English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The United Nations treaty body system, at present, suffers from at least two significant, systemic shortcomings: it fragments what ought to be interrelated and indivisible rights across different conventions and monitoring committees, and it has no power to implement recommendations against rights-violating states. These flaws have immediate and profound implications for human rights organizations, which, by strategic necessity, are required to file multiple, unique submissions, across multiple treaty bodies, in the hopes of raising awareness and generating change on a single, discrete instance of rights violation. To highlight the extent of this problem, this article focuses on a recent, emblematic case: Validity International’s campaign to expose appalling human rights violations against the residents of Topház Special Home in Hungary, which saw this single issue presented at least seven times before three treaty bodies over a seven-year period. The Topház case further serves as the basis for identifying lessons in effective treaty body advocacy for human rights organizations operating within this fractured system, and for discussing how the United Nations as an institution may resolve this problem through the creation of an integrated treaty body system.

Multiple Submissions Before a Fractured Treaty Body System: Lessons in Advocacy from Validity International and Topház Special Home