Criteria for evaluating state policy from the point of view of international human rights law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31558/2786-5835.2026.1.1.4Keywords:
human rights, participation, accountability, regressive measures, non discrimination, equality, minimum core, financial policyAbstract
The paper analyzes the provision of human rights in Ukraine according to the following criteria: availability, accessibility, acceptability, adaptability and quality, manifestations of discrimination and the use of all available means for the full implementation of rights and remedies for consideration of alleged violations. The results achieved are evaluated on the basis of an approach that involves the use of human rights indicators and benchmarks, as well as a combination of quantitative and qualitative analysis. The applied approach has four dimensions: results; political efforts; resources; estimates. The responsibility of the state as a bearer of obligations to guarantee the rights of rights holders by adopting fair laws that have legal force, are honestly and fairly applied by both law enforcement agencies and the judicial system is analyzed. Policy processes are evaluated on the principles of participation, transparency and accountability. Critical gaps in the capacity of the duty bearer have been identified, which almost always include gaps in legal, institutional, political and budgetary norms, as well as gaps in human rights knowledge that affect both rights holders and duty holders. Fiscal and monetary policies are not focused on the realization of all human rights. The economic policy of the state is guided by market regulators in the absence of a market. These shortcomings do not allow mobilizing the maximum available resources to ensure a minimum level of economic, social and cultural rights. Regressive measures are not based on transparent and effective stakeholder participation and are not subject to meaningful audits and accountability procedures, including an assessment of their impact on human rights.
References
Holmes M. The Maastricht Treaty referendum of June 1992. Irish Political Studies. 1993. Vol. 8. № 1. P. 105–110. URL: https://doi.org/10.1080/07907189308406511
Nolan A., Lusiani N. C,ourtis C. Two Steps Forward, No Steps Back? Evolving Criteria on the Prohibition of Retrogression in Economic and Social Rights. Economic and Social Rights after the Global Financial Crisis. 2014. Vol. 121. P. 128–29.
De Schutter O. The Rights-Based Welfare State.Geneva: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Geneva Office, November 2018. URL: https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/genf/14943.pdf
Міжнародний пакт про громадянські та політичні права № 995_043 від 19.10.73. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_043#Text
Carmona M. S. Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, A/HRC/26/28. 2014.
General Comment № 19: The Right to Social Security (Art. 9 of the Covenant), E/C.12/GC/19. CESCR. 2008.
Гудима Н. С. Основні принципи та критерії оцінки державної політики з точки зору забезпечення прав людини. Європейські перспективи. 2025. № 1.
Langford M. Closing the Gap-An Introduction to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Special Issue of Nordisk Tidsskrift For Menneskerettigheter. Nordic Journal of Human Rights. 2009. Vol. 27, № 1. P. 1–28.
Liebenberg S. Between Sovereignty and Accountability: The Emerging Jurisprudence of the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Under the Optional Protocol. Human Rights Quaterly. 2020. Vol. 42(1).
Chapman A. A Violations Approach for Monitoring the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Human Rights Quarterly. 1996. Vol. 18(1). P. 23–66.
Chapman A. The Status of Efforts to Monitor Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights / S. Hertel, L. Minkler (eds.). A Economic rights: Conceptual, measurement, and policy issues. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. P. 143–164.
Alston P., Gerard Q. The Nature and Scope of States Parties’ Obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Human Rights Quarterly. 1987. Vol. 9(2). P. 156–229.
Health Systems and the Right to Health: An Assessment of 194 Countries / G. Backman, P. Hunt, R. Khosla, C. Jaramillo-Strouss, B. Fikre, C. Rumble, D. Pevalin, D. Paez, M. Pineda, A. Frisancho. The Lancet. 2008. Vol 372(9655). P. 2047–2085.
De Schutter O. The Rights-Based Welfare State. Geneva: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Geneva Office, November 2018. URL: https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/genf/14943.pdf
OPERA In Detail. CESR. 14.05.2020. URL: https://www.cesr.org/opera-detail
Lusiani N., Chaparro S. Assessing Austerity: Monitoring the Human Rights Impacts of Fiscal Consolidation. Lusiani, Nicholas and Chaparro, Sergio, Assessing Austerity: Monitoring the Human Rights Impacts of Fiscal Consolidation. Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR). 2018. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3218609 URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3218609
Health Systems and the Right to Health: An Assessment of 194 Countries / G. Backman, P. Hunt, R. Khosla, C. Jaramillo-Strouss, B. Fikre, C. Rumble, D. Pevalin, D. Paez, M. Pineda, A. Frisancho. The Lancet. 2008. Vol. 372(9655). P. 2047–2085.
Letter to State Parties, Reference CESCR/48th/SP/ MAB/SW’. CESCR. 2012.
Alston P., Reisch N. Tax, Inequality, and Human Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.
Carmona M. S. Report of the Independent Expert on the Question of Human Rights and Extreme Poverty, A/HRC/17/34. 2011.
Guiding principles on human rights impact assessments of economic reforms A/HRC/40/57. 19.12.2018. URL: https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/g18/443/52/pdf/g1844352.pdf
Guiding Principles on Human Rights Impact Assessments of Economic Reforms. Human Rights Council (HRC). 2018. URL: https://www.cesr.org/opera-detailhttps://digitallibrary.un.org/record/
?v=pdf
MacNaughton G., Hunt P. A Human Rights-Based Approach to Social Impact Assessment. New Directions in Social Impact Assessment: Conceptual and Methodological Advances. 2011.
De Beco G. Human Rights Impact Assessments. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights. 2009. Vol. 27(2). P. 139–66.
Harrison J. Establishing a Meaningful Human Rights Due Diligence Process for Corporations: Learning from Experience of Human Rights Impact Assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 2013. Vol. 31(2). P. 107–117.
Fox G. H. The Right to Political Participation in International Law. Yale Journal of International Law. 2000. Vol. 17, 539.
O’Connell P. Let Them Eat Cake: Socio-Economic in an Age of Austerity. Hart Publishing, 2013.
Branco M. C. Economics versus Human Rights. Abingdon: Routledge, 2008.
Branco M. C. Economics against Democracy. Review of Radical Political Economics. 2012. Vol. 44(1). P. 23–39.
O’Cinneide C. Austerity and the Faded Dream of a Social Europe. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights after the Global Financial Crisis / A. Nolan (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Harvey D. A Brief History of Neoliberalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Saad-Filho A. Anti-Capitalism: A Marxist Introduction, London: Pluto Press, 2003.
Пирога С. С. Реформи трансфертного ціноутворення в контексті BEPS: проблеми залишаються. Право і безпека. 2024. № 92(1). С. 163–172. DOI: 10.32631/pb.2024.1.15.
Пирога С. С. Правове регулювання системи оподаткування України: проблеми теорії і практики: дис. … д-ра юридичних наук. Ужгород, 2025.
Bohoslavsky J. P. 2020. Letter: ‘COVID-19: Urgent Appeal for a Human Rights Response to the Economic Recession. UN Independent Expert on the Effects of Foreign Debt on Human Rights. SUR 30. Vol. 17, № 30. P. 85–98.
