|
In developing the sanctions assessment methodology, one of the most important issues considered was how to define the interface between the methodology and human rights. Essentially, the question was: “to what degree should human rights feature in assessment of the humanitarian implications of sanctions?”. This presents significant challenges, since any considerations of the degree of fulfilment of human rights involves judgements on the legal obligations of certain people or entities involved (the targeted State; the sanctioning authority; and other States Parties to the relevant human rights Covenants and agreements) in upholding and safeguarding those rights.
The central purpose of the methodology described in this handbook is to assess humanitarian conditions in sanctioned countries and regions. Assessment studies using this methodology will analyse the basic status of people’s living conditions and identify how these conditions evolved as they did, including the specific impact of sanctions.
By focusing on the possible implications of sanctions on the basic conditions of life of those in sanctioned States, the methodology highlights two key dimensions of the interface between assessment of the humanitarian impacts of sanctions and human rights: (1) human rights problems which manifest as a result of discriminatory access to resources and (2) application of the methodology to provide an analytical basis for performing human rights assessments of sanctions.
Certain limitations on human rights that are associated with discrimination and prejudicial access to basic resources can be identified and followed through the subject areas outlined in the preceding section, insofar as these constraints influence processes that affect humanitarian conditions. For example, where sanctions result in increased discrimination against women seeking employment in particular sectors, the human rights impact is manifest in economic and employment data. Thus, when undertaking humanitarian assessments, it is important for investigators to inquire about the potential for sanctions to change resource allocations in favour of particular groups in the population.
In the literature on sanctions and human rights consequences, there is much confusion about how indicators of humanitarian conditions relate to changes in human rights. It is important therefore to define these terms and how they overlap.
Humanitarian conditions are defined here as those conditions of life that relate most directly to physical survival, health and wellbeing, and critical aspects of human development. Humanitarian conditions are empirical in nature and can be examined by discrete measures. Human rights—being rights of individuals—are universal, independent and indivisible. Fundamental human rights that relate to the very existence of the individual (among other rights) are nonderogable. Human rights are aspirational (everyone can aspire to fulfilment of their human rights) and normative (every person should be able to enjoy complete fulfilment of his/her human rights). Perhaps most importantly, human rights confer entitlements, and define obligations, both in a legal and a moral sense.
Because human rights are entitlements of every person, and cannot be diluted or diminished, it is not possible to measure human rights, per se. When people speak of human rights indicators, they are referring to measurement of the degree to which human rights are being fulfilled. To measure this, one must identify and use indicators that provide an assessment of the degree to which human rights are being fulfilled.
Practitioners in the two domains of human rights and humanitarian affairs each have developed empirical measures upon which to base assessments of their respective variables of interest. Human rights practitioners have identified indicators to assess the degree to which human rights are being fulfilled. Humanitarians have identified indicators of humanitarian conditions. There is significant overlap in these groups of indicators.
However, indicators of humanitarian conditions and human rights differ in one primary area: assessments of humanitarian conditions are based on empirical and analytical determinations of existing conditions. In the case of indicators used to assess the fulfilment of human rights, indicators of humanitarian conditions provide the foundation upon which human rights specialists can make an additional judgement as to whether the observed conditions constitute a breach of, or constraint on, human rights.
By analysing the basic conditions of people’s lives and assessing the impact of sanctions on those conditions, the methodology described here can provide an analytical foundation which others can use to determine compliance with the duties and obligations of the actors involved in creating and redressing these conditions. This empirical and analytical basis will be a necessary precursor for human rights assessment of sanctions, which will require additional judgements and interpretation.
| 
