29/35 Report of the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, Virginia Dandan
Document Type: Final Report
Date: 2015 Apr
Session: 29th Regular Session (2015 Jun)
Agenda Item: Item3: Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development
GE.15-07070 (E)
Human Rights Council Twenty-ninth session
Agenda item 3
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,
political, economic, social and cultural rights,
including the right to development
Report of the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, Virginia Dandan
Summary
The Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity, Virginia
Dandan, submits the present report pursuant to Human Rights Council resolution 26/6. The
report provides a summary of activities undertaken by the Independent Expert during the
reporting period with the aim of raising awareness of the proposed draft declaration on the
right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity in particular, and on promoting
international solidarity in general.
The main feature of the present report is the conceptualization in human rights terms
of international solidarity in the context of the proposed draft declaration. This is the first
time that international solidarity is being examined in the light of the text of the proposed
draft declaration on the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity.
Contents Paragraphs Page
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1–10 3
A. Activities undertaken during the reporting period .......................................... 3–7 3
B. Context of the present report .......................................................................... 8–10 4
II. Human rights and international solidarity ............................................................... 11–38 5
A. Attributes of international solidarity ............................................................... 11–19 5
B. International solidarity in action ..................................................................... 20–27 8
C. Building on international solidarity ................................................................ 28–38 11
III. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 39–41 16
I. Introduction
1. In its resolution 26/6, adopted at its twenty-sixth session, the Human Rights Council,
decided to extend the mandate of the Independent Expert on human rights and international
solidarity, and noted with appreciation the proposed draft declaration on the right of
peoples and individuals to international solidarity set out in the annex to her report
(A/HRC/26/34). The Council also decided that, in order to obtain input from as many
Member States as possible on the proposed draft declaration, the Independent Expert should
convene regional consultations and/or workshops, and requested the Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner to assist her in organizing those gatherings. In the same
resolution, the Council also requested the Independent Expert to consolidate and consider
the output from all the regional consultations; to submit to it, at its thirty-second session, a
report on those consultations; and to submit to the Council and the General Assembly,
before the end of her second term, a revised draft declaration.
2. In her report to the General Assembly at its 69th session (A/69/366), the
Independent Expert explored the application of the provisions of the proposed draft
declaration to the illustrative goals recommended by the High-Level Panel of Eminent
Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, together with the sustainable development
goals proposed by the Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable
Development Goals. Her brief analysis was written with a view to contributing to the
current process of formulating the future sustainable development goals to ensure that they
are consistent with universal human rights standards, focusing on the value added to the
goals when they are defined and informed by the right to international solidarity.
A. Activities undertaken during the reporting period
3. Pursuant to other requests reiterated by the Council in its resolution 26/6, the
Independent Expert has continued to pursue her mandated activities. They include
participation in relevant international forums and major events with a view to promoting the
importance of human rights and international solidarity, particularly in the implementation
of the Millennium Development Goals and the United Nations development agenda beyond
2015. The Independent Expert closely followed and actively participated in activities and
initiatives relating to the post-2015 development process, including those relating to climate
change, in various conferences and consultations at the international and regional levels.
4. In August 2014, she was invited to speak in the session entitled “Accountability and
a renewed global partnership” during the Asia-Pacific Regional Consultation on
Accountability for the Post-2015 Development Agenda, held at the United Nations
Conference Centre in Bangkok. The expected output of the consultation was a set of
recommendations on how global partnerships could be made more effective and
accountable, and how such partnerships could benefit from regional platforms. During the
discussions, the Independent Expert stressed that effective global partnerships in the
context of the post-2015 development agenda should be grounded in human rights
standards and that States’ human rights accountability was already set forth in the
international human rights treaties that they had ratified.
5. The Independent Expert also had an opportunity to highlight once again the need to
integrate human rights throughout the sustainable development processes and outcomes
when she was invited by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia
and the Pacific to speak as a panellist at the Expert Group Meeting on Macroeconomic
Prospects, Policy Challenges and Sustainable Development in Asia-Pacific, held in
December 2014 in Bangkok. The expert group meeting brought together development
experts from the region and beyond to provide new regional perspectives for policy options
which Asian and Pacific countries could adopt to meet their development objectives. The
Independent Expert participated in discussions focused on the strategies needed to improve
the economic, social and environmental aspects of economic growth that are
simultaneously people-centred and inclusive, dynamic and resilient, and within the capacity
of the earth and its resources; overcoming the fundamental barriers to the integration of the
economic, social and environmental dimensions that support people-centred sustainable
development; and the key steps required to turn trade-offs between the economic, social
and environmental dimensions into synergies.
6. The Independent Expert attended the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples and
the Climate Change Summit, which were held simultaneously during the opening week of
the sixty-ninth session of the General Assembly, in September 2014, with a view to
gathering more recent data relevant to the proposed draft declaration on the right to
international solidarity. She was invited to participate in the Leaders’ Forum on Women
Leading the Way: Raising Ambition for Climate Action, an event hosted by UN-Women
and the Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice. Current and former women heads of
State, representatives of governments, leaders of grassroots, youth and indigenous
organizations, civil society, the private sector, the scientific community and the United
Nations system were gathered together to demonstrate women’s leadership on climate
action and highlight gender-responsive action taken at both the local and national levels.
The forum’s outcomes were intended to feed into the Secretary-General’s Climate Change
Summit, which was aimed at mobilizing action by governments, business, the financial
sector and civil society to enable the world to shift towards a low-carbon economy.
7. In November 2014, the Independent Expert, at the invitation of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights,
participated as a speaker and resource person during the Commission’s workshop on the
theme “Regional mechanisms: “best practices on implementation of human rights”, which
was held with a view to creating a platform for exchanging and sharing experiences, best
practices and lessons learned among representatives of regional human rights mechanisms
around the globe and other relevant stakeholders, including representatives of government
agencies, national human rights institutions, United Nations agencies and civil society
organizations. The workshop was convened with a view also to enhancing and regularizing
cooperation between the Commission, other regional mechanisms and other stakeholders
for the better promotion and protection of human rights in the ASEAN subregion, which
was to be integrated into a single economic community by the end of 2015. During the
discussions, the Independent Expert spoke on experiences and challenges in developing and
implementing regional norms, standards or instruments and on the way forward for
cooperation between the regional mechanisms and the United Nations agencies and treaty
bodies.
B. Context of the present report
8. At recent events in various parts of the world, opposing interest groups have been
using the term “solidarity” loosely, rendering the term and, by association, the concept of
“international solidarity” vaguer or more ambiguous than they already are. This ambiguity
gives rise to the need to limit the possible interpretations of the term that may be applied on
the various occasions when the term may be used In the present report, the Independent
Expert discusses how the term “international solidarity” as a principle underpinning
international law should be understood in the context of the proposed draft declaration on
the right of peoples and individuals to international solidarity. In the preamble to the
proposed draft declaration, the Independent Expert defines and clarifies the concept of
international solidarity,1 its value and significance. Although reviews of international
solidarity has been undertaken in the past, including by the present mandate holder’s
predecessor, this is the first time that international solidarity has been examined with
reference to the text of the proposed draft declaration on the right of peoples and
individuals to international solidarity.2 In that it expounds the concept of international
solidarity, the present report will also be of use for the series of regional consultations being
held in 2015 as mandated by the Human Rights Council in resolution 26/6.
9. It is not the intention of the Independent Expert in the present report to trace the
historical pathways that international solidarity has taken over the decades since the term
was first used in a socialist context in the 1890s. Instead, she focuses on the concept of
international solidarity in human rights terms, in line with the mandate on human rights and
international solidarity established by the Commission on Human Rights, the predecessor
of the Human Rights Council.
10. In the present report, the Independent Expert responds to issues around the question
as to what international solidarity is and what it is not, in the context of the proposed draft
declaration. In view of the limitations on the length of the present report, the core features
of international solidarity—preventive solidarity and international cooperation—will be
discussed further in subsequent reports. The proposed draft declaration on the right of
peoples and individuals to international solidarity itself will be closely and critically
analysed in the forthcoming series of regional consultation workshops to be convened in
2015 and early 2016, and the outcome will be described in the Independent Expert’s
subsequent reports.
II. Human rights and international solidarity
A. Attributes of international solidarity
11. The principle of solidarity has been given prominent attention in international law,
notably in the writings of Karel Wellens, in which it was analyzed in the light of the
“common responsibilities of States, international organizations, peoples and nations, and
civil society.”3 It has been said and rightly so, that the principle of solidarity is a concept
that progressively moves forward in asserting common rights and responsibilities and in the
shaping of an international community, representing values to be attached, as a whole, to
the life of present and future generations, and to the development of a democratic and
equitable international order.4
12. When she first took up her mandate, the present Independent Expert spoke of
solidarity as a persuasion that combines differences and opposites, holding them together in
1 See final paper on human rights and international solidarity, prepared by Chen Siqiu on behalf of the
drafting group on human rights and international solidarity of the Human Rights Council Advisory
Committee (A/HRC/21/66), paras. 11‒14.
2 See A/HRC/26/34, annex, for the full text of the proposed draft declaration on the right of peoples
and individuals to international solidarity.
3 T. Van Boven, “The right to peace as an emerging solidarity right”, in Evolving Principles of
International Law (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2012), p. 137.
4 Ibid., p. 138.
one heterogeneous whole, imbuing that whole with the universal values of human rights.5
She continues to maintain that solidarity is a positive force in the lives of people and
nations and that it should be protected from exploitation and corruption, most importantly
at the international level, across national boundaries and cultural diversities. International
solidarity should be explicitly linked with human rights if it is to be true to the purposes of
the United Nations, and if it is to be the engine that will drive the international community’s
collective actions to overcome the common challenges, risks and threats faced by nations
and peoples and achieve the transformative changes that are imperative in these troubled
times.
13. The proposed draft declaration provides that international solidarity shall be
understood as the convergence of interests, purposes and actions between and among
peoples, individuals, States and their international organizations to achieve the common
goals that require international cooperation and collective action in order to foster peace
and security, development and human rights. This requires that States respect the human
rights standards set forth in the international human rights treaties that they have ratified,
and comply with their existing treaty obligations. It also implies that non-State actors
should be guided in their activities by codes of conduct to prevent harm. International
solidarity carries with it the precondition of compliance with duties and obligations for
actors who come together to act collectively. International solidarity should not therefore be
misconstrued as relating in any way to collective action by States that result in the
contravention of any of the international human rights treaties to which they are parties.
Nor is international solidarity related to any form of collective action undertaken by non-
State actors the outcome of which may be, for example, to cause or perpetuate inequality,
discrimination and exclusion among or between the individuals, groups and peoples with
whom they work.
14. The Independent Expert holds the view that, given the disturbing conflicts and
discord ongoing in many parts of the world, it is important to reconsider whether and how
solidarity is indeed advancing rights and responsibilities as it influences the shaping of the
international community. The time is appropriate, while the proposed draft declaration is
still in the form of a proposal, to identify and rethink the attributes of international
solidarity in human rights terms, a facet that is often neglected or ignored. There is a need
to re-examine the issues that persist around international solidarity, this time taking fully
into account the new dynamics that are rapidly changing the present global realities. The
challenges that confront the world today cannot be addressed using the previous
perspectives, which may no longer be relevant or applicable. The Independent Expert
reiterates what she has pointed out a number of times in the past: that international
cooperation is a key mechanism for international solidarity, but that international
cooperation is not the same as international solidarity. In the report on the enhancement of
international cooperation in the field of human rights prepared by the Human Rights
Council Advisory Committee, a definition of international cooperation is not given but
merely implied, with a detailed description of its practice and conceptual ramifications. For
example, the report quotes the following text from the Declaration on Principles of
International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in
accordance with the Charter of the United Nations: “States have the duty to co-operate with
one another, irrespective of the differences in their political, economic and social systems,
in the various spheres of international relations, in order to maintain international peace and
security and to promote international economic stability and progress, the general welfare
5 V. Dandan, as cited by S. Puvimanasinghe in “Understanding the right to development” in Realizing
the Right to Development (Geneva, United Nations, 2013) p. 205.
of nations and international co-operation free from discrimination based on such differences
(A/HRC/AC/8/3, para. 12).”
15. The proposed draft declaration defines international solidarity as a much broader
principle, encompassing a comprehensive and coherent conceptual and operational
framework to regulate a spectrum of global governance issues beyond the more limited
instances of international cooperation in the development field. For example, international
solidarity requires the deployment of preventive solidarity aimed at proactively preventing
and removing the root causes of inequalities between developed and developing countries,
as well as the structural obstacles that generate poverty. International solidarity represents a
multi-directional—rather than a one-way—deployment of action, together with the
corresponding obligation and accountability, thus creating a nexus of intersecting elements
that would bring about an enabling environment where human rights can be exercised and
enjoyed by individuals, groups and peoples.
16. International solidarity is a foundational principle underpinning the three pillars of
the Charter of the United Nations : peace and security, development and human rights. The
Charter distinctly reaffirms faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of
the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small.
The Charter is a testimony to the determination of States to establish the conditions under
which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of
international law can be maintained; to promote social progress and better standards of life
in greater freedom; and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the
economic and social advancement of all peoples.6 Accordingly, international solidarity
should be understood within the context of the conditions that States are bound to maintain,
and not otherwise. The Charter of the United Nations needs to be revisited as often as
necessary, as a reminder of its timeless vision, given the evolving needs of a changing
world. Article 1 of the Charter, articulating the purposes of the Organization, implicitly
calls for international solidarity to undertake effective collective measures for the
prevention and removal of threats to peace. Article 1 also calls for international cooperation
in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character,
through international cooperation. The Independent Expert interprets this article as
consistent with the view that international cooperation is a key mechanism of international
solidarity.
17. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes the equal and inalienable
rights of all members of the human family (preamble), and asserts that all human beings are
born free and equal in dignity and rights and that everyone is entitled to a social and
international order in which rights and freedoms can be fully realized (art. 28). The civil,
political, economic, social and cultural rights that are enshrined in the Declaration have
been codified in various international human rights instruments which the majority of
States have ratified. The Declaration and international solidarity are mutually reinforcing
since, while the Declaration is one of the pillars upon which international solidarity is built,
international solidarity has been, throughout the history of the modern human rights
movement, among the most powerful and essential tools of advocates and activists seeking
to advance the vision embodied in the Declaration (see A/HRC/21/44/Add.1, para. 4).
18. A number of articles in the Declaration are of particular relevance to international
solidarity, such as article 1, which provides that all human beings “are endowed with reason
and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”; article 22,
which provides that as a member of society, everyone is entitled to the realization “through
national effort and international cooperation and in accordance with the organization and
6 Charter of the United Nations, preamble.
resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his (the
person’s) dignity and the free development of his personality”; article 27, which provides
that everyone has the right “freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to
enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits”; and article 29, which
provides that everyone “has duties to the community in which alone the free and full
development of his personality is possible”. The preamble and the above-mentioned articles
of the Declaration shape the contours of international solidarity as both a principle and a
right of peoples and individuals. They also reinforce the idea of international solidarity as
an instrument that responds to the existing imperative to establish the conditions under
which all individuals and peoples can enjoy and realize their human rights. It is in addition
the engine for international assistance and cooperation towards the effective
implementation of sustainable development.
19. While international solidarity has instrumental value, it is also an end in itself. It is
instrumental in that it draws attention to interdependency and the need for collective action,
but is at the same time a guide for the collective action of States towards the desired
outcome of international solidarity for the full realization of all human rights
(A/HRC/21/44/Add.1, para. 20). This is consistent with the affirmation by the Human
Rights Council that international solidarity is not limited to international assistance and
cooperation, aid or humanitarian assistance; that it includes sustainability in international
relations, especially international economic relations, the peaceful coexistence of all
members of the international community, equal partnerships and the equitable sharing of
benefits and burdens (resolution 18/5, para. 2). The Council’s statement implicitly refers to
international solidarity as a foundation of the three pillars of the United Nations: peace and
security, development and human rights.
B. International solidarity in action
20. International solidarity recognizes that collective action affecting human rights is not
limited to activities undertaken by governments and international organizations alone. Such
action also includes that by non-State actors, such as civil society and its organizations,
acting in the civil, political, economic, social or cultural fields, whether in the international
arena or within the internal processes of their societies. International solidarity requires that
human rights standards should guide the policies and practices of State and of non-State
actors alike when these affect the individuals, groups and peoples, within or outside their
territories.7 The paragraphs that follow provide a few examples that illustrate international
solidarity as practised among States and non-State actors.
21. It has been observed that the overwhelming expression of international solidarity by
States8 is apparent not only in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
in 1948 but also in the multitude of commitments and pledges relating to human rights and
development to which States have agreed, such as the Declaration on the Right to
Development in 1986, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action in 1993, the
Copenhagen Declaration and Programme of Action on Social Development in 1995, the
Beijing Declaration and Platform of Action in 1995 and the Millennium Declaration in
2000, not to mention the numerous declarations and decisions that have been agreed upon
in various United Nations international conferences and regional summits. International
solidarity is manifested among States when their collective action has a positive impact on
7 C. Beitz, “Human rights as a common concern”, in The American Political Science Review, Vol. 95.
No. 2. (June, 2001), p. 277.
8 See Human Rights Council resolution 15/13, para. 8.
the exercise and enjoyment of human rights by peoples and individuals within and outside
their respective territories upon the actual implementation of the commitments and
decisions made between and among them at the regional and international levels.
International solidarity permeates the vision and purposes of the various United Nations
specialized agencies, and is reflected in their programmes and activities. More importantly,
the outcomes of such programmes and activities substantiate their impact on the ground.
22. International solidarity is just as evident on the part of peoples, groups, and civil
society and their organizations, which establish forums and platforms domestically and
transnationally at which actors in different situations and geographical locations can
peacefully share, discuss and disseminate information, interact with each other, negotiate—
formally or informally—and advance their social, cultural and political interests in order to
foster respect for, and protection and fulfilment of, all human rights on the basis of equality
and non-discrimination. The work of non-State actors becomes even more significant and
productive when they complement the efforts of States through their own activities. The
initiatives around the Millennium Development Goals are a notable example. Since the
Goals were adopted in 2000, governments, international agencies and civil society
organizations worldwide have worked together and contributed to remarkable
achievements. Although much more needs to be done, there are now half a billion fewer
people living in extreme poverty; the lives of about 3 million children have been saved each
year; four out of five children are now vaccinated for a range of diseases; maternal
mortality is now receiving the focused attention it deserves; deaths from malaria have fallen
by one quarter; contracting HIV no longer constitutes a death sentence; and, in 2011, a
record 590 million children in developing countries attended primary school.9
23. The Global Forum for Migration and Development is arguably the world’s foremost
dialogue opportunity for civil society organizations and governments to discuss
international migration and development at the international level. The Forum was
established in Brussels in 2007 and is a State-led voluntary process outside the United
Nations system at which policymakers and stakeholders from countries all over the world
participate in meetings, notably the annual meetings, to discuss the relationship between
migration and development, share experiences and forge practical cooperation. Although
State-led, civil society has been directly engaged in the Forum from the beginning. At its
annual meeting, the Forum produces a number of recommendations for governments to
pursue, including those put forward by civil society during the Civil Society Days, prior to
the government meeting.10 The Platform for Partnership, a feature of the Forum, is an
online initiative that highlights government policies and practices that have been inspired
by recommendations from civil society. The online platform facilitates the dissemination of
information, communication and exchanges between stakeholders, who share their
experiences and the outcomes of migration and development projects that have emerged
from the recommendations and that they have adapted to their own situations.
24. International solidarity has enduring significance in the conduct of international
affairs and is critical in ensuring that global challenges such as epidemics and public health
crises are approached and managed in such a way that the burdens and the financial
responsibilities are distributed fairly, in accordance with the principles of equity and social
justice. The alarming spread of HIV/AIDS has challenged the development, progress and
stability of societies, calling for a exceptional and comprehensive global response.11 The
crisis has united the international community in an unprecedented manner: few other
9 United Nations, A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through
Sustainable Development (2013).
10 See http://gfmdcivilsociety.org.
11 See Security Council resolution 1983 (2011).
challenges have generated a similar set of reactions.12 Multiple stakeholders and partners,
including the United Nations, governments and civil society organizations, have laboured,
and continue to do so, in a spirit of shared and global responsibility, to combat the
epidemic. The disease spurred local initiatives for the protection of the human rights of the
most vulnerable and disadvantaged peoples and prompted remarkable international
solidarity between the global north and the global south.13
25. The challenges that arise from epidemics such as HIV/AIDS demand that peoples,
nations and the international community tackle governance differently, to yield positive
outcomes, while at the same time taking fully into account respect for, and protection of,
human rights. The nature of the disease and the scale of the epidemic have spurred
governments and local people to be more responsible and resourceful in governing
themselves in order to ensure that national priorities are aligned with shared international
commitments, not only to combat HIV/AIDS but also to promote health, development and
human rights. In 1987, the World Health Organization (WHO) took on the lead
responsibility for AIDS in the United Nations and set up the Special Programme on AIDS,
which subsequently became the Global Programme on AIDS. In response, an
unprecedented 160 countries rapidly set up national programmes to combat HIV/AIDS.14
As a national priority in the worst affected countries, the programmes for the treatment of
the disease were expanded to include prevention, along with social support for affected
groups down to the community level. It was at that point that the direct repercussions of
AIDS on social, cultural and economic development became apparent. HIV/AIDS was not
simply a disease but a social and economic handicap that hindered development. The need
for a broader response at the international level led to the creation in 1995 of the Joint
United Nations Programme on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS), whose establishment was
coordinated by WHO. UNAIDS has been in operation since 1996 and coordinates the
efforts of the United Nations family of agencies and organizations. It spearheads global
action to help the world prevent new HIV infections, care for people living with HIV and
mitigate the impact of the epidemic.15
26. UNAIDS is tasked with putting together the global response to an epidemic of a
dreaded and highly stigmatizing disease, whose ramifications affect all human rights and
extend across virtually all aspects of society.16 The International Guidelines on HIV/AIDS
and Human Rights, first developed in 1998 by UNAIDS and the Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, are a tool for States to use in designing,
coordinating and implementing effective national HIV/AIDS policies and strategies. As a
human rights-based response to HIV/AIDS, the Guidelines rely on broad approaches such
as support and increased private sector and community participation to respond ethically
and effectively to HIV/AIDS.17 However, there are still no data regarding the
implementation of the guidelines and their effectiveness in achieving expected outcomes.
Global AIDS Response Progress Reporting provides in-depth information on collating data
and undertaking subsequent global AIDS response progress reporting. The collection and
12 See UNAIDS, AIDS at 30: Nations at the crossroads, available from
www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/aids-at-30_1.pdf.
13 IbidError! Hyperlink reference not valid..
14 M.Caraël, Twenty Years of Intervention and Controversy, 2006.Available from
http://rds.refer.sn/IMG/pdf/06CARAEL.pdf
15 See www.un.org/ga/aids/ungassfactsheets/html/FSUNworks_en.html.
16 See data.unaids.org/pub/Report/2008/JC1579_First_10_years_en.pdf.
17 See www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/HIV/Pages/InternationalGuidelines.aspx.
reporting of high-quality results on the AIDS response are crucial components of the
UNAIDS plan for continued mutual responsibility and international solidarity.18
27. During the period from 1996 to 2012, global investments for a concerted AIDS
response increased from US$ 300 million to about US$ 15 billion. Those considerable
financial contributions substantiated the political declarations that had been made and
resulted in impressive returns – from a global increase in access to prevention and treatment
to significant declines in new infections and in AIDS-related fatalities. Similarly, the
Global Fund to Fight AIDS , Tuberculosis and Malaria caused a drop in the price of anti-
retroviral drugs and set the conditions for fixing the prices of pharmaceuticals.19
Commitments by donors both large and small, national investments by States, the
significant impact of the Global Fund and initiatives such as the United States President’s
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief have proved crucial in tackling the urgent need for
sustained funding.20 Political entities and policymakers also rose to the occasion, discussing
and making crucial decisions regarding the issue in relation to finance and debt.21 The funds
raised from cancellation of debt or debt relief have assisted countries in their efforts to
combat HIV/AIDS and to implement poverty reduction programmes.22
C. Building on international solidarity
28. International solidarity, in the true sense of the term, should inform the new
opportunities for economic growth and the development of the world economy that have
been brought about by globalization but that have, however, also been accompanied by a
widening gap between developed and developing countries, widespread poverty and
inequality including gender inequality, unemployment, social erosion and environmental
risks. The ongoing globalization of trade and capital contributes to the interconnectedness
and interdependence of individuals and States, presenting challenges that demand increased
coordination and collective decision-making at the global level. It is in this area that
international solidarity can deploy international cooperation to promote a global enabling
environment that should not be limited to the promotion of economic growth through
unchecked trade liberalization and free movement of capital. Instead, international
cooperation should actively promote a multilateral trading and investment system that is
conducive to the realization of all human rights. Establishment of a fair, inclusive and
rights-based international trade and investment regime requires that all States, acting in
solidarity and pursuant to their common but differentiated responsibilities, recognize their
obligations to ensure that no international trade agreement or policy to which they are party
adversely impacts upon the protection and promotion of human rights inside or outside of
their borders. The notion of international obligations becomes even more relevant in the
present context of globalization, where the role of the State is increasingly being reduced,
inadvertently in some cases, it might be argued. Whether or not this is the case, the State’s
capacity to respect, protect and fulfil human rights is diminished. In such a context, the
value of international cooperation, a key feature of international solidarity, takes on even
more importance, particularly in connection with supporting a State that needs assistance in
complying with its core human rights obligations. Collective action by States in
18 UNAIDS, Global AIDS Response Progress Reporting 2015, p. 4.
19 See UNAIDS, Aids at 30: Nations at the Crossroads (footnote 18).
20 See www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/UNAIDS_2012_LetterToPartners_en_1.pdf.
21 See UNAIDS, Aids at 30: Nations at the Crossroads (footnote 18).
22 See www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2002/TheInternationalResponsetoHIVAIDS.aspx.
undertaking measures of reactive solidarity, as well as preventive solidarity,23 are of critical
importance in minimizing adverse impacts on the exercise and enjoyment of human rights.
29. During the Millennium Summit in 2000, States resolved to, inter alia, promote
gender equality and the empowerment of women as effective ways to combat poverty,
hunger and disease and to stimulate development that is truly sustainable; to combat all
forms of violence against women; and to implement the Convention on the Elimination of
All Forms of Discrimination against Women.24 Eradication of poverty based on sustained
economic growth, social development, environmental protection and social justice requires
the involvement of women in economic and social development, and equal opportunities
and the full and equal participation of women and men as agents of, and not just as the
beneficiaries of, people-centred sustainable development (Beijing Declaration, para. 16).
The General Assembly, in its resolution 66/216 on women and development, recognized
the mutually reinforcing links between gender equality and poverty eradication, and the
achievement of all of the Millennium Development Goals, as well as the need to elaborate
and implement, where appropriate, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders,
comprehensive gender-sensitive poverty eradication strategies to address social, structural
and macroeconomic issues. In paragraph 10 of resolution 66/216, the General Assembly
urged the donor community, Member States, international organizations including the
United Nations, the private sector, non-governmental organizations, trade unions and other
stakeholders to strengthen the focus and impact of development assistance, targeting gender
equality and the empowerment of women and girls through gender mainstreaming, the
funding of targeted activities and enhanced dialogue between donors and partners, and also
to strengthen the mechanisms needed to measure effectively the resources allocated to
incorporating gender perspectives in all areas of development assistance. The resolution
brings to the fore the need for international solidarity between States that enter into
international cooperation, which should be based on equal partnerships and mutual
commitments and obligations taking into account the best interests of the constituents in
their jurisdictions, on the basis of equality and non-discrimination, in accordance with
international human rights principles and standards.
30. The Social Protection Floor Initiative (SPF Initiative), established in 2009 by a
coalition of United Nations agencies and development partners extending beyond the
United Nations, promotes universal access to social transfers and services as a means of
reducing poverty and inequality. It is predicated on the results of various studies showing
that a basic floor of social transfers is affordable in all countries at all stages of economic
development, although the least developed countries may need initial assistance from the
donor community.25 The initiative transcends the mandate of any individual United Nations
agency, and it is logical therefore that it is being implemented through a coherent, system-
wide approach. The optimal use of experts, resources and logistical support is ensured
through joint United Nations country responses, with each United Nations agency
contributing to the initiative in its respective area of expertise. This system of operations is
a collective endeavour aimed at a common outcome that will impact on the realization of
human rights.
31. The social protection floor consists of a basic set of transfers, either in cash or in
kind, to provide a minimum income and livelihood security for all; and the supply of an
essential level of goods and social services such as health, water and sanitation, education,
23 Preventive solidarity is another key feature of international solidarity, with reactive solidarity its other
side. The key features of international solidarity will be discussed in a forthcoming report.
24 General Assembly resolution 55/2 on the United Nations Millennium Declaration.
25 See http://www.ilo.org/secsoc/information-resources/publications-and-tools/Workingpapers/lang--
en/index.htm.
food, housing, and life and asset-saving information, accessible to all. The SPF Initiative
emphasizes the need to guarantee services and transfers across the life cycle, from children
to the economically active but with insufficient income, to older persons, paying particular
attention to vulnerable groups, including people living with HIV/AIDS, migrants and
populations exposed and highly sensitive to adverse external factors such as natural
hazards, extreme weather events and other climate phenomena. The initiative also takes
into account key characteristics that cut across all age groups, including gender,
socioeconomic status, ethnicity and disability.26
32. In June 2012, at its 101st session, the International Labour Conference adopted, by
an impressive tripartite consensus, International Labour Organization (ILO)
recommendation No. 202 (2012) concerning national floors of social protection. The
recommendation established a new international labour standard, calling for a basic social
protection floor for all through the provision of health care and income security. In adopting
its recommendation No. 202, the ILO General Conference recognized the importance of
social security in preventing and reducing poverty, inequality and social exclusion, and the
role of social security systems as automatic stabilizers in times of crisis. The
recommendation provides guidance to States on establishing and maintaining social
protection floors as a fundamental element of their national social security systems. Social
Floor Protection Initiative processes are country-driven, consultative, inclusive and
participatory in nature, involving all stakeholders, including government representatives
from the relevant agencies, social partners, parliamentarians and civil society through social
dialogue.
33. The expansion of social protection has proved to be important in reducing inequality
and poverty in a range of national contexts in both developing and developed countries.
According to recent reports, some 30 developing countries have already taken measures to
introduce elements of a social protection floor. Their experiences have shown that social
security schemes are a vital and flexible policy tool to counteract and soften the social and
economic consequences of financial shocks. They have also demonstrated the feasibility of
building social protection floors and that, with the necessary political will, adequate
resources for capacity-building and a sound implementation process, a strong national
consensus in favour of social protection floor policies can be created and developed.27 The
Social Protection Floor Initiative is a way for people to earn sufficient income for adequate
food, housing, water and sanitation, education and good health. It also paves the way for
people to take part in cultural life, exercise their freedom of expression and share
knowledge and ideas, all human rights to which everyone is entitled. The SPF Initiative
contributes to more stable, fairer and cohesive societies by making those rights available
and more accessible. At the same time, it strengthens the capacity of States to comply with
their obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights, which is a defining attribute of
international solidarity.
34. The International Conference on Financing for Development, held in Mexico in
March 2002, was hailed as an exceptional event, different from other United Nations
conferences, primarily because of the inclusion of all the stakeholders in the constructive
interaction between developed and developing countries, and also because it was free from
hostilities between the rich and the poor countries, which at that time was considered
remarkable.28 The outcome document, known as the Monterrey Consensus, was a blueprint
26 International Labour Organization and WHO, Social Protection Floor Initiatives (2010), p. 3.
27 A/HRC/28/68, p. 4.
28 I.Haque and R. Burdescu, “Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development: response sought
from international economic law”, in Boston College International & Comparative Law Review,
Vol. 27, p. 219 (2004). Available from http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr/vol27/iss2/4/.
for a new partnership that focused for the most part on a shared responsibility between
developed and developing countries, based on the recognition that each country had
“primary responsibility for its own economic and social development”, stressing the role of
national policies and development strategies and putting forward a renewed commitment by
the international community to support its efforts.29 The Monterrey Consensus did not
constitute an end point but marked the beginning of an important process stemming from
the resolve of States and other stakeholders to build an alliance for development and “act
together”. It was during the conference that it was decided that donor countries should
commit to allocating 0.7 per cent of their gross national income to official development
assistance.30
35. The period beginning in 2000 has been defined by the aid effectiveness agenda.
What started as a small gathering of major Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) donors in the early 2000s grew to an unprecedented gathering of
developed and developing countries, and international and regional civil society. The global
landscape changed during this period, economically, politically and socially. The lines
between developed and developing countries have blurred, and new forms of cooperation
have emerged. In the years that followed the adoption of the Monterrey Consensus in 2002,
four high-level forums on aid effectiveness were convened by OECD: in Rome in 2003,
Paris in 2005, Accra in 2008 and, most recently, in Busan, Republic of Korea, in 2011.
Busan was the venue for the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, at which over
three thousand delegates met to review progress on implementing the principles of the Paris
Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and discuss how to maintain the relevance of the aid
effectiveness agenda in the context of the evolving development landscape. The forum
culminated in the signing of the Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation
by ministers from developed and developing countries, emerging economies and providers
of South-South and triangular cooperation. For the first time in the history of the High
Level Forum, a civil society representative took part in the actual negotiating process,
marking a critical turning point in development cooperation and international solidarity,
particularly where the language of the partnership emphasized the link between fighting
poverty and protecting human rights.31
36. A new chapter in the history of international cooperation was initiated in Busan,
where the focus shifted from aid effectiveness to the broader concept of development
effectiveness. Through the inclusion of a diverse range of development stakeholders –
donor governments from the North and the South, the private sector, civil society
organizations, parliamentarians and local authorities, inter alia – the Busan Partnership for
Effective Development Cooperation provided a more realistic framework for improving the
way cooperation is implemented on the ground and how it works with other drivers of
development. For civil society organizations, Busan was a particularly significant
milestone, as it marked the first time that civil society had participated as a full and equal
stakeholder in aid effectiveness negotiations alongside governments and donors. It was thus
a unique opportunity to influence development cooperation for people’s organizations, and
also strengthened the shift from a technical aid effectiveness approach to development
effectiveness based on long-term sustainability, addressing the root causes of poverty and
the realization of human rights.32
29 See Report of the International Conference on Financing for Development, Monterrey, Mexico, 18–
22 March 2002 (A/CONF.198/11), chap. I, resolution 1, annex.
30 Ibid.
31 See www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/busanpartnership.htm.
32 See http://cso-effectiveness.org/4th-high-level-forum-on-aid,080.
37. “The Future We Want”,33 the outcome document of the United Nations Conference
on Sustainable Development, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 2012, encompasses a broad
range of issues and outlines an agenda for the future, representing the common vision of
States with the full participation of civil society. In it, the Heads of State and Government
who attended the Conference recognize that eradicating poverty is the “greatest global
challenge facing the world today” and commit themselves to freeing humanity from
poverty and hunger “as a matter of urgency.34 The contents of the outcome document are
summarized thus:
We recognize that poverty eradication, changing unsustainable and promoting
sustainable patterns of consumption and production and protecting and managing the
natural resource base of economic and social development are the overarching
objectives of, and essential requirements for, sustainable development. We also
reaffirm the need to achieve sustainable development by promoting sustained,
inclusive and equitable economic growth, creating greater opportunities for all,
reducing inequalities, raising basic standards of living, fostering equitable
development and inclusion, and promoting integrated and sustainable management
of natural resources and ecosystems that supports, inter alia, economic, social and
human development while facilitating ecosystem conservation, regeneration and
restoration and resilience in the face of new and emerging challenges.35
We reaffirm the importance of international human rights instruments and
international law. We emphasize the responsibilities of all States, in accordance with
the Charter , to respect, protect and promote human rights and fundamental
freedoms for all without distinction;36 We reaffirm our commitment to strengthen
international cooperation to address the persistent challenges related to sustainable
development for all, in particular in developing countries, … the need to achieve
economic stability, sustained economic growth, the promotion of social equity and
the protection of the environment, while enhancing gender equality, the
empowerment of women and equal opportunities for all, and the protection, survival
and development of children to their full potential, including through education.37
38. The avowed commitment of States to strengthening international cooperation to
address the “persistent challenges” to sustainable development cannot be overemphasized,
as it implies that they must be true to that pledge. It should also be emphasized that States
stressed that sustainable development required concrete and urgent action, and that
sustainable development could “only be achieved with a broad alliance of people,
government, civil society and the private sector, all working together to secure the future
we want for present and future generations”.38 Those words, together with those in the
preceding paragraph, effectively define international solidarity. Another report, entitled “A
new global partnership: eradicate poverty and transform economies through sustainable
development”,39 contains the recommendations of the High Level Panel of Eminent Persons
33 General Assembly resolution 66/288, annex.
34 Ibid., para. 2.
35 Ibid., para. 4.
36 Ibid., para. 9.
37 Ibid., para. 11.
38 Ibid., para. 13.
39 See the report of the Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity (A/69/366), in
which the Independent Expert seeks to contribute to the process of formulating the future sustainable
development goals to ensure that they are consistent with universal human rights standards, focusing
on the value added to those goals when they are defined and informed by the right to international
solidarity.
on the Post-2015 Development Agenda,40 envisioning a universal agenda driven by “five
big transformative shifts”, describing the fifth as “the most important transformative shift
towards a new spirit of solidarity, cooperation and mutual accountability that must underpin
the post-2015 agenda”, namely, leave no one behind; put sustainable development at the
core; transform economies for jobs and inclusive growth; build peace and effective, open
and accountable institutions for all: and forge a new global partnership.41
III. Conclusion
39. In 2015, two important international agreements to be decided upon by States
will affect the future of human development. One is a new set of sustainable
development goals to take over from and continue the Millennium Development
Goals, which expire at the end of 2015. The other is the outcome of the Conference of
Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the
primary international intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to
climate change. The Conference is crucial because it must produce an international
climate agreement for adoption in December 2015. The new agreement will limit
global warming to the 2-degrees Celsius target, requiring a commitment from each
government to indicate targets for reducing the levels of carbon emissions. Funding
for those efforts will also be pledged at the Conference. The binding agreement will
apply to all countries and will be implemented in 2020.
40. The lead-up to the Conferenceand the United Nations summit for the adoption
of the post-2015 development agenda has been closely monitored by stakeholders and
advocates who have been continuously calling for human rights to be at the forefront
of the negotiations and to be integrated into the final agreements. The United Nations
conferences at which States have pledged their commitments to goals and objectives
that entail action at the national, regional or international level, are much too
numerous to mention in the present report. Furthermore, information on the actual
implementation of such pledges and their outcomes is very difficult to obtain, perhaps
because of the paucity of action taken. The Independent Expert reiterates that
international solidarity cannot be inferred merely from collective decisions or
commitments agreed upon between State and non-State entities, until such time as
those agreements are acted upon. But the integration of human rights into such
agreements will indicate the path leading to the desired outcome of international
solidarity.
41. The claim is not that genuine international solidarity as described above, nor
international solidarity in general, is a magic formula for achieving desired outcomes.
Rather, the Independent Expert suggests that international solidarity is a powerful
tool for addressing key global challenges to human rights. In the context of the
sustainable development goals and the climate agreement to be forged in 2015,
international solidarity as described in the present report would ensure a fair and just
relationship between State and non-State actors engaged in the pursuit of common
goals or in overcoming a common challenge, in full cognizance of the human rights of
the peoples, individuals and groups concerned. This resonates with the view of the
High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda: “This is
40 Ibid.
41 United Nations, A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through
Sustainable Development: Report of the High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015
Development Agenda (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.13.I.10).
a world of challenges, but these challenges can also present opportunities, if they
kindle a new spirit of solidarity, mutual respect and mutual benefit, based on our
common humanity and the Rio principles.”42 The need is greater than ever before for
States and non-State actors to come together and undertake collective action in
solidarity, whatever the outcomes of the two international agreements.
42 Ibid., p. 4.