Write a short passage on the following questions.
Budget: $10 – $30 USD
Answer the following questions in a paragraph or two(minimum 250 words) with sources cited in APA style.
Background information:
The UN Human Rights Council (HRC) is the main body of the United Nations in charge of reviewing member states’ human rights records. The council publishes reports on each country’s human rights practices, recommends appropriate actions for correcting human rights practices, sends independent experts to investigate and report on human rights violations in some cases, and similar.
Each regional block gets a certain number of seats on the council and the UN General Assembly elects representatives based on the nominations from each regional block. Recently, the HRC has come under criticism for allowing countries which routinely violate human rights, such as China, Saudi Arabia, Eritrea, the Philippines, and similar, to have a seat on the council.
Question:
Should countries which violate human rights be allowed to have a seat on the Human Rights Council? What are the benefits and downsides of each approach (allowing them to sit on the council and not allowing them)?
While the initial instinct of most of us is to say “human rights violators should not have a seat on the HRC,” make sure to consider the downsides of that approach too before answering the question. For example, what can be problematic about excluding countries from the HRC, what could be the consequences of that decision, would entire regions be excluded from representation in some cases, do any countries in the world have perfect human rights records, and similar.
-Cite your sources in APA style, both in text and in references.
-MInimum 250 words (not including references)
Background information:
The UN Human Rights Council (HRC) is the main body of the United Nations in charge of reviewing member states’ human rights records. The council publishes reports on each country’s human rights practices, recommends appropriate actions for correcting human rights practices, sends independent experts to investigate and report on human rights violations in some cases, and similar.
Each regional block gets a certain number of seats on the council and the UN General Assembly elects representatives based on the nominations from each regional block. Recently, the HRC has come under criticism for allowing countries which routinely violate human rights, such as China, Saudi Arabia, Eritrea, the Philippines, and similar, to have a seat on the council.
Question:
Should countries which violate human rights be allowed to have a seat on the Human Rights Council? What are the benefits and downsides of each approach (allowing them to sit on the council and not allowing them)?
While the initial instinct of most of us is to say “human rights violators should not have a seat on the HRC,” make sure to consider the downsides of that approach too before answering the question. For example, what can be problematic about excluding countries from the HRC, what could be the consequences of that decision, would entire regions be excluded from representation in some cases, do any countries in the world have perfect human rights records, and similar.
-Cite your sources in APA style, both in text and in references.
-MInimum 250 words (not including references)