Examples of using Pre-draft declaration in English and their translations into Arabic
{-}
-
Political
-
Colloquial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
The pre-draft declaration is contrary to this principle.
(p) Report of Mr. Miguel Alfonso Martínez containing a new initial version of the pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities(decision 2005/111).
Pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities.
To that effect, and as a first step in that direction, he offers,in annex I to this, his final report, a" pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities".
Pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities 20.
He will provide succinct reasoning for eachresponsibility he considers necessary to include in the articles of the pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities, included in this report(annex I).
The pre-draft declaration is an attempt to bridge the gap between the concepts of law and morality.
The fact that most of 28. According to the Government of Switzerland, the main objective of the pre-draft declaration is to condition human rights, making their exercise and enjoyment dependent on the fulfilment of social responsibilities.
The pre-draft declaration may undermine this principle and also the principle that individuals are entitled to enjoy the same human rights without discrimination of any kind.
The World Intellectual Property Organization proposed to add thefollowing second paragraph to article 23 of the pre-draft declaration, based on article 27, paragraph(2), of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Various specific articles in the pre-draft declaration would conflict with and violate the existing international human rights obligations of all States.
The Commission will have before it the report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights containing acompilation of the essential aspects of the replies received on the pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities(E/CN.4/2005/99).
Further, the pre-draft declaration would purport to subordinate the enjoyment of human rights to the performance of these duties and to other vague and undefined interests of society.
The Government of New Zealand considered that by making human rights conditional, and promoting the idea that a State can determine which, if any,rights an individual may enjoy, the pre-draft declaration undermines the basic principle that individuals are entitled to enjoy fundamental human rights without discrimination, interference or qualification.
Other respondents consider the pre-draft declaration as an instrument that contributes to the awareness that the individual has both rights and duties towards the society, and that there exists a close link between them.
The Governments of Albania, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain andNorthern Ireland submitted a joint comment in which they expressed the view that the pre-draft declaration is contrary to the principles on which the international human rights system is built.
The European Union took the view that the pre-draft declaration could be seen as conditioning respect for human rights and providing the basis for selective observation of human rights standards.
The pre-draft declaration can be seen as an extension and development of the fundamental international legal instruments in the field of human rights, including, first and foremost, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and notably its article 29.
In its decision 2004/117, the Commission on Human Rights requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights(OHCHR):(a)to circulate to Member States and to intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations the pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities(E/CN.4/2003/105, annex I), requesting their views on it; and(b) to submit to the Commission at its sixty-first session a compilation of the essential aspects of the replies received.
According to the Government of France, the pre-draft declaration is contrary to the principle of inalienability of human rights as it conditions the recognition of human rights on respect for rules established by a State.
By letters dated 3 and 4 August 2004,OHCHR circulated the pre-draft declaration to Member States and to intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, requesting their views on it.
The pre-draft declaration constitutes an important contribution to resolving the acute discrepancy existing between, on the one hand, the enormous conceptual advances made on the subject of rights and, on the other, the lack of precise definitions concerning what duties result from article 29, paragraph 1, of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the last(fifth) common preambular paragraph of the International Covenants on Human Rights.
The first article of the pre-draft declaration wrongly links" duties" and" responsibilities" of the individual, which are two different notions as set forth in article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The pre-draft declaration promotes the idea that States can decide to what extent an individual may enjoy his or her human rights and thereby undermines the responsibility of States to protect human rights, which is contrary to the very essence of human rights law.
That decision, together with the pre-draft declaration on human rights and human responsibilities, constitutes a direct assault on the foundations of human rights and international human rights law by claiming that such rights are conditional.
In this sense, the pre-draft declaration is seen as an extension and a development of the fundamental international human rights instruments, and in particular of article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
In the view of the Government, consideration of the pre-draft declaration would undermine the fundamental role of States in safeguarding and guaranteeing the human rights of all individuals in accordance with obligations freely assumed under international law.
Expresses concern that the content of the pre-draft declaration on human social responsibilities, contained in annex I to document E/CN.4/2003/105, runs counter to these fundamental principles by seeking to make the enjoyment of human rights conditional;
Finally, the pre-draft declaration is contrary to article 29 of the UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights, in that the recognition of individual duties towards the society in which he/she lives does not exempt the State from fulfilling its obligations to respect human rights.
Nothing in the pre-draft declaration should run counter to the universality and inalienability of the human rights of individuals irrespective of their race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.