The story of the European Social Charter is one of the interweaving of peace and social justice.
By and large, recognition of human rights and the urge to respect them have emanated from necessity, not generosity. Progress was often the result of social struggle. Leaps forward were sometimes triggered by terrible events—and by the belief that, by eradicating their causes, such calamities would not happen again.
This is also true of social policies and recognition of social rights. They too have been associated with a shift in the societal paradigm.
Together with other human rights, social rights are universal, indivisible and inter-related. This interdependence makes the enjoyment of some social rights a precondition for the exercise of other human rights. Such ‘gateway’ rights include those to health, housing, social protection and protection against poverty, as well as employment.
The full enjoyment of social rights during childhood and youth—including to education, protection against physical and moral dangers, housing and elimination of the cycle of poverty—is a precondition for the enjoyment of human rights in later life. The pitfalls deriving from deficits in social rights are even greater for girls and young women, whose disadvantages can be compounded and perpetuated throughout their lifetimes and across generations.
Peace and social justice
The idea of a social contract first took form among ancient Greek philosophers and was later presented as an alternative to war or a factor in securing peace. Advances in social justice often defused adverse developments or crises otherwise considered inevitable. In a 1946 speech, the British wartime leader Winston Churchill evoked the welfare of workers and the protection of families from privation as part of an ‘overall strategic concept’ for safety in Europe and beyond.
Become a Social Europe Member
Support independent publishing and progressive ideas by becoming a Social Europe member for less than 5 Euro per month. Your support makes all the difference!
Complacency in the face of widespread suffering is the enemy of peace. Already in the peace treaty that followed the first world war, part XIII—the constitution of the International Labour Organization—affirmed that universal and lasting peace ‘can be established only if it is based upon social justice’ and that ‘conditions of labour exist involving such injustice, hardship and privation to large numbers of people as to produce unrest so great that the peace and harmony of the world are imperilled’. It set out a range of social rights and impressed a sense of urgency to address them.
The second world war led to ‘recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family [as] the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world’. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights also stated that ‘disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind’. The signatories proclaimed a range of civil and political as well as economic, social and cultural rights.
Council of Europe
The Council of Europe was established the following year. This organisation with a pan-European vocation—and currently 46 member states—celebrates this year its 75th anniversary. The Council of Europe and the European postwar architecture were designed to provide the normative framework (democracy, human rights and the rule of law) and the path to integration (economic and potentially political union) that would prevent past catastrophes from occurring anew. Churchill was one of the drivers behind the organisation.
The Council of Europe was set up in the belief ‘that the pursuit of peace based upon justice and international co-operation is vital for the preservation of human society and civilisation’. Social progress was engraved in the organisation’s statute as a touchstone of lasting peace.
One early Council of Europe initiative in this context was the 1961 European Social Charter, the social-rights counterpart to its European Convention on Human Rights of 1950. The 1961 charter was reinforced by a 1988 protocol with additional rights and the 1996 revised charter. The treaty’s supervisory mechanism, based on national reports, was also strengthened with a system of quasi-judicial collective complaints.
Considerable harm
From the 1980s, ‘neoliberalism’, or faith in unfettered markets, tried to stifle the developing social and welfare state. The ‘small state’ mantra brought about considerable harm to swaths of society. Its ramifications included the shaping of policies in dictatorships as well as reversing social progress in democracies. Growing inequality was one of the insidious consequences, threatening social peace.
It is a collective responsibility to appropriate the lessons of the past and to prevent their erasure by the passage of time or by attempts to rewrite or mask history. The responsibility of those in positions of political authority is even greater, given the risk that obscuring the past can bring about its recurrence. We should be attentive to the alarm bells set off by the rise in populism and the unhinged nurturing of anti-system sentiments.
In view of Russia’s criminal attack on Ukraine and its dire consequences for the enjoyment of human rights, the Council of Europe organised its fourth summit in Reykjavik in May last year. The heads of state and government confirmed then that ‘social justice is crucial for democratic stability and security’ and ‘reaffirm[ed their] full commitment to the protection and implementation of social rights as guaranteed by the European Social Charter system’.
Political resolve
The repeated recognition of the capital importance of social justice must be translated into political resolve to minimise the risk of crises, by vigorously implementing social rights as guaranteed by the charter. The role of the European Union in this respect has to be highlighted. Decision-makers should rely on the inputs to governance the charter system provides for sound policies compliant with human rights.
Social rights must be integral to any response to the current ‘polycrisis’ and to future crises. Climate change is likely to have a profound impact on the enjoyment of social rights and may therefore be a factor in the sustainability of democracy. The right to a sustainable environment is also consistent with the intergenerational dimension of social rights and related responsibility.
There is great responsibility and risk too in the persistence of poverty. Poverty is not a personal choice; neither is it a fate nor is it irremediable—it is the result of political choices. Christos Giakoumopoulos, director general of human rights and the rule of law in the Council of Europe, said last October: ‘People in poverty or at risk of poverty are not responsible for their situation. Nor are they responsible for the solution to this human rights violation.’
Additional commitments
The European Social Charter is special in that it allows states parties to shape the extent of the monitoring to which they submit. In line with the messages from the Council of Europe heads of state and government and its Committee of Ministers, states should pay redoubled attention to the possibility of acceptance of additional commitments under the charter. For some, this may involve ratification of the revised charter and additional provisions; for others, it may entail accepting the collective-complaints procedure or extending the possibility for national non-governmental organisations to make collective complaints.
There is also considerable scope for mutual support among states to enable progress—and levelling up—in social rights. These rights are not fixed but are in constant evolution. The Committee of Ministers mandated the European Committee of Social Rights to apply the charter to new or emerging situations to the extent possible, and invited the charter’s inter-governmental body to make proposals to fill gaps that might be identified. A broad reflection is desirable but protection of a safe and healthy environment is an obvious first choice. Moreover, revisiting the restrictive personal scope of application of the charter—an anomaly in international human-rights law—is a pending subject.
The coming high-level conference in Vilnius should be the beginning of another iteration in the discussion around social rights and the European Social Charter—not the end.
Jan Malinowski is head of the Department of Social Rights in the Council of Europe and executive secretary of the European Committee of Social Rights. The views express here are only those of the author and cannot be attributed in any way to the Council of Europe or any of its organs or entities.