States of Emergency - Centre for Policy Alternatives

particularly one that is as convoluted and non‐imperative as this.
It is nonetheless remarkable for being contemplated in the bipolar
international context of the 1960s. 219 It is hardly surprising
that the mechanism has never been used. Perhaps with the
growing importance of human rights as a principle of
international law and practice, there may be a future role for this
mechanism, but admittedly, even now this is a remote possibility.
4.2.4
Individual
Communications
This is by far the most innovative mechanism in the ICCPR
framework for human rights protection, enabling individuals to
directly petition the Human Rights Committee upon exhaustion of
domestic avenues of redress. This mechanism has been widely
availed of by individuals, and is a signiLicant element of the future
development of the regime of international human rights
protection. However, this right is only available to individuals in
States that have acceded to the First Optional Protocol. The
Protocol, which is in the form of a separate treaty, sets out the
rules regarding who may author a communication to the
Committee and under what circumstances. In brief, any individual
claiming to be a victim of a violation of any right set forth in the
Covenant may communicate a written complaint to the
Committee, subject to having exhausted all domestic remedies. In
addition to the latter, there are several other admissibility
constraints including those relating to standing, although in many
respects, the regime is liberal and inclusive. 220
219
Rehman (2002), op cit., p.89
220
See esp. Davidson in Conte, Davidson & Burchill (2004), op cit, Ch.1;
Rehman (2002), op cit, pp.92‐101
135