Article 29 of the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2018/08/09
Article 29
1. Any dispute between two or more States Parties concerning the interpretation or application of the present Convention which is not settled by negotiation shall, at the request of one of them, be submitted to arbitration. If within six months from the date of the request for arbitration the parties are unable to agree on the organization of the arbitration, any one of those parties may refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice by request in conformity with the Statute of the Court.
2. Each State Party may at the time of signature or ratification of the present Convention or accession thereto declare that it does not consider itself bound by paragraph I of this article. The other States Parties shall not be bound by that paragraph with respect to any State Party which has made such a reservation.
3. Any State Party which has made a reservation in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article may at any time withdraw that reservation by notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979)
The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women or the Convention, Article 29 covers a substantial territory as if a coda at the end of the publication. The basic idea is that if there is any disagreement or “dispute” between two of the nations involved in the Convention; then, there will be an arbitration between the two countries regarding their disagreement.
The disagreements or the foundations of the disputes focus on the interpretation or the application of the current version of the Convention, remembering, of course, that the Convention is subject to changes based on, for example, alterations in the scientific and technological landscape, where these changes in the world of science and technology merit an adjunction, deletion, or general edit to the Convention.
The interpretation of any document becomes important in the world of international rights because the line between what is and what is not contextually appropriate for a particular stipulation within the Convention is important. The interpretation statement could be clear to most States Parties or nations regarding the reasonable scope and limits of it.
However, to a small percent, it may not be so clear. That is where Article 29(1) comes into play. The other part of the article discusses the areas of concern in a dispute or disagreement in the area of implementation of a right in the Convention. An individual may consider the Convention relatively clear and then the nation-state may begin to actualize those reasonable interpretations, according to the consensus of all parties and no objections, but then the implementation of the stipulation of equal rights may be a point of contention.
The first point of conflict resolution is the negotiation. The next stage, if the first stage is insufficient, will be the submitted request for an arbitration on the dispute. One of the two parties will submit the request. The time limit on stage two, if things head to stage two, is six months. That is, there is a time limit of party patience on the first stage and hard chronological time limit in the second stage.
That is the selection process time limit for an arbitrator to conduct the arbitration of the dispute. Then one of the parties of the disagreement simply refers to the International Court of Justice, an extremely important body, for the deliberation, which, according to the Statute of the Court – part of the United Nations Charter, is in conformity” with it. It follows the rules of the statute.
Article 29(2) stipulates the right of a state party to not consider itself bound to the statements of Article 29(1). That is a real possibility and something important to consider on this front. At the time of the accession or agreement via signature to the current version of the Convention, any of the nations’ representatives can declare that they’re not in any way signing to be bound to the first section of Article 29.
The last section determines the reservations made by a nation at the time of the agreement can withdraw said reservation with a notification sent to the highest official in the United Nations, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. These previous articles have covered a lot ground, but the CEDAW retains a certain importance based on its general application and international focus for rights and equality.
–One can find similar statements in other documents, conventions, declarations and so on, with the subsequent statements of equality or women’s rights:
- The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the Preamble, Article 16, and Article 25(2).
- Convention Against Discrimination in Education (1960) in Article 1.
- The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) in Article 3 and Article 13.
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966).
- Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979).
- Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984).
- The Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (1993).
- Beijing Declaration(1995).
- United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000).
- Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children (2000).
- The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa or the “Maputo Protocol” (2003).
- Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence or the Istanbul Convention (2011) Article 38 and Article 39.
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.
In-Sight Publishing 