Introduction
The environment in which international human rights are implemented varies in line with differences in political systems. In this case, one of the most common political systems is federalism. In federalism, two levels of government exist: state and federal levels. Today, many human rights laws are being enacted both locally and internationally. A major concern for human rights crusaders relates to the manner in which international human rights are being safeguarded in the context of the political philosophy of federalism. In some political systems, it is likely for the rights of minority groups to be ignored (Tushnet 843). It is not clear whether the same thing may be said as far as federalism is concerned.
In efforts to integrate international human rights into domestic laws of federalism in a country such as the US, many challenges are often encountered (Tran 29). The aim of this paper is to examine how international human rights norms being integrated into domestic laws in the context of federalism. This paper hypothesizes that federalism creates far-reaching restrictions on the adoption of international agreements that address human rights issues, meaning that it is hardly seems like a better enabler of human rights protection than other political systems.
Human rights in the context of federalism
Several countries have succeeded in rising to a stature where they can be referred to as mature federalist nations. The United States Switzerland, and Germany may stand out as the best examples of mature federalist nations (Tarr, Williams and Marko 53). In some other countries, it may be inaccurate to say that systems that are purely federalist in nature exist. For example, Italy and Spain are governed by what may be referred as a quasi-federal system. In Austria, federalism exists in a context of a highly homogenous population. India’s federal system contrasts sharply with that of Austria because of the country’s extraordinary diversity. Many other countries around the world are in the process of transitioning into federal systems. Examples of such countries include Russia, Herzegovina, Bosnia, and Belgium.
Germany has a rich tradition of federalism that has ultimately had a far-reaching impact on the way the rights of minorities are protected. However, this is not to say that the issue of minority protection is a dominant theme in discussions on federalism in the country. Today, the country is embroiled in a more pressing debate regarding a rapidly rising number of immigrants. At the national level, the country is faced with the task of addressing the issue of integration.
In federalism, sub-national constitutions play a critical role in the way human rights issues are addressed. In the US, a dominant view is that federalism is detrimental to the rights of minority groups (Tarr, Williams and Marko 53).
…
Works Cited
Tarr, George., Williams, Robert., and Marko, Joseph. Federalism, Subnational Constitutions and Minority Rights. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2004. Print.
Tran, Luan-Vu. Human Rights and Federalism: A Comparative Study on Freedom, Democracy and Cultural Diversity, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2000, Print.
Tushnet, Mark. “Federalism and International Human Rights in the New Constitutional Orderâ€, The Wayne Law Review, 47, (2001): 841-869.