Why People Should Link
April 9, 2024
BY KIRK BOYD
My last blog was an overview about the linkage of people, NGOs, businesses and governments, represented by the four figures on our logo. Paulo Coelho, in the Alchemist, shared the thought that “when you conspire on behalf of the world, the world conspires on behalf of you.”
By linking you are thinking beyond yourself, on behalf of others, to create enforceable environmental and human rights, but when you do, others, people, NGOs, businesses, are thinking on behalf of you - it is reciprical and it is powerful! It’s the fuel for a movement to strengthen and expand courts internationally so that rights are not just trumpeted in the streets, or espoused behind lecturns, but are argued in court and enforced with orders.
For rights to be enforceable, there must be courts with independent judges to enforce them. We can talk all we want about rights, but to truly have them as the core of our social contract with each other, and with those who represent us, they must be “juridical”, that is, enforceable in courts.
This is why you should take 30 seconds to link and sign to show your support for the rule of law and courts to enforce it; it’s worth your time. And it does not matter if you’re a rock star, teacher, or truck driver, a billionaire, or impoverished, every person brings the same amount of power to linkage: one human = one link. This is an opportunity to use your power, not to just lament about the loss of rights, or vote for someone who may, or may not, care about your rights, but to actively participate in creating them.
What will you be creating? An international judicial architecture! A web of domestic, regional and international courts with the power to enforce rights, with orders and repercussions if those orders are not followed.
What does this international judicial architecture look like? Neither this blog nor the Legal Pact have a definitive design for an international judicial architecture, but we do have a foundation: domestic and appellate courts in all countries; regional courts to review domestic decisions; an international court to punish those who violate rights, and an international court to resolve disputes among nations and prevent war.
Domestic courts vary, and they always should, with respect for cultural differences. This is why regional review is based upon Bills of Rights for several regions, each of which encompasses several countries, with the application of a "margin of appreciation” so there can be some variation among countries within a particular region, while remaining true to of the social contract embodied in the regional Bills of Rights.
Today Regional Courts, including the European Court of Human Rights, the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, are issuing decisions that cover more than half of the countries on Earth. They provide the best protection for human rights in the world today- not the UN. The UN issues reports; the Courts issue orders. Both are needed, but there has been undue focus on reports of UN Committees and not enough attention or funding for the strengthening and expansion of the Regional Courts.
What would a web of regional courts look like? Here’s a map of existing courts, which is a starting point, and additions that should be made for the strengthening and expansion of these courts:
With these courts in place, whenever an athoritarian is on the rise in any country, the Regional Courts can stop the violation of rights in that country, just as is done by the European Court of Human Rights today, and, to some extent, the Inter-American and African Regional Courts too.
John Humphrey, the Canadian law professor who led the team who did most of the research and writing for the UDHR, had this to say about Regional Courts after Rene Cassin was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work writing the UDHR and serving as a Judge on the European Court of Human Rights: "If the international community ever becomes really serious about human rights, the time will come when the European example [the European Court] will be followed on a universal scale.”
The time is now and the UN Summit of the Future is prime time to make this happen.
The map reflects civil law. For the times when despots act to violate environmental or human rights despite civil law orders, it is important to have an International Criminal Court as part of the international judicial architecture. Fortunately, as with the Regional Courts, the International Criminal Court exists:
Today, a fifth crime, Ecocide, should be recognized at the ICC as part of a process to strengthen and expand existing courts. When leaders know they can be criminally prosecuted for wanton acts against the environment, they will be deterred from acting.
This leads to another essential part of an international judicial architecture: an International Court of Justice (ICJ) that can resolve disputes between nations so that war can be prevented. Yet again, this Court already exists.
Lawyers arguing before the ICJ.
Most importantly, this Court can order preliminary measures so that the rule of law, not the rule of force, prevails among nations and humanity as a whole.
It is clear from a review above of EXISTING courts, that an international judicial architecture is not fanciful, it exists! This architecture represents the rule of law. The task before us is to to strengthen and expand what we have, and that will take every link we can muster. Please join us, and bring along your family, friends and anyone else who you think would be interested in linking. On we go.
