View With Charts And Images
The domestic implication mechanism of Human Rights between Bangladesh and USA
This assignment is about the domestic implication of human rights between Bangladesh and USA where it describes the whole comparison between both countries on domestic human rights. It also describes the common domestic human rights of both countries and figure out the situation of their law inbound of human rights where their judicial law system are contractual and also figure out the human rights are inter related.
|ACLU||American Civil Liberties Union|
|BNP||Bangladesh Nationalist Party|
|RAB||Rapid Action Battalion|
|UDHR||Universal Declaration of Human Rights|
A country’s law has a great impact on its growth. Especially domestic law and their implication in a proper way reflect the counties development. So in a common sense, as Bangladesh is a developing country and USA is a developed country, surely there are some differences between these two country’s laws.
Bangladesh considers that hunger, poverty, illiteracy which characterizes underdevelopment to be formidable impediments, which frustrate the effective enjoyment of human rights. Removal of these impediments through mutual co-operation is, therefore, vital for the full realization of the aims and objectives of the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights. The people of Bangladesh have a deep-rooted awareness of human rights and fundamental freedom borne of the experience accompanying the nation’s birth. This was again demonstrated in the struggle of the people of Bangladesh and their heroic sacrifice for the restoration of democracy by uprooting a+ deeply entrenched autocratic regime in December 1990.
The ACLU urges the United States to extend the basic human right to life guaranteed by the UDHR to all members of our society and to ratify its companion treaties, especially the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which aims at the abolition of the death penalty.
Human Rights Mechanism:
The international human rights system depends on active participation of civil society – NGOs, nonprofits, the academic community, and community activists. International and regional treaty bodies monitor and report on human rights conditions. This resource provides the basic tools for NGOs, nonprofits, and activists to easily take part in international human rights advocacy. From Documentation to Advocacy will help you find, understand, and apply international human rights standards to the issues you work on. By providing credible examples of human rights violations, on-the-ground activists and advocates draw attention to systemic problems and help take part in ending human rights violations. Parties to international and regional human rights treaties are required to submit regular reports detailing their compliance.1 Next, consult the Overview of Human Rights Monitoring Mechanisms for information on the specific treaty monitoring bodies.
Guide to International Human Rights Mechanisms Retrieved from
The Domestic Implication Mechanism of Human Rights of Bangladesh:
Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent, and indivisible. Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law, general principles and other sources of international law.2
Extrajudicial Killings and Custodial Torture:
The BNP came into power in 2001 with an anti-crime mandate. In 2003, the government established the RAB, an elite “anti-crime” unit comprised of armed personnel from various security branches. Since the establishment of RAB, there have been consistent allegations of a surge in extrajudicial killings and custodial torture. Between January and October 2005, an estimated 300 persons were killed at the hands of the security forces, largely in so-called “encounter” killings. Of these killings, 223 were committed by the police and other law enforcement agencies, and seventy-eight by RAB.2
Human rights groups and journalists have documented many of these killings and have demanded an inquiry into each death, but the government has refused. The government defends the actions of RAB by stating that, since its establishment, serious crime in Bangladesh has dropped by half. When the European Parliament issued a strong resolution in April 2005 condemning RAB, the government responded dismissively, arguing that “encounter killings” happen in all parts of the world.
2 What are the human rights Retrieved from http://www.ihrc.in/
3 World Report 2006: Events of 2005
Persecution of Minority Communities:
Bangladesh is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which ensures the rights to freedom of religion and expression, but has tolerated violent assaults by extremists on religious minority communities. In January 2004, the government placed a ban on all Ahmadiyya publications, in response to an ultimatum to the government by the Islami Okiya Jote (IOJ) and the Khatme Nabuwat Movement (KNM) to declare that Ahmadiyyas are not Muslims. The IOJ is a small coalition partners with the BNP, while the KNM, and is an extreme Islamist vigilante and pressure group. The BNP government chose to save its coalition rather than defend the rights of the Ahmadiyya. A court later suspended the ban, but Islamist parties and organizations are threatening further legal challenge.4
Attacks on Ahmadiyya homes and places of worship continued in 2005. Although human rights groups and journalists documented these attacks, the government to date has not prosecuted any of the responsible individuals and has not disciplined police who failed to protect victims. Members of other religious minorities have also come under attack. Throughout 2005, there were persistent reports of abductions and forced conversions of minorities, and destruction and desecration of religious sites.
4 World Report 2006: Events of 2005
The climate of intimidation has extended to other groups who document or speak against the government’s actions. Opposition voices are increasingly at risk. On January 27, 2005, senior AL member and former Finance Minister Shah Abu Mohamed Shamsul Kibria was assassinated. Attacks on opposition AL members are not new: Sheikh Hasina, the leader of the AL, survived a 2004 grenade and bomb blast during which twenty of AL’s party members were killed. Other senior and junior AL members have been harassed and threatened. On August 8, 2005, two human rights activists were attacked in public by persons who identified themselves as BNP members. The victims, Rabindra Ghosh and Ashok Taru Saha, were returning from conducting an investigation into a case of torture against a member of the Ahmadiyya community.
Journalists face tremendous risks in Bangladesh. For the third year running, Reporters Sans Frontieres reported that Bangladesh was the country with the largest number of journalists physically attacked or threatened with death. The government showed little interest in protecting journalists, while Islamist groups stepped up their intimidation of the independent news media.
The Domestic Implication Mechanism of Human Rights of USA
The protection of fundamental human rights was a foundation stone in the establishment of the United States over 200 years ago. Since then, a central goal of U.S. foreign policy has been the promotion of respect for human rights.
UNITED NATIONS 1503 PROCEDURE:
The 1503 Procedure is named after the resolution of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights which established it.
Since 9/11, America’s historic role as a leader in the human rights movement and its moral standing in the community of nations has been damaged as never before. The Bush administration’s response to 9/11 called into question truths Americans had thought self-evident about themselves.
American officials had helped draft the Convention against Torture and the United States was at the forefront of the anti-torture movement. Yet, starting in 2001, U.S. personnel subjected hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people in Guantánamo, Iraq and Afghanistan to cruel and inhuman treatment, and tortured an unknown number.5
America historically stood for the principle of justice in accordance with the rule of law, yet starting in 2002; hundreds of men were detained indefinitely without charge in Guantánamo and secretly in other countries.
5 Public Image of George W. Bush
Numerous international human rights documents firmly establish the principle that no human being can be outside the protection of the law or “illegal.” Yet despite the clearly established principle that discrimination and abuse based upon immigration status is a violation of human rights, U.S. government policies continue to sanction human rights violations against immigrants.6
Federal immigration enforcement policies such as Secure Communities and local laws like Arizona’s S.B. 1070 tear immigrant families apart create rifts between communities and law enforcement. Immigrant workers are abused, exploited and become scapegoats for a host of societal ills in a nation with a suffering economy. And immigrants trapped in this country’s maze of immigration and deportation proceedings are incarcerated in immigration detention, a system that has repeatedly failed to properly care for those in its custody.
For many decades the Supreme Court served as the final arbiter in compelling states and private actors to treat all people in the United States as equals. However, in recent years, the Court has rolled back many of these protections and has taken a sharp about-face with regard to providing remedies to individuals for civil rights violations. These norms and mechanisms provide opportunities for holding the government accountable in ways that are no longer available in domestic courts.7
These changes will not come easily or quickly, especially given the United States’ oft-espoused disdain for international human rights mechanisms. Yet advocates must engage in this struggle as it is the most promising avenue available at this moment in history to bring about meaningful policy changes with regard women’s rights. Only through such efforts will we achieve equality and dignity for all.
6 Immigrants Rights Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/human-rights/immigrants-rights
7 Women’s Rights Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/human-rights/womens-rights
Race has been inextricably woven into the fabric of the United Nation’s human rights framework from its very inception. The relationship between the role of race in America and international human rights is a complex one in which each sphere affects the other. Although the United States pioneered many advances in racial justice, developments in the international arena have resulted in the United States falling behind the rest of the world in some respects.8
As a result, ethnic and racial discrimination and inequality remain ongoing and pervasive problems in the United States. Policies and practices at the federal, state and local level continue to disproportionately burden the most vulnerable groups in society: racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants and noncitizens, low-wage workers, women, children and the accused. Minorities are unfairly victimized by racial profiling Immigrants have become the targets of frequent racially discriminatory acts and statements, and laws at the local, state and federal levels have enshrined this kind of discrimination and profiling.
The drafters of the UDHR contemplated eventual abolition of the death penalty, but it wasn’t until 1991 that the international community, in a complementary treaty to the UDHR, adopted the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights calling for total abolition of capital punishment.
The ACLU urges the United States to extend the basic human right to life guaranteed by the UDHR to all members of our society and to ratify its companion treaties, especially the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which aims at the abolition of the death penalty. At a minimum, the U.S. should begin by imposing a national moratorium on use of the death penalty in keeping with the 2007 U.N. General Assembly resolution calling for a global moratorium. Ultimately, the United States’ compliance with international human rights norms will require nothing less than a complete abolition of the death penalty.
8 Racial Justice Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/human-rights/racial-justice
Compare and contrast:
As we can see the whole human rights of Bangladesh and USA there are many difference in their domestic human rights. In Bangladesh judicial torture and killings happens often where in USA immigrant people suffer most. Because in USA they have hard judicial system and whenever any immigrant people caught by their unofficial documents then they tried to peruse them.
On the other hand women rights are requisition tools for both countries. In USA they have already claimed new rules for republish law system and already changed their human rights law system. In Bangladesh the constitution 152 claimed by High court and even it has not been changed yet.
Both countries has powerful security for their domestic intention and in USA they have already announced rules for security guards rights and all rules will publish by their judicial system where in Bangladesh high court maintain security rights under the constitution act 155.
In USA, whatever human right law they have, they try to follow those best, because otherwise government punishes them. The implication of these laws in USA is very strict there.
On the other hand, Bangladesh has also so many human laws which are very good for a nice and well formed developed country. But the sad thing is here, the implications of those laws are not strict. As a result guilty can easily beat the law and skip out of it.
7. The Legal Environment Today: Business In Its Ethical, Regulatory, E-Commerce, and Global Setting by Roger LeRoy Miller and Frank B. Cross (Jan 1, 2012)