Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) & International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) & International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)

(Averaged) │ New York, adopted 18 December 1979 (CEDAW) and 21 December 1965 (CERD) │ Overall Score: 46/70 │ Rank: #44

Introduction

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW, 1979) and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD, 1965) are core UN human rights treaties aimed at eliminating discrimination based on gender and race, respectively. CEDAW focuses on equal rights for women in political, economic, social, and cultural spheres, while CERD addresses racial discrimination in all its forms. Together, they represent widely accepted standards for non-discrimination and equality, monitored through periodic state reports and recommendations from their respective committees.

For a small entity like Liberland, which prioritizes individual liberty, voluntary association, and minimal government, these conventions are of secondary relevance. Their broad principles of equality align with basic non-discrimination values, but the treaties’ emphasis on state obligations to actively promote and enforce equality introduces elements of positive intervention that diverge from a strictly hands-off approach. In 2025, both instruments remain influential—CEDAW with 189 states parties and CERD with 182—yet their practical impact on a microstate with a small population and no significant historical patterns of systemic discrimination is limited. Neutral assessment indicates that while the conventions could serve as reference points for domestic policy, they are not high-priority commitments at this stage.

Summary

CEDAW was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 18 December 1979 and entered into force on 3 September 1981. It defines discrimination against women as any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on sex that impairs equal enjoyment of rights (Article 1). States undertake to eliminate discrimination in public and private life (Article 2), ensure equal rights in political participation (Article 7), employment (Article 11), education (Article 10), health (Article 12), and family matters (Article 16). The CEDAW Committee monitors implementation through periodic reports and issues General Recommendations (e.g., General Recommendation 40 on gender equality in climate action, adopted 2025).

CERD was adopted on 21 December 1965 and entered into force on 4 January 1969. It defines racial discrimination as any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on race, colour, descent, or national/ethnic origin (Article 1). States commit to eliminate racial discrimination in all forms (Article 2), condemn racial propaganda (Article 4), and guarantee equality before the law (Article 5). The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) oversees compliance via reports and urgent procedures.

As of December 2025, CEDAW has 189 parties and CERD 182 (UN Treaty Collection). In 2025, CEDAW reviewed states like Pakistan (new party) and issued General Recommendation 40 on climate and gender. CERD addressed racial profiling in migration contexts and continued monitoring of hate speech online. For a libertarian perspective, both treaties promote non-discrimination as a principle of individual equality, but their state-centric obligations (e.g., legislative measures, affirmative action) introduce elements of positive intervention that contrast with minimal government ideals.

Inner Content

Individual Liberty (8/10)
Averaged score of 8 reflects the conventions’ focus on protecting personal equality and autonomy by prohibiting discrimination that restricts individual rights based on gender or race. CEDAW’s guarantees of equal rights in employment, education, and political participation (Articles 7–16) empower women to pursue self-determined paths, while CERD’s protections against racial discrimination (Article 5) safeguard equal access to freedoms for all. Both treaties promote non-coercive equality, aligning with libertarian principles of treating individuals as equals regardless of group identity.

The score is moderated because the conventions call for state action to eliminate discrimination (CEDAW Article 2, CERD Article 2), which can imply regulatory or affirmative measures that may limit pure individualism. For Liberland, these treaties offer a neutral reference for ensuring non-discriminatory treatment without mandating extensive programs.

Minimal Government (5/10)
Averaged score of 5 arises from the treaties’ requirement for states to adopt legislative and policy measures to eliminate discrimination (CEDAW Article 2, CERD Article 2), which can expand governmental roles in enforcement, monitoring, and affirmative action. While implementation is flexible (progressive realization in CEDAW), the obligation to report to treaty bodies and address recommendations introduces administrative burdens.

Free Markets (7/10)
The 7 in free markets stems from protections against discrimination in employment and economic life (CEDAW Article 11, CERD Article 5), which support equal participation in markets and reduce barriers to opportunity.

Non-Aggression (7/10)
A 7 in non-aggression, as the conventions promote social stability by addressing discrimination that can fuel conflict or exclusion.

Decentralization (6/10)
The 6 in decentralization reflects national implementation flexibility, but treaty body monitoring introduces some central oversight.

Feasibility (8/10)
An 8 in feasibility, with near-universal ratification (189/182 parties) and straightforward compliance for small states.

Citizen Consent (6/10)
A 6 in citizen consent, as state ratification implies democratic agreement, but positive obligations may not fully reflect individual preferences.

Cost (1–10)
Cost: 8

• Ratification: Low ($500–$2,000 for UN deposit and legal review).
• Compliance: Low to moderate ($5,000–$15,000/year for periodic reporting to CEDAW/CERD Committees every 4–5 years; possible minor legal adjustments).
• No dues. Minimal for small states; mainly staff time for reports.

Conclusion

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) are foundational UN human rights instruments, but for Liberland they represent lower-priority considerations. CEDAW and CERD, while widely ratified, emphasize state-driven measures to eliminate discrimination, which contrasts with our preference for voluntary, minimal-intervention approaches. Their principles of equality are broadly compatible with our values, but the administrative burden of reporting and potential for regulatory expansion make them secondary at this stage. Neutral evaluation suggests that while these treaties could serve as references for non-discriminatory policy, they are not essential commitments for our current priorities. Focus remains on higher-impact commercial, mobility, and governance frameworks, with periodic review of human rights instruments as needs evolve. This averaged entry reflects their moderate relevance to Liberland’s development trajectory.