Abstract: Validity, integrity, and impacts of the IT systems of
the US federal courts have been studied as part of the Human Rights
Alert-NGO (HRA) submission for the 2015 Universal Periodic
Review (UPR) of human rights in the United States by the Human
Rights Council (HRC) of the United Nations (UN). The current
report includes overview of IT system analysis, data-mining and case
studies. System analysis and data-mining show: Development and
implementation with no lawful authority, servers of unverified
identity, invalidity in implementation of electronic signatures,
authentication instruments and procedures, authorities and
permissions; discrimination in access against the public and
unrepresented (pro se) parties and in favor of attorneys; widespread
publication of invalid judicial records and dockets, leading to their
false representation and false enforcement. A series of case studies
documents the impacts on individuals' human rights, on banking
regulation, and on international matters. Significance is discussed in
the context of various media and expert reports, which opine
unprecedented corruption of the US justice system today, and which
question, whether the US Constitution was in fact suspended. Similar
findings were previously reported in IT systems of the State of
California and the State of Israel, which were incorporated, subject to
professional HRC staff review, into the UN UPR reports (2010 and
2013). Solutions are proposed, based on the principles of publicity of
the law and the separation of power: Reliance on US IT and legal
experts under accountability to the legislative branch, enhancing
transparency, ongoing vigilance by human rights and internet
activists. IT experts should assume more prominent civic duties in the
safeguard of civil society in our era.
Abstract: Many states are now committed to implementing
international human rights standards domestically. In terms of
practical governance, how might effectiveness be measured? A facevalue
answer can be found in domestic laws and institutions relating
to human rights. However, this article provides two further tools to
help states assess their status on the spectrum of robust to fragile
human rights governance. The first recognises that each state has its
own 'human rights history' and the ideal end stage is robust human
rights governance, and the second is developing criteria to assess
robustness. Although a New Zealand case study is used to illustrate
these tools, the widespread adoption of human rights standards by
many states inevitably means that the issues are relevant to other
countries. This is even though there will always be varying degrees of
similarity-difference in constitutional background and developed or
emerging human rights systems.