Towards ‘Human Rights Compatible’ Public Budgets – an Account of Institutional Virtues

Abstract

In the aftermath of the recent economic crisis, scholarly discussions on the relationship between human rights, budgeting and budgets have been re-energised. This article focuses on the design of governing institutions in the context of public budgeting. More specifically, it introduces three institutional virtues, each of which can serve a facilitative function in the drafting of 'human rights compatible budgets' (i.e. budgets that take human rights obligations adequately into consideration). These institutional virtues are: instrumental deliberation, interpretative deliberation and evaluative deliberation.In the aftermath of the recent economic crisis scholars and human rights activists have often reminded that human rights should be adequately taken into account in public budgets. This suggestion alone, while legitimate, does not take us very far in efforts to address possible tensions between budgets and the realisation of human rights. Instead, it only constitutes a beginning that is followed by a set of complex questions related to potential actions and omissions by various agents. In general terms the scholarly literature that has so far discussed the topic can be divided into two categories: framework inquiries and case studies. The former focus on developing analytical instruments that can be utilised in the scrutiny of revenue and expenditure and the process of drafting budgets. 1 In turn, the latter focus on examining whether actual budgeting processes and budgets are compatible with human rights obligations. 2 This article offers a contribution to framework inquiries. More specifically, it focuses on guidelines for institutional design. Three institutional virtues will be introduced, each of which can -if integrated into public discussions on human rightsserve a facilitative function in the drafting of 'human rights compatible public budgets' -i.e. public budgets that adequately take into consideration human rights obligations. These institutional virtues are: instrumental deliberation, interpretative deliberation and evaluative deliberation. The article will proceed in the following way. First, the link between human rights and public budgeting, and the general function of deliberation in the drafting of human rights compatible budgets, will be explored. Second, the three modes of deliberation will be introduced. Finally, limitations in the case that has been presented will be examined.

Human rights and social welfare pathologies: civil society perspectives on contemporary practice across UK jurisdictions – critical analysis of third cycle UPR data

“…As one academic account notes, 'in the aftermath of the recent economic crisis scholars and human rights activists have often reminded that human rights should be adequately taken into account in public budgets'. 55 However, the CSO discourse suggests that the UK is a long way from adopting this proactive, redistributive approach to public finances. The CSO UPR discourse is typified by the following submission, 'underfunding poses a real threat to older people's right to dignity … [Arts.…”