Conclusion
In order to assess whether the individual petition system provided for in the Optional Protocol has 'immeasurably' improved the enforcement of human rights norms, it is first necessary to determine how any improvements should be measured. Opsahl believes that it is 'unfair to gauge progress in this field from one hundred percent. Rather, one has to measure from zero.' If the Optional Protocol has indeed been effective in improving the enforcement of global human rights norms, the result would be 'better implementation, fewer violations, and more ratifications.' The legal mandate that the Committee was given for its task was anything but clear. However, the Committee found strength in this weakness, as they show themselves to be courageous in interpreting any ambiguities in favour of that which offers the highest level of protection to the individual. In doing this it has 'strengthened the core of [its] supervisory machinery.' The Committee has also commanded much respect and recognition for the impartial, quasi-judicial manner in which it processes complaints and presents its views. Although faced with financial, administrative and institutional constraints, the Committee has made admirable efforts to assert itself and also to raise its profile. Nonetheless, in the final analysis, the 'ultimate concern of an alleged victim is of course with the observance of the [Committee's] views' by the States parties. …
