rights meaningful, i.e. applicable under the rule of law.

Our organization considers item 12(c) ("Recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of United Nations activities and mechanisms") of paramount importance not only for the present conference, but for the credibility of the United Nations as a whole. We deeply regret the fact that, at present, effective (international) enforcement of human rights is impossible due to impediments in the UN Charter itself. The Commission on Human Rights is confined to the mere filing of human rights violations.  The Security Council is handicapped by the veto rule, which in fact implies that the mechanisms of power politics override the unequivocal application of the rule of law. So far, we have witnessed a policy of double standards which results from a very selective application of human rights and international law principles by the Council. (Cf. the publication by the I.P.O., "The Voting Procedure in the United Nations Security Council," 1991.)

As this state of affairs undermines not only the United Nations' credibility, but also international legality as such, the International Progress Organization calls for the establishment of an International Court for Human Rights that will make it possible to bring cases of egregious human rights violations before an independent international judiciary --  without interference of the respective domestic authority. On a regional level, we have already seen that such a system is workable. Why should it not be applied on a worldwide level? The amendments to the Charter of the United Nations that this measure requires could pave the way for a complete reshaping of the system of international law. The rules of power politics would thus be transformed into a system that will be characterized by the supremacy of the norms of human rights. Only in such a normative framework can the rule of law prevail and will international legitimacy be guaranteed. If the member states represented in the General Assembly are committed to more than just paying lip service to the noble cause of human rights, they should seriously consider such amendments to the Charter.

***