Revision history [back]

I agree with idea that there should be a combination of both; ratification of HR conventions as well as signatory to MDG/ SDGs. I would like share an example of Nepal. Nepal has ratified most of the HR conventions and most of their optional protocols, but its MDG, which seem to motivate our Government to set national target on water and sanitation - we have national target of universal coverage by 2017. Because in MDG/ SDGs, besides other commitments it has defined time frame as well, where one can evaluate its own progress. Where as ratifying conventions obliges country to submit report once in few years, which can be escaped as well (as far as I know). Just sharing my personal opinion.

I agree with idea that there should be a combination of both; both ratification of HR human rights conventions as well as signatory and signing up to MDG/ SDGs.

I would like share an the example of Nepal. Nepal Nepal: the country has ratified most of the HR international human rights conventions and most of their optional protocols, but its MDG, it was the MDGs which seem to motivate have motivated our Government to set a national target targets on water and sanitation - we have national target that of universal coverage by 2017. Because in MDG/

This might have been because MDGs / SDGs, besides other commitments it has commitments, have a defined time frame timeframe as well, where one states can evaluate its their own progress. Where as progress - whereas ratifying conventions obliges country to submit report reports once in few years, which they can be escaped as well get out of (as far as I know). Just sharing my personal opinion.