Promoting the Rights of Victims in Under-Resourced Places by Using Science and Technology That Can be Used by Ordinary People, to Deal with Human Rights Violations: Bolstering the Right to the Truth

How can international organizations (IOs) like the United Nations (UN) and their implementing partners be held accountable if their actions and policies violate fundamental human rights? Political scientists and legal scholars have shed a much-needed light on the limits of traditional accountability when it comes to complex global governance. However, conventional studies on IO accountability fail to systematically analyze a related, puzzling empirical trend: human rights violations that occur in the context of global governance do not go unnoticed altogether; they are investigated and sanctioned by independent third parties. This book puts forward the concept of pluralist accountability, whereby third parties hold IOs and their implementing partners accountable for human rights violations. We can expect pluralist accountability to evolve if a competitive environment stimulates third parties to enact accountability and if the implementing actors are vulnerable to human rights demands. Based on a comprehensive study of UN-mandated operations in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Kosovo, the European Union Troika’s austerity policy, and global public–private health partnerships in India, this book demonstrates how competition and human rights vulnerability shape the evolution of pluralist accountability in response to diverse human rights violations, such as human trafficking, the violation of the rights of detainees, economic rights, and the right to consent in clinical trials. While highlighting the importance of studying alternative accountability mechanisms, this book also argues that pluralist accountability should not be regarded as a panacea for IOs’ legitimacy problems, as it is often less legalized and might cause multiple accountability disorder.

Download Full-text

Child appropriations and irregular adoptions: Activism for the “right to identity,” justice, and reparation in Argentina and Chile

Childhood ◽

10.1177/09075682211028648 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 090756822110286

Author(s):

Soledad Gesteira ◽

Irene Salvo Agoglia ◽

Carla Villalta ◽

Karen Alfaro Monsalve

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

The Right

In this article we examine the process of construction and transformation of the meanings surrounding the serious violations of the Right to Identity in Argentina and Chile, which encompass from child appropriations during dictatorships to so called “irregular adoptions.” We inquire about how activists have built their public claims of justice and reparation. We discuss the singularities and differences of these processes in both countries and the current challenges, particularly in the construction of those affected as victims of human rights violations.

Download Full-text

THE POSSIBILITY OF THE RIGHT TO RELIGION EMERGING AS A JUS COGENS NORM (PART 2)

Obiter ◽

10.17159/obiter.v37i3.11519 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 37 (3) ◽

Author(s):

David Abrahams ◽

Tayla Dye

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Community ◽

Previous Article ◽

Republic Of Korea ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Jus Cogens ◽

The Right ◽

Near Future

This article follows a previous article published in Obiter Vol 2 of 2016. In that article the concept of jus cogens and its role in the international community, together with the nature of the right to religion, were discussed. In Part Two, the seriousness of such human rights violations needs to be appreciated by the international community at large. To this end, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea will serve as a case study, examining the extent of the DPRK’s compliance of its obligations vis-à-vis the right to religion. This should ultimately lead to an understanding as to why the right to religion emerging as a jus cogens norm will not solve the problem of enforcement, and even if it could, due to the uncertainty surrounding the formation of jus cogens it is unlikely that other human rights will be added to the list in the near future.

Download Full-text

Human rights violations during the COVID-19 pandemic

International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare ◽

10.1108/ijhrh-11-2020-0097 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽

Author(s):

Mohammed R.M. Elshobake

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Content Type ◽

International Human ◽

The Right

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with international human rights law. Design/methodology/approach Through doctrinal and legal study and content analysis, this paper analyses the important relevant legal provisions under International human rights law and applies these provisions to the reality of managing the COVID-19 crisis to identify the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 outbreak. This research paper considered as a review paper in that it provides a review of the most prominent measures taken during the COVID-19 crisis, which constitutes violations of international human rights law. Findings It is concluded that some measures that have been taken by countries to confront the COVID-19 pandemic have constituted violations of human rights and did not comply with the legal conditions to restrict human rights. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the ugly fractures in health-care systems, health inequities, racism and discrimination, Undermining the right to freedom of expression and the right to access information, gross negligence in protecting detainees from COVID-19 infection, all of these constitute clear violations of the principles of international human rights law. Research limitations/implications The spread of COVID-19 has not stopped, and its effects still continue, including human rights violations. Therefore, this paper cannot enumerate all human rights violations that occur during the spread of COVID-19. Practical implications Based on the results in this paper, governments need to be more prepared to face any health crisis at all levels including health care, which would reduce human rights violations. Social implications This research paper reflects positively on the social reality, as the adoption of its recommendations leads to the provision of adequate health care to all members of society in accordance with the principles of human rights, granting them the right to access information, protecting their right to freedom of expression, reducing the phenomenon of racism and discrimination and providing adequate health care to all detainees. Originality/value This paper studies an up-to-date topic that we are still living and seeing its effects. The benefit of this paper is to provide recommendations that protect human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Download Full-text

Global Application of Intersectionality Theory

10.1093/oso/9780198868835.003.0003 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 27-53

Author(s):

Johanna Bond

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Partner Violence ◽

The United States ◽

Black Girls ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Gender Based Violence ◽

Gender Based ◽

The Many ◽

Inadequate Prenatal Care ◽

The Right

This chapter delves into examples of global intersectionality to illustrate the need for a thorough and consistent intersectional approach to human rights violations around the world. Although it is impossible to provide an exhaustive analysis of the many and varied types of intersectional human rights violations, this chapter offers multiple examples of intersectional human rights violations, including (1) gender-based violence, including both non-state actors who commit intimate partner violence and sexual violence in armed conflict; (2) maternal mortality and inadequate prenatal care in Brazil; (3) coerced sterilization among the Roma in Europe; (4) disproportionate discipline and punishment of Black girls in the United States; and (5) inconsistent LGBTQI rights. These case studies implicate different human rights, including the right to be free from violence, the right to education, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Each example demonstrates how a more nuanced, intersectional lens is necessary to capture the rights at stake and to contemplate appropriate remedies for victims of human rights violations in full.

Download Full-text

Well-Being and Human Rights

Structural Injustice ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190053987.003.0005 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 116-145

Author(s):

Madison Powers

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Well Being ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Institutional Agents ◽

Pragmatic Approach ◽

Nation States ◽

The Right ◽

Crucial Part ◽

Control Theories

This chapter demonstrates how the conception of well-being developed in this book is a crucial part of the rationale for human rights. A variant of interest-based theories of human rights is defended against a number of objections. These objections include criticisms raised by proponents of control theories, dignity-based theories, and critics who maintain that the function of human rights is not limited to considerations of how human rights matter to the right-holder. The argument builds on an account of the contingent, but widespread linkage between structural unfairness and human rights violations to defend a pragmatic approach to problems of assigning responsibility for human rights. It addresses the specification of counterpart duties that correlate with human rights claims, and it offers guidance on questions pertaining to the more general responsibilities of institutional agents, paradigmatically nation-states, for maintaining background conditions of structural fairness.

Download Full-text

The Ring of Steel: Extraterritorial Migration Controls in Indonesia and Libya and the Complicity of Australia and Italy

Human Rights Law Review ◽

10.1093/hrlr/ngz024 ◽

2019 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Azadeh Dastyari ◽

Asher Hirsch

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Right To Life ◽

Degrading Treatment ◽

The Right ◽

Italian Territory

Abstract This article provides an analysis of cooperative non-entrée policies in Australia and Italy. Through their funding, training and interception activities, Australia and Italy have aided and assisted Indonesia and Libya, respectively, in the commission of a number of internationally wrongful acts against refugees and migrants. These wrongful acts include refoulement; arbitrary detention; violations of the right to life; cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment; and violations of the right to leave. These human rights violations benefit Australia and Italy by preventing refugees and migrants from entering Australian and Italian territory. They are extensively reported and widely known. Neither Australia nor Italy can claim ignorance of the circumstances of these acts. In the light of this analysis, it is argued that, under Article 16 of the Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Australia and Italy are therefore responsible for their complicity in human rights violations in Indonesia and Libya, respectively.

Download Full-text

Mobile Devices and the Prevention of Human Rights Violations

Research Anthology on Empowering Marginalized Communities and Mitigating Racism and Discrimination ◽

10.4018/978-1-7998-8547-4.ch026 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 553-572

Author(s):

Ikbal Maulana

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Mobile Devices ◽

Public Awareness ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Ordinary People ◽

Worrying Trend ◽

Multiple Categories

With mobile devices always in their possession, users can report breaking events, including the violation of human rights perpetrated by states. Mobile devices have given ordinary people the power to acquire and produce any information, which in turn make power more dispersed than before, reducing the power of the states. However, there is a worrying trend, namely, the increasing number of human rights violations by ordinary people. Since human rights violations by a mob are difficult to stop and the violations of human rights have grown out of prejudices, it is better to prevent the spread of prejudices as early as possible. It can be done by counter-mobilization of alternative narratives, and promotion of public awareness that anyone has multiple categories. Promoting mutual interdependence between groups will also reduce prejudices.

Download Full-text

Part III The Right to Justice, C Restrictions on Rules of Law Justified By Action to Combat Impunity, Principle 29 Restrictions on the Jurisdiction of Military Courts

10.1093/law/9780198743606.003.0033 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Aoláin Fionnuala Ní

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Theoretical Framework ◽

Historical Background ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Domestic Courts ◽

Military Law ◽

The Right ◽

The Military

Principle 29 deals with restrictions on the jurisdiction of military courts. Under this Principle, the adjudication of human rights violations by military courts is explicitly excluded, and ordinary domestic courts are mandated as the only appropriate venue of judicial oversight. Nevertheless, military courts remain functionally important for the routine and uncontroversial deployment of military law consistent with international law. The chapter first provides a contextual and historical background on Principle 29 before discussing its theoretical framework and how military courts are used in various countries such as Ireland and Turkey. Issues arising when civilians find themselves within the jurisdiction of military courts are also examined, along with the difficulties of ensuring fair trials in military courts. This chapter shows that military courts, while certainly serving important functions within the military forces of states, remain subject to human rights and humanitarian law compliance.

Download Full-text

Part III The Right to Justice, C Restrictions on Rules of Law Justified By Action to Combat Impunity, Principle 22 Nature of Restrictive Measures

10.1093/law/9780198743606.003.0026 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Pinzauti Giulia

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Theoretical Framework ◽

Historical Background ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Criminal Prosecution ◽

Legal Systems ◽

Domestic Courts ◽

Rules And Principles ◽

The Right ◽

Restrictive Measures

Principle 22 is an overarching guideline to states on the nature of the safeguards and restrictions that they may need to adopt and enforce in order to counter impunity more effectively. It is an umbrella provision listing certain rules or principles in national legal systems which might impede the criminal prosecution or other scrutiny of human rights violations by domestic courts. These rules and principles include those regulating amnesty, prescription (statutory limitations), extradition, the right to asylum, due obedience, repentance, the jurisdiction of military courts and the irremovability of judges. This chapter first provides a contextual and historical background on Principle 22 before discussing its theoretical framework and how the safeguards or restrictive measures outlined in Principle 22 have been applied in practice.

Download Full-text