Many NGOs supported the establishment of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the decision to establish it had been taken in 1993 at the United Nations World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, which had recommended that the General Assembly consider as a matter of priority the establishment of such a High Commissioner for the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights. This happened in the same year. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights is appointed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations and confirmed by the General Assembly as a “person of high moral character” with expertise in the field of human rights as a United Nations official with primary responsibility for United Nations activities in the field of human rights: Its role includes the promotion, protection and effective exercise of all rights. Engagement and dialogue with Governments to protect human rights and strengthen international cooperation and United Nations coordination to promote and protect all human rights. As the principal United Nations representative for human rights, the High Commissioner heads, inter alia, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and its regional and country offices. OHCHR supports the activities of a wide range of United Nations activities in the field of human rights and is committed to the promotion and protection of human rights and respect for universal human rights standards, including the World Programme for Human Rights Education. The above account of rights was written largely from the standpoint of Anglo-American law and philosophy. It should be noted, however, that there is an aspect of legal rights that is found among continental European writers, but of which there is no trace in the Anglo-American tradition. It is the description of rights as “subjective” (subjective rights; subjective rights). The American democratic system is not always based on the simple majority rule. Certain principles are so important to the nation that the majority has agreed not to interfere in these areas. For example, the Bill of Rights was adopted because concepts such as freedom of religion, freedom of expression, equal treatment and due process were considered so important that even a majority should not be allowed to change them.

Many legal rights must be accompanied by a condition of possession or exercise. This in itself does not distinguish legal rights from many moral rights. Just as you are only entitled to legal compensation for bodily injury if you have been attacked, you are only entitled to an excuse to be offended if you have been offended. But legal rights can lead to more complicated situations that rarely occur in morality. In contrast, modern legal conceptions have often emphasized freedom and equality as one of the most important aspects of rights, as demonstrated by the American and French revolutions. As at UN level, social and economic rights in Europe are regulated in a separate document. The European Social Charter (revised) is a binding document covering the rights to safeguard the standard of living of people in Europe. The Charter was signed by 45 Member States and ratified by 30 in 2010.

In French and German, the same word (law, law) serves as a noun, referring to both legal norms and the rights created by them, which is why disambiguation is necessary. Some systems are a mixed parliamentary/presidential structure. In France, for example, the president is far from being a mere titular head of state. Since 1962, he has been directly elected by the people, appoints the Prime Minister, has emergency powers and signs decrees resulting from the extensive legislative functions of the executive. In cooperation with the government, he or she may submit bills to the people, which are adopted by referendum, bypassing parliament, dissolving the National Assembly and calling new elections. Most human rights treaties require States to submit periodic reports. These shall be established by the States in accordance with the instructions of the Board of Supervisors. The purpose of these reports and subsequent verification with the competent supervisory body is an open exchange of views on the challenges faced by efforts to realize the rights concerned. The reports are publicly discussed as part of the “State Dialogue”. State reports, as well as all NGO “shadow reports”, are reviewed according to their own sources and analyses dealing with the State`s record.

Following the dialogue between representatives of States and the independent experts of the Supervisory Authority, the Authority shall comment on the compliance of that State with the standards maintained in the binding instrument under review. These observations address both the positive and critical aspects of the government`s record. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women are examples of instruments requiring the submission of such periodic reports. In addition to this process of dialogue between States, monitoring bodies may also be authorized to carry out “on-site” or on-site visits to monitor the human rights situation directly. Most of these visits require the express authorization of the State on a case-by-case basis. However, efforts are being made to allow open invitations, for example with States that publicly issue standing invitations to visit United Nations special mandate holders. But despite this great diversity, it is important to first emphasize the separation between religious and secular legal systems. Everyone has very different views on the law, in terms of source, scope, sanctions and function. The source of religious law is the Godhead, who makes the laws through the prophets. However, secular law is man-made. In a religious legal system, disputes are usually settled by an official of that religion, so that the same person is both judge and priest. In a secular system, on the other hand, the function of judge is distinct and is often reinforced by guarantees of judicial independence.

For example, suppose X leaves a sum of money to Y according to his will, provided that Y reaches the age of 21. The provision may need to be properly understood under the rules of the legal system that Y is only entitled to the money if he was 21 years old at the time of X`s death. But it may be that the right way to understand it is that Y, even if he has not reached 21, when X dies, acquires a right to money, but he does not have to be paid until the age of 21. A practical difference is that, in the latter case, the right may pass to the titular successor of Y if, after surviving X, Y nevertheless dies before the age of 21. In the latter case, lawyers refer to the right as “acquired”. There can be many complex legal regulations regarding this type of situation, and they vary greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Reference should be made to textbooks, in particular on testamentary succession, in the jurisdiction. The protection of human rights ultimately depends mainly on mechanisms at the national level. Legal rights are clearly rights that exist in these jurisdictions by virtue of the rules of legal systems or by decisions of the appropriate competent bodies. They raise a number of different philosophical questions.