Tamar Ezer and R. Denisse Cordova Montes (both University of Miami – School of Law) have posted An Analysis of Global and Regional Human Rights Standards on Gender-Based Violence on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Human rights law provides an extensive normative and global governance framework regulating gender-based violence (GBV). It further offers a much needed moral and legal compass and connection to global discourse as “gender” itself has become a suspect word, and women’s rights are pitted against transgender rights, despite a common source for violations. Moreover, viewing GBV as a human rights violation signifies “an important conceptual shift,” as the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) recognizes: GBV is not just a private matter taking place “by accident, or because of an in-born vulnerability.” Instead, “[GBV] is the result of structural, deep-rooted discrimination, which the state has an obligation to address.” Human rights violations are both a cause and manifestation of GBV. GBV undermines fundamental human rights to equality and non-discrimination, life, health, security of person, privacy, and freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Moreover, GBV can prevent individuals from exercising additional rights, including rights to family, employment, and housing. Under international human rights law, states have the responsibility to address these violations, and human rights standards provide a framework to guide states and set benchmarks for monitoring compliance. International and regional human rights bodies have repeatedly highlighted the importance of a coordinated, sustained, and long-term approach at the national level to address GBV. In this context, National Action Plans on Violence Against Women serve as a best practice for tackling GBV by setting a concrete metric for implementing human rights standards. This article provides an analysis of international and regional human rights standards and interpretations regarding GBV, which can help inform national action plans. It looks across the United Nations (U.N.) and each of the major regional human rights systems—the European, Inter-American, and African—identifying key intersections, tensions, and gaps. This jurisprudential review is then accompanied by recommendations to strengthen human rights standards and ensure greater consistency, taking survivor perspectives into account. It builds on work by the Human Rights Clinic at the University of Miami School of Law, undertaken in conjunction with the Lancet Commission on GBV and Maltreatment of Young People. This analysis draws on the following: discussions during the April 2022 Gender Justice and Human Rights Symposium at the University of Miami School of Law and at meetings of the Lancet Commission on Gender-based Violence and Maltreatment of Young People; interviews with subject matter experts; and desk research on the applicable human rights frameworks. This article provides an analysis of key themes and gaps across the various human rights systems, as well as recommendations to strengthen human rights standards addressing GBV. Part I focuses on defining GBV, exploring categories of GBV, evolving terminology, intersections with inequality, and recognition of a collective dimension. Part II examines cross-cutting approaches to GBV that are both survivor-centered and survivor-led and that encompass GBV across the lifecycle. Part III analyzes state responsibilities in addressing GBV, focusing on prevention, healing, and justice, a typology proposed by the survivors working group of the Lancet Commission on Gender-Based Violence and Maltreatment of Young People. Part IV then concludes with a summary of key findings, as well as recommendations to address current gaps.
To receive new posts from Legal Theory Blog by email, get a free subscription to Legal Theory Stack.
Lawrence Solum