Increasing numbers of academics and practitioners are employing the language of economic and social rights (ESR) when conceptualizing the aims, scope and implementation mechanisms of transitional justice. Their contributions have added to an evolving debate on the boundaries of transitional justice. However, when employing rights language, the current debate on the economic and social dimensions of transitional justice frequently suffers from terminological and conceptual confusion. Problematically, it is not unusual for the claims made by transitional justice commentators with regard to ESR to be founded on apparent misconceptions about both the legal framework and the existing scholarship relating to ESR. Addressing these misconceptions in terms of four key dichotomies and suggesting the way forward, we prepare the ground for a more effective debate on the desirability and feasibility of incorporating ESR into transitional justice processes. In doing so, we assert that such a debate must be based on an accurate understanding of ESR and the obligations they impose. We conclude by demonstrating how inclusion of ESR considerations in transitional justice does not necessitate rethinking transitional justice as a whole.
Recent years have seen an explosion in methodologies for monitoring children’s economic and social rights (ESR). Key examples include the development of indicators, benchmarks, child rights-based budget analysis and child rights impact assessments. The Committee on the Right of the Child has praised such tools in its work and has actively promoted their usage. Troublingly, however, there are serious shortcomings in the Committee’s approach to the ESR standards enshrined in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which threaten to impact upon the efficacy of such methodologies. This article argues that the Committee has failed to engage with the substantive obligations imposed by Article 4 and many of the specific ESR guaranteed in the CRC in sufficient depth. As a result, that body has not succeeded in outlining a coherent, comprehensive child rights-specific ESR framework. Using the example of child rights-based budget analysis, the author claims that this omission constitutes a significant obstacle to those seeking to evaluate the extent to which states have met their ESR-related obligations under the CRC. The article thus brings together and addresses key issues that have so far received only very limited critical academic attention, namely, children’s ESR under the CRC, the relationship between budgetary decision-making and the CRC, and child rights-based budget analysis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.