The International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the Council of Europe have developed a number of conventions relating to social security standards. As these standards are international conventions they have legal effects. In this article, we discuss the various dimensions of these effects, including interpretation, problems of supervision and the role of the conventions in national courts. The article considers how these legal effects should be assessed, and how to proceed with international social security standards.
AlstonP. (2004), ‘Core Labour Standards and the Transformation of the International Labour Rights Regime’, European Journal of International Law, 15(3), 457–521.
2.
BeckerU.von MaydellB. and NußbergerA. (eds.) (2006), Die Implementierung internationaler Sozialstandards, Baden-Baden, Nomos.
3.
BeveridgeW. (1942), Social Insurance and Allied Social Services, Cmd. 6404, London, HMSO.
4.
BijleveldL. (2007), ‘The Role of ILO Conventions and Interpretation Problems. Experiences from the Trade Union Movement’, in PenningsF. (ed.), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 101et seq.
5.
BrinkmanO. (2007), ‘The Role of International Social Security Standards from a Government's Point of View’, in PenningsF. (ed.), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 117et seq.
6.
Gomez-HerederoA. (2007), ‘Objectives and Interpretation Methods of the Conventions of the Council of Europe’, in PenningsF. (ed.), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 51et seq.
7.
GravelE. and Charbonneau-JobinC. (2003), The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations: Its Dynamic and Impact, Geneva, ILO.
8.
ILO (2001), Social security: A new consensus, Geneva.
9.
KulkeU. (2007), ‘The present and future role of ILO standards in realizing the right to social security’, International Social Security Review, 60 (2–3), 119–141.
10.
KulkeU.CichonM. and PalK.‘Changing Tides: A Revival of a Rights-Based Approach to Social Security’, in van LangendonckJ. (ed.), The Right to Social Security, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 13–35.
11.
LeppikL. (2007), ‘Experiences With International Social Security Conventions: A Point of View From Central and Eastern European States’, in PenningsF. (ed.), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 125et seq.
12.
NußbergerA. (2005), Sozialstandards im Völkerrecht. Eine Studie zu Entwicklung und Bedeutung der Normsetzung der Vereinten Nationen, der Internationalen Arbeitsorganisation und des Europarats zu Fragen des Sozialschutzes, Berlin, Duncker und Humblot.
13.
NußbergerA. (2006), ‘Evaluating the ILO's Approach to Standard-Setting and Monitoring in the Field of Social Security’, in RiedelE. (ed.), Social Security as a Human Right. Drafting a General Comment on Article 9 ECESCR – Some Challenges, Berlin, Springer Verlag, 103–116.
14.
NußbergerA. (2007), ‘Interpretation of International Social Security Standards – Problems and Prospects’, in PenningsF. (ed.), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 33et seq.
15.
PenningsF. (ed.) (2006), Between Soft and Hard Law – The Impact of International Social Security Standards on National Social Security Law, The Hague, Kluwer Law International.
16.
PenningsF. (ed.) (2007), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia.
17.
RiedelE. (2006), Social Security as a Human Right. Drafting a General Comment on Article 9 ICESCR – Some Challenges, Berlin, Springer Verlag.
18.
SchoukensP. (2007), ‘Instruments of the Council of Europe and Interpretation Issues’, in PenningsF. (ed.), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 71et seq.
19.
RobertsS. (2006), ‘The Impact of Social Security Conventions: The United Kingdom’, in PenningsF. (ed.) (2006), Between Soft and Hard Law – The Impact of International Social Security Standards on National Social Security Law, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 53–68.
20.
SchmidtA. (2003), Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention und Sozialrecht Die Bedeutung der Straßburger Rechtsprechung für das europäische und deutsche Sozialrecht, Baden-Baden, Nomos.
21.
ŚwiątkowskiA. (2007), Charter of Social Rights of the Council of Europe, Alphen aan den Rijn, Kluwer Law International.
22.
VeermanT.J. (2001), Werkgevers over ziekteverzuim, arbo en reïntegratie. Eindrapportage van het ZARA-SZW-werkgeverspanel, Den Haag, Ministerie SZW.
23.
de VriesT. (2007), ‘Difficulties of the Interpretation of Conventions: A judge's point of view’, in PenningsF. (ed.), International Social Security Standards. Current Views and Interpretation Matters, Antwerp – Oxford – Portland, Intersentia, 91–100.
