Organization for Security and Co-operation in EuropeOffice for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
The OSCE process
Since its beginnings, the OSCE has followed a process approach. The Helsinki Final Act provides for regular follow-up conferences and meetings. This is very important for understanding the OSCE human-rights framework.
First, this means that there is a forum for discussing the implementation of the standards agreed in previous meetings.
Second, this has led to a set of successive OSCE documents specifying and elaborating the human dimension commitments adopted in past documents. As a result of this, the OSCE has developed a very flexible and dynamic norm-creating process in the human-rights field, a process that is ongoing.
Among the innovations adopted in recent documents is, for example, the acknowledgement of trafficking in human beings, previously treated most often in an organized-crime context, as a human-rights concern (Vienna Ministerial Council 2000).
OSCE commitments generally take the form of documents adopted by consensus at OSCE summits or ministerial meetings. Each meeting takes place in a particular political climate and context. Not surprisingly, the OSCE summits have therefore been of differing importance in creating new commitments. Whereas some meetings, in particular in the early 1990s, created a large set of important new norms, others restricted themselves to minor changes and additions.
This process approach has led to the creation of a large number of OSCE documents. As a result, it is not always easy for practitioners to find out which standards exactly apply to a specific situation, in particular as each document contains, to a varying degree, repetitions and innovations.
As a basic guideline, the user should note that all documents together form the existing framework of the OSCE. Thus, a document does not become invalid when new documents are adopted. The documents build on each other and constitute what could be called the acquis OSCE. They have been adopted by consensus and thus are politically binding on all OSCE participating States. This also applies to newly admitted participating States that were required to accept the acquis upon accession.
Consequently, a user should not rely only on a single document but should check the whole range of existing documents in order to find the actual scope of commitments on a given right or fundamental freedom. Often, an early document stipulates only a general principle that then is further elaborated in subsequent documents. However, since the commitments and documents build on each other, a commitment in an early document does not lose its force if a subsequent document has only a general reference to this right.
At the same time, each document as a whole reflects a specific historical context and its structure follows a certain logic that puts the different parts of the document in a wider context. Reading the document in its entirety can thus equally provide important information as to the understanding and interpretation of the norms concerned.
First, this means that there is a forum for discussing the implementation of the standards agreed in previous meetings.
Second, this has led to a set of successive OSCE documents specifying and elaborating the human dimension commitments adopted in past documents. As a result of this, the OSCE has developed a very flexible and dynamic norm-creating process in the human-rights field, a process that is ongoing.
Among the innovations adopted in recent documents is, for example, the acknowledgement of trafficking in human beings, previously treated most often in an organized-crime context, as a human-rights concern (Vienna Ministerial Council 2000).
OSCE commitments generally take the form of documents adopted by consensus at OSCE summits or ministerial meetings. Each meeting takes place in a particular political climate and context. Not surprisingly, the OSCE summits have therefore been of differing importance in creating new commitments. Whereas some meetings, in particular in the early 1990s, created a large set of important new norms, others restricted themselves to minor changes and additions.
This process approach has led to the creation of a large number of OSCE documents. As a result, it is not always easy for practitioners to find out which standards exactly apply to a specific situation, in particular as each document contains, to a varying degree, repetitions and innovations.
As a basic guideline, the user should note that all documents together form the existing framework of the OSCE. Thus, a document does not become invalid when new documents are adopted. The documents build on each other and constitute what could be called the acquis OSCE. They have been adopted by consensus and thus are politically binding on all OSCE participating States. This also applies to newly admitted participating States that were required to accept the acquis upon accession.
Consequently, a user should not rely only on a single document but should check the whole range of existing documents in order to find the actual scope of commitments on a given right or fundamental freedom. Often, an early document stipulates only a general principle that then is further elaborated in subsequent documents. However, since the commitments and documents build on each other, a commitment in an early document does not lose its force if a subsequent document has only a general reference to this right.
At the same time, each document as a whole reflects a specific historical context and its structure follows a certain logic that puts the different parts of the document in a wider context. Reading the document in its entirety can thus equally provide important information as to the understanding and interpretation of the norms concerned.
