Introduction to Human Rights Week 4: typology IV. Third generation: solidarity rights We still have one drawer left to open. Inside, we find the rights of the third generation, also called "solidarity rights". these rights differ from the ones belonging to the first two generations on one point. While the holders of the first two generations of rights are individuals, the holders of the third generation of rights are collective entities: the people. Solidarity rights derive from the ambition of developing countries and they have their roots in the second half of the 20th century. The ICESCR and the ICCPR take account of the developing countries' ambition regarding decolonization. They enshrine the first and the most famous of peoples' right: the right of self-determination. This right protects self-determination in the political, social, economic and cultural field. This right also contains the right for all people to freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources. Other rights belong to solidarity rights but, contrary to the right of self-determination, these rights are not enshrined in treaties at the universal level. We find them in Declarations or in Resolutions. Declarations and Resolutions belong to "soft law". These documents are legally non-binding and they have a political value. This is why we have described the other rights as "rights in the making". Let us see what rights it includes. The rights which are the most mentioned under the auspices of solidarity rights are - The right to development - The right to peace - The right to a healthy environment - The right to humanitarian assistance These rights reflect the demands of developing countries to a more just international legal order. It also expresses the idea that the realisation of the rights of the first two generations is not independent on the economic, social, cultural and environmental conditions. These rights appeal to brotherhood and to solidarity because they partly protect collective interests: peace and environment. Everyone can benefit from these two interests, apart from his/her respective contribution. We have seen that, special rights, such as the right to self-determination, have been described as "rights in the making" at the universal level. At the regional level, solidarity rights are not only "rights in the making" on the African continent. These rights are legally binding. A whole list of rights belonging to the third generation can be found in the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. There are for example: - The right to equality of the people - The right to self-determination - The right to dispose of their wealth and natural resources - The right to their economic, social and cultural development - The right to peace - The right to satisfactory environment On the African continent, these rights are not only enshrined in the African Charter but they are also applied. They are made concrete by the case law. We have read a case for today: the case of the Endorois. This case perfectly illustrates this point. As you know, this case was field by nongovernmental organizations. The aim was to defend the interests of the Endorois. The Endorois are a community of 60 000 people living in Kenya. This community was expelled from their ancestral lands because these ancestral lands were converted into a wildlife reserve. There was no preliminary consultation before the expulsion. And there was no compensation. The consequences were important, or even dramatic, for the people. Indeed, they lost the access to the site that they were using to feed the livestock. They are now in an arid region which is not adapted to their way of subsistence. Furthermore, they also lost access to their sacred site and to the medicinal plants that they use to treat themselves. Ruling on this complaint field by nongovernmental organizations, the commission examined several rights. It is interesting to note that the rights of the three generations were examined in this case. Civil and political rights were examined, especially the freedom of worship and the right to property. Then, the rights of the second generation were also examined, especially cultural rights which were impaired by the restriction of accessing to the cultural site. Then, and this is what I would like to highlight, the collective rights were also examined. First, the commission examined the question if the Endorois was a people. It is not easy to define what a people is. Nevertheless, it can be seen here that we face a community who considers itself as a separate entity. From a subjective point of view, they are an indigenous people. Moreover, it is also recognized by others that they have a separate identity. They have a shared life style and culture. The Endorois are therefore a people. They can invoke solidarity rights. Then, the commission examined if their rights were violated. It retained the violation of two rights. First of all, the right to dispose of natural wealth and resources and a violation of the right to development. The right to development was infringed in two ways. First, the right to development also contains the right to an effective participation. The Endorois should have been consulted before being expelled from their lands. Secondly, the Endorois were excluded from the development process. They did not receive a share of the benefits stemming from the exploitation of these natural reserves. Let us keep the Endorois case in mind. It will be of use to us in the next section which examines the criticism of the generational classification.