Human Rights Codification and Its Impact
Senior 4 · History
Human Rights Codification and Its Impact
Lesson 3 of 3
25 min
"Rwanda continues to stand as the first country in the world to achieve a female majority in its national parliament, with 63.75% of seats in the Chamber of Deputies held by women, a figure unmatched by any other sovereign state."
Parliament of the Republic of Rwanda, website, consulted on 20 October 2026.
Figure 1. Drawn by Ganzaa from UN Women, "Revisiting Rwanda five years after record-breaking parliamentary elections" (2018), and the Parliament of Rwanda's website.
Analyse it. The source is the Parliament describing itself, so check it against an independent one: UN Women reports that women held an average of 18 percent of seats in the 1990s, 56 percent after the 2008 elections and 64 percent after 2013. The rise followed the constitutional principle of at least 30 percent women in decision-making organs (Article 10) and the 24 seats reserved for women (Article 75), and then went well beyond them. This is one clear implication of human rights codification in Rwanda: a right to equality, written into treaties (CEDAW, 1981) and the Constitution, changed who makes the laws. This lesson asks what else codification has changed, and where the debate continues.
Definition
Implication: a consequence that follows from something. Here, what human rights codification has meant in practice for the State, for citizens and for society.
State obligations: the duties a state accepts when it joins a human rights treaty, usually described as duties to respect rights (not violate them), protect them (stop others violating them) and fulfil them (take steps so people can enjoy them). Example: building schools fulfils the right to education.
Remedy: a way for a person whose rights were violated to get justice. Example: a complaint to the National Commission for Human Rights or a case in court.
Individual petition: the right of a person to take a complaint against a state directly to an international body. Example: the declaration Rwanda made in 2013 allowing individuals to petition the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Universal Periodic Review (UPR): the process, set up by the UN General Assembly on 3 April 2006, by which the Human Rights Council examines the human rights record of every UN member state in turn.
| Area | What changed, with dates | Link to codification |
|---|---|---|
| Equality of women and men | From 18 percent of seats in the 1990s to 63.75 percent of the Chamber of Deputies today; women hold 42.3 percent of Senate seats | CEDAW (Rwanda a party since 1981); Constitution Articles 10, 16 and 75 |
| The right to life | Organic Law N° 31 of 2007, of 25 July 2007: "The death penalty is hereby abolished" (Article 2) | ICCPR (right to life); Human Rights Watch lists it among the reforms "aimed at meeting international fair trial standards" so that the ICTR would transfer cases |
| Fair trial and international justice | After further reforms, the ICTR agreed in 2011 to transfer genocide cases to Rwanda's courts; an amendment of 2008 ruled out "life imprisonment with special provisions" in cases transferred from the ICTR | ICCPR fair-trial rights; Constitution Article 29 |
| Freedom from torture | Rwanda joined the Convention against Torture in 2008; Law N° 61 of 2018 gave the National Commission for Human Rights special powers to prevent torture | CAT (2008); Constitution Article 14 |
| International scrutiny | Every UN member, Rwanda included, is reviewed under the UPR; UN special rapporteurs visit (for example in January 2014); individuals could petition the African Court from 2013 | UN and African Charter mechanisms |
Codification also has implications for citizens. Chapter V of the Constitution lists the "Duties of the State and of citizens": to respect State property, promote good health, maintain good relations with others, safeguard national culture, take part in the country's development and protect the environment (Articles 44 to 53). The African Charter does the same (Article 27, lesson 1). A right such as freedom of expression comes with the duty to respect other people's rights and dignity.
In 2013 Rwanda made the declaration under Article 34(6) of the African Court's Protocol that allowed individuals and some NGOs to bring cases against it directly; it was then one of only eight states to have done so. On 24 February 2016 the Government withdrew the declaration. Its note gave its reasons: that "a Genocide convict who is a fugitive from justice" had used the procedure to gain "a platform for re-invention and sanitization", and that Rwanda had "strong legal and judicial institutions" able to resolve human rights issues. Human Rights Watch called the withdrawal "a profound setback to access to justice", and civil society groups criticised it.
Evaluate. The record is mixed, and a historian says so. On one side: women's representation, the abolition of the death penalty, legal reforms that convinced the ICTR to transfer cases, and new protections against torture. On the other: Human Rights Watch argued in 2015 that "the Rwandan justice system still lacks sufficient independence", and the withdrawal from individual petition narrowed one remedy. Judge with evidence from both sides, and say which weighs more and why.
Warning
Keep claims and evidence apart. "First in the world" comes from the Parliament's own website; support it with an independent source, as Figure 1 does with UN Women. In the same way, criticism from Human Rights Watch is evidence of a view, not proof on its own. Name your sources and test them against each other.
Tip
"Respect, Protect, Fulfil, Remedy". For any right, ask: does the State respect it, protect it from others, fulfil it with action, and give a remedy when it is broken? Use the four words to organise an essay on the implications of human rights.
Important
Discuss. Rwanda withdrew its declaration to the African Court after saying that a convicted genocide fugitive was using it. Does a state's need to protect the memory of a genocide justify narrowing a remedy for everyone else? Argue both sides.
International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), "The Universal Periodic Review: The Basics" (about 4 minutes). Watch how every UN member state, Rwanda included, has its human rights record reviewed by other states, and how civil society can take part.
Practice
Key points
Further reading
Sources and credits
Written by Ganzaa: the analysis, the chart (Figure 1), the table and the exercises. This lesson adapts CC BY-SA material and is shared under CC BY-SA 4.0.
Quick check
Which source would best test the Parliament's claim that 63.75% of deputies are women?
