Universal-MigrationHRlaw-PG-no-6-Publications-PractitionersGuide-2014-eng

MIGRATION AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW | 233of scientific research and creative activity (Article 15.3) ICESCR). TheCESCR clearly rejected any inference that these elements of rights andobligations might be non-self-executing. 920 The list is illustrative andnon-exhaustive. 921 Furthermore, it must be recalled that, even in thecase of obligations subject to progressive realisation, national courtscan review compliance with ESC rights based on principles of reasonableness,proportionality and necessity.Box 14. ESC Rights in regional courtsESC rights are adjudicated by a number of international courtsand tribunals. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights andthe African Commission supervise and rule on the implementationof the ESC rights included in their main instruments. 922The European Court has a more limited role due to the scarcepresence of the ESC rights in the European Convention, butit includes protection for some rights also protected as ESCrights including the right to education (Article 2 of Protocol 1)and other ECHR rights allow it to adjudicate on some aspectsof ESC rights, including the right to respect for private andfamily life and to respect for the home (Article 8 ECHR) andthe right to property (Article 1 Protocol 1). The EuropeanCourt can also find violations of ESC rights under the generalprohibition of discrimination set out in Article 1 of Protocol 12ECHR (for those States Parties that have ratified the Protocol),which prohibits discrimination in regard to “any right set forthby law”. 923 The European Committee of Social Rights can receivecollective complaints, and, despite the restrictive scopeof the European Social Charter, its jurisprudence is openingup to adjudicating on at least a minimum common core ofESC rights for all migrants, regardless of their status. Finally,920 Ibid., para. 5.921 See, CESCR, General Comment No. 9, op. cit., fn. 914, para. 10.922 See, SERAC and the CESR v. Nigeria, ACommHPR, op. cit., fn. 29, para. 68. In Socio-EconomicRights Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Nigeria, ACommHPR, CommunicationNo. 300/2005, 5 th Extraordinary Session, 21–29 July 2008, para. 65, the Court said that the“African Charter [...] constitutes a normative base for socio-economic rights claims whichallow any claim brought under the Charter to be litigated before national courts.”923 In particular, the Explanatory Report to Protocol 12 to the Convention for the Protectionof Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, ETS No. 177, clarifies that the prohibitionof discrimination refers to “the enjoyment of any right specifically granted to an individualunder national law; [.. .] the enjoyment of a right which may be inferred from a clear obligationof a public authority under national law, that is, where a public authority is under anobligation under national law to behave in a particular manner; [unjustified discrimination]by a public authority in the exercise of discretionary power (for example, granting certainsubsidies); [or] by any other act or omission by a public authority (for example, the behaviourof law enforcement officers when controlling a riot).”