Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T17:07:01.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Right to Development*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Karel de Vey Mestdagh
Get access

Extract

On 17 May 1980 Mr. J. de Koning, the Minister for Development Co-operation, addressed a public meeting of the Independent Commission on International Development Issues in The Hague. The Brandt Commission, as it is otherwise known, had recently published a report which made various proposals for structural reforms in the economic relations between the developed countries and the Third World — also with the aim of breaking the almost hopeless deadlock the North-South dialogue had reached.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , May 1981 , pp. 30 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. North-South: A programme for survival (London, 1980)Google Scholar.

2. de Koning, J., “Recht op bestaan en ontwikkeling” (The Right to existence and Development), in Aspecten von Internationale Samenwerking, 1980, No. 6 p. 226 et seq.Google Scholar

3. See for example Robbins, Lord, The Theory of Economic Development in the History of Economic Thought (London, 1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Hagen, E. E., The Economics of Development (Illinois, 1968)Google Scholar.

4. For a more comprehensive approach of this kind see for example Lewis, W. A., Development Planning (London, 1966)Google Scholar; Myrdal, G., The Challenge of World Poverty (New York, 1970)Google Scholar; Pearson, L. B., The Crisis of Development (London, 1970)Google Scholar; and Ulhaq, M., The Poverty Curtain (New York, 1976)Google Scholar.

5. A/Res/1710(XVI).

6. A/Res/2626 (XXV), para. 7.

7. Declaration on Social Progress and Development, A/Res/2542 (XXIV), Part II, “Objectives”; also A/RES/32/117 (1977), which reaffirms the Declaration on Social Progress and Development.

8. M'Baye, Kéba, “Le droit au développement comme un droit de l'homme” (The Right to Development as a human right), Revue des droits de l'homme, Vol. V (1972) pp. 528 and 530Google Scholar.

9. Idem pp. 526–7.

10. Vasak, Karel, “A 30-year Struggle”, Unesco Courier, 11 1977 p. 29Google Scholar.

11. See for example Bloed, A. and van Hoof, G.J.H., “Enige aspecten van de Oosteuropese visie op de mensenrechten in relatie tot het non-interventiebeginsel” (Some aspects of the Eastern European vision regarding human rights in relation to the principle of non-intervention), 19 Civis Mundi 2 (1980) p. 64 et seq.Google Scholar; Völkerrecht, Lehrbuch, Teil I, (East-Berlin, 1973) p. 325Google Scholar; and Tichonov, A., Le droit à la paix (The Right to Peace), Unesco Doc. SS-78/CONF. 630/10, quoted in E/CN.4/1334 p. 80Google Scholar.

12. Infra p. 46.

13. CHR/Res/4 (XXXIII), para. 4.

14. See E/CN.4/1334.

15. CHR/Res/5 (XXXV).

16. A/Res/34/46.

17. Internal memorandum of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, No. 66/80.

18. CHR/Res/6(XXVI).

19. Röling, B.V.A., International Law in an Expanded World (Amsterdam, 1960)Google Scholar; and Friedmann, W., The Changing Structure of International Law (London, 1964)Google Scholar.

20. Friedmann, W., op.cit., p. 60 et seqGoogle Scholar.

21. E/CN.4/1334.

22. Idem, para. 305.

23. Alston, Ph., “The Right to Development at the International Level”, in The Right to Development at the International Level, Workshop, The Hague, 16–18 October 1979 (Alphen aan den Rijn, 1980) p. 103Google Scholar.

24. Verwey, W.D., The Establishment of a New International Economic Order and the Realization of the Right to Development and Welfare: A Legal Survey, HR/Geneva, 1980/BP.3Google Scholar. In the epilogue to his study the writer returns to the right to development and rightly emphasizes that it is related not only to the achievement of a new international economic order but also that there is a close connection between the right to development and the national economic order. In this connection the governments of developing countries also bear a large measure of responsibility; pp. 74–75.

25. Infra p. 49.

26. Verwey, , op.cit., p. 23Google Scholar.

27. Idem p. 35; it should be noted that Verwey's phraseology is not always equally incisive, varying from “one can probably successfully try to establish the existence of a duty of states to co-operate” (p. 25) to “one can now put forward convincing arguments to sustain the thesis that such an obligation exsists” (p. 35).

28. Idem pp. 35–50; see also the same writer's “The Recognition of the Developing Countries as Special Subjects of International Law Beyond the Sphere of United Nations Resolutions”, Workshop, The Hague, 1979, loc.cit., (n. 23) p. 372Google Scholar.

29. See in particular Bedjaoui, M., Towards a new international economic order, (New York, 1979) pp. 243–261Google Scholar. The author most strongly repudiates a double standard which only leads to a law for the ghetto. On the same lines see de Waart, P.J.I.M., Volkenrecht in Samenwerking (International Law in Co-operation) (Deventer, 1978) p. 9Google Scholar. This latter writer raises the same objection to the introduction by Friedmann of the “international law of co-operation” along-side the “international law of co-existence”; the French writer Flory also distinguishes a separate right of development and accordingly arrives at a right to development which is the special prerogative of developing countries: See Flory, M., Droit International du Développement, (Paris, 1977) pp. 47–8Google Scholar.

30. See in particular the development of the principle of solidarity and the principle of substantive equality infra p. 43 et seq.

31. See also Verwey, , who recognizes this problem: op.cit., p. 4Google Scholar.

32. For an interesting account of this matter see Dupuy, R.J., “Declaratory Law and Programmatory Law: From Revolutionary Custom to ‘Soft Law’”, in Akkerman, R.J. (ed.), Declarations on Principles (Leyden, 1977) p. 247 et seq. (p. 252)Google Scholar; also Schachter, O., “Towards a Theory of International Obligation”, 7 Virginia Journal of International Law, 1967 p. 300 et seq.Google Scholar; Abi Saab refers to the “threshold of law” in Abi-Saab, G., “The Legal Formulation of a Right to Development”, Workshop, (The Hague, 1979), loc.cit., (n. 23) p. 160Google Scholar.

33. Art. 38. para. l(a) and (b); for the definition of ‘recognized manifestations’ see Bos, M.. “Van Panhuys’ ‘Carnaval des Animaux’” (Van Panhuys' Carnival of the Animals), NJB, 75/34 p. 1117Google Scholar; and the same writer's “The Recognized Manifestations of International Law”, 20 German Yearbook of International Law (1977) p. 9Google Scholar, where he introduces the term ‘manifestations of international law’ to replace the customary ‘sources of international law’.

34. Also Art. 38, para. l(c).

35. van Dijk, P., “International Law and the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights”, in 24 Wayne Law Review No. 4 (1978) p. 1529 et seq.Google Scholar; and von der Heydte, F.A., “Glossen zu einer Theorie der Allgemeinen Rechtsgrundsätze” (Notes on a Theory of General Principles of Law), 33 Friedens-Warte (1933) pp. 289–300Google Scholar.

36. Also Verdross, A., Die Quellen des Universellen Völkerrechts, (Freiburg, 1973) p. 128Google Scholar.

37. Bos, M., loc.cit. (n. 33), in GYIL, (1977) pp. 38–42Google Scholar.

38. Brownlie, I., Principles of Public International Law, 2nd ed., (1973) p. 19Google Scholar.

39. E/CN.4/1334 p. 29 et seq.

40. See also Espiell, H. Gios, The Right to Self-Determination: Implementation of United Nations Resolutions, United Nations, (New York, 1980) p. 10Google Scholar. In relation to Art. 56 of the UN Charter Verwey states that “there is a clear commitment to do something for the achievement of the purposes mentioned in Art. 55; there certainly is no right to do nothing…”, Verwey, , op.cit., p. 22Google Scholar.

41. Schachter, O., “The Evolving International Law of Development”, Columbia Journal of Translational Law, 1976 pp. 9–10Google Scholar.

42. A/Res/2625 (XXV).

43. Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966), Art. 11, para. 2.

44. E/CN.4/1334, para. 64 et seq.

45. A/Res/2626 (XXV).

46. A/Res/3201 and 3202 (S-VI).

47. A/Res/3281 (XXIX).

48. Goodrich, L.M., The United Nations in a Changing World, (New York, 1974) p. 228Google Scholar.

49. van Themaat, P. VerLoren, Rechtsgrondslagen van een Nieuwe Internationale Economische Orde (The Changing Structure of International Economic Law) (The Hague, 1979)Google Scholar.

50. Idem pp. 245–6.

51. Idem p. 199.

52. Idem p. 200.

53. Friedmann, W., The Changing Structure of International Law, (London, 1964) p. 62Google Scholar.

54. Idem p. 367.

55. In this connection see for example Fatouros, A.A., “Participation of the ‘New’ States in the International Legal Order of the Future”, in The Future of the International Legal Order, Vol. I (Black, C.E. and Falk, R.A., eds.) (Princeton, 1969) p. 365Google Scholar; and Yusuf, A.A., “Differential Treatment as a Dimension of the Right to Development”, Workshop, (The Hague, 1979), loc.cit, (n. 23) p. 233Google Scholar.

56. See also van Themaat, P. VerLoren, op.cit., p. 243Google Scholar.

57. See n. 49 and 24 respectively.

58. CHR/Res/4 (XXXV) and CHR/Res/6 (XXXVI); and A/Res/34/46.

59. E/CN.4/SR.1504 (1978) p. 32.

60. Supra p. 33.

61. Verwey, W.D., op.cit., p. 5Google Scholar.

62. See for example Alston, P., “The United Nations Specialized Agencies and Implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights”, 18 Columbia Journal of Transition Law (1979) p. 79Google Scholar; and in particular van Boven, T.C., “Internationale instrumenten en procedures ter bevordering en bescherming van de rechten van de mens” (International Instruments and Procedures for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights), in Rechten van de Mens in Mundiaal en Europees Perspectief (2e ed.) (Utrecht, 1980) pp. 44–54Google Scholar.

63. Verwey, , op.cit., p. 5Google Scholar.

64. It is noteworthy that even the Russian writer Kartashkin rejects the third category fairly categorically: “What is required at the present time is no third covenant or another set of rights, but the fullest possible realization of the fundamental human rights and freedoms already anchored in the Universal Declaration and other relevant documents”. Kartashkin, V., “Human Rights and the Modern World”, International Affairs, (1979) p. 54Google Scholar; cf., my comment, supra at p. 34.

65. M'Baye, Kéba, loc.cit. (n. 8) P. 510Google Scholar.

66. A right with a similar instrumental nature is the right to self-determination, which is concerned with the realization of a large number of other rights. As regards the external effect in relation to nations the right to self-determination is concerned for example with the implementation of the principle of sovereign equality and the freedom to dispose of natural wealth and resources; as regards its internal aspect it is concerned with the provision of opportunities for individuals to participate in the administration of the state.

67. CHR/Res/6 (XXXVI) and A/Res/34/46.

68. See Art. 1 of both Covenants (1966). In fact more and more writers can be found convincingly defending the argument that the right to self-determination also extends to individuals; see, inter alia, Espiell, H. Gros, The Right to Self-Determination (New York, 1980) p. 10Google Scholar.

69. This Proclamation was adopted by the International Conference on Human Rights in 1968 and was confirmed by the General Assembly in A/Res/2442 (XXIII).

70. A/Res/2542 (XXIV), Part II, Objectives.

71. A/Res/32/130, para. l(a).

72. ST/HR/Ser.A/8 p.41.

73. See also Alston, Ph., loc.cit., (n. 23) p. 102Google Scholar; and ST/HR/Res.A/8, para. 72.

74. World Development Report 1980 p. 33; Adler-Karlsson, G., “Eliminating Absolute Poverty:An Approach to the Problem”, in Reducing Global Inequities (Wriggins, and Adler-Karlsson, , eds.), (New York, 1980) p. 125Google Scholar.

75. Also Verwey, W.D., op.cit., p. 11Google Scholar.

76. van Dijk, P., “De Rechten van de Mens en Ontwikkelingssamenwerking; enige beginselen” (Human Rights and Development Co-operation: some principles), 5 NJCM Bulletin (1980) p. 12Google Scholar.

77. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Ait. 6, in conjunction with Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Art. 11.

78. Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, Arts. 7, 8, 9, 10 and 18.

79. Art. 4, para. 2.

80. Verwey, in his paper for the 1980 UN seminar, does not agree with this ‘holistic’ approach. He prefers in the first instance to apply what he calls a ‘narrow concept’ which gives priority to several basic economic and social rights. He believes that ‘Erst kommt das Fressen, dann die Moral’ (food first, morals later) applies to all hungry and despairing people wherever they live. In the immediate future – Verwey regards the ‘narrow concept’ as a preliminary measure which he sees in a dynamic context – ‘the concept of development, in the perception of those segments of the world's population who need it most, is a simple and narrow one’ (see pp. 9–13). I wonder whether this view of the situation is not oversimplified. Surely in many cases, if not all, the active promotion of social and economic development is of fundamental importance to such development. And in many countries is it not the trade union movement which is the first victim of the violation of political and civil freedoms? For some other arguments see also M'Baye, Kéba, “Le Développement et les droits de l'homme” (Development and Human Rights), Revue Sénégalaise de Droit (1977) pp. 31–2 and 36Google Scholar.

81. Para. 3 (see n. 69).

82. A/Res/2542 (XXIV) and A/Res/32/117, Art. 5.

83. For example Alston, Ph., “Human Rights and Basic Needs: A Critical Assessment”, Revue des Droits de l'Homme (1979) Vol. XII p. 24 et seqGoogle Scholar.

84. See North-South: A programme for survival (London, 1980) p. 133Google Scholar.

85. Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Aits. 13 and 15.

86. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Arts. 19, 21 and 22.

87. van Dijk, P., “Het Internationale Recht inzake de Rechten van de Mens” (International Law on Human Rights), in Rechten van de Mens in Mundiaal en Europees Perspectief, 2nd ed. (Utrecht, 1980) pp. 16–17Google Scholar; and Valticos, N., “Les méthodes de la protection Internationale de la liberté syndicate” (International Methods of Protecting Trade Union Freedom), Recueil des Cours de VAcademie de Droit International (1975) Vol. I pp. 85–135Google Scholar.

88. van Dijk, P., op.cit., in 5 NJCM Bulletin (1980) p. 13Google Scholar.

89. North-South: A programme for survival (London, 1980) p. 133Google Scholar.

90. de Vey Mestdagh, K., “De rechten van de mens en het ontwikkelingsbeleid” (Human Rights and Development Policy), Intermediair (1979) No. 44 p. 3Google Scholar; see also Human Rights in a One Party State, International Seminar convened by the International Commission of Jurists (London, 1978)Google Scholar.

91. A/Res/400 (V).

92. See A/Res/2542 (XXIV), Art. 8, and A/Res/2626 (XXV), para. 11 respectively; also Kapteyn, P.J.G., De Verenigde Naties en de Internationale Economische Orde, (The United Nations and the International Economic Order) (The Hague, 1977) p. 56Google Scholar.

93. Para. 13 (see also n. 69).

94. A/Res/32/130, para. l(b).

95. See n. 91–94.

96. CHR/Res/5/(XXXV) in conjunction with A/res/34/46.

97. A/Res/2542 (XXIV), Art. 9; also A/Res/32/117 (1977).

98. Supra p. 41 et seq.

99. van Dijk, P., op.cit., in 5 NJCM Bulletin (1980) p. 18Google Scholar.

100. Idem p. 19.

101. In this connection see also van Boven, T.C., “Some Remarks on Special Problems Relating to Human Rights in Developing Countries”, Revue des droits de l'homme, Vol. III (1979) p. 383 et seqGoogle Scholar.

102. Abi-Saab, G., The Legal Formulation of a Right to Development, Workshop, (The Hague, 1979), loc.cit, (n. 23) p. 168Google Scholar.

103. Supra p. 48.