Access to wildlife should be a right, not a privilege | Tony King | Environment | guardian.co.uk
Great article. A must for every country.
I was slightly stunned by the articles reference to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. “The Convention – signed by every member of the UN except Somalia and the US – outlines children’s fundamental rights such as the right to an identity, the right to life and development, and the right to be heard”.
A few seconds research on the Source Of All Knowledge, THE INTERWEB shows that the US has signed the convention (on the 16 February 1995), it has not “ratified” it, nearly seven years later. The only other country in the whole world that has not ratified it is Somalia.
The difference? Unicef
gives these definitions;
constitutes a preliminary endorsement of the Convention or Protocol. but does demonstrate the State’s intent to examine the treaty domestically and consider ratifying it.
While signing does not commit a State to ratification, it does oblige the State to refrain from acts that would defeat or undermine the treaty’s objective and purpose.
Ratification or accession signifies an agreement to be legally bound by the terms of the Convention. Though accession has the same legal effect as ratification, the procedures differ. In the case of ratification, the State first signs and then ratifies the treaty. The procedure for accession has only one step—it is not preceded by an act of signature.
It must be exceptionally embarrassing for the the people of the US that whilst they on one hand are doing so much to remediate, reshape and reconnect their children, their elected government is of yet to sign the treaty.