EU and NAFTA: On Human Rights Essay

The European Union (EU) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has had several initiatives that address human rights issues. These initiatives obligate and mandate its signatories and the member states to follow particular rules regarding human rights. In terms of influence, varying levels of success can be noted. The human right action done by both organizations is notable, although the level of success is arguable, as there are criticisms to implementation and scope of these programs. Also, there are still existing issues on human rights that has yet been addressed and influenced by these international organizations. European Union The European Union has human rights as one of its priorities, as it conducts dialogues and coordinates with other countries and international organization. In fact, the EU has institutionalized the focus and prioritization of the issue by establishing the European Court of Human Rights which was founded as product of the European Convention on Human Rights. This court has resolved some very notable cases, and until now serves as a mechanism and agency to promote human rights and prosecute its violators. The Human Rights Watch notes however that some anti-terrorism strategies has resulted in some human rights violations in the EU, as laws protecting human rights have been weakened. Also, the EU policy on migration and refugees altogether prevents asylum seekers and refugees, even deporting them back to the home country. This is a strong indication that the EU has not perfected its human rights strategy by neglecting these issues, even detaining migrants, as Human Rights Watch notes. Individual EU members also committed human rights violations with regards to the policy of refugees and migration. The NAFTA has had initiatives and agreements that address some human rights concerns, but it has gathered criticisms on its inability to effectively implement the provisions. Also, the need to balance trade and human rights is emphasized as one of the lacking values of the organization. Some human rights initiative of the NAFTA has proven to be not very successful; as impressive as the texts of the agreement are, the implementation falls short of expectations and has had disappointing results. For instance the Human Rights Watch notes that the NAFTA Labor Accord was ineffective, and that its results should serve as lesson for future trade agreements. This labor accord – the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation – was supposed to harmonize trade relations and labor rights, but this agreement has not elicited any results. Labor rights protection should be part and parcel of any trade agreement, but not one of the complaints of abuse and injustice has been addressed by the NAFTA initiative. The FIDH Report on the effects on human rights of the NAFTA also notes that although the organization promoted stronger economic links between United States and Mexico, it has essentially dismantled Mexico’s agricultural industry and made it dependent on the US. This has impacted negatively on the situation of Mexico, with increased poverty as result of NAFTA initiatives. Labor law reforms, as was mentioned above, also have to be considered to prevent abuse of human rights. Conclusion The European Union and the North American Free Trade Agreement are not devoid of concern for human rights issues, but the existing and past initiatives has to be reinforced in order to effectively influence its member states and the human rights situation.