scholarly journals President of the Republic et al. v. Ali Ayyoub et al.

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (4) ◽  
pp. 791-798
Author(s):  
Ginevra Le Moli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
International Law ◽  
Red Sea ◽  
Sea Islands ◽  
Political Dimensions ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Egyptian Government

On April 8, 2016, the Egyptian government announced the signing of a “Convention of Demarcation of the Maritime Border” with Saudi Arabia (Convention). Under the Convention, the Red Sea Islands of Tiran and Sanafir lay in Saudi territory. The move was perceived by foreign and domestic observers as the abandonment by Egypt of a long-held territorial and maritime claim in exchange for a loan from Saudi Arabia, and it was challenged before the Egyptian courts. On January 16, 2017, the Egyptian Supreme Administrative Court rendered a judgment annulling the act of cession of the islands on the basis of the Egyptian people's entitlement over them (Judgment). The Judgment triggered a domestic judicial saga, which only ended in 2018. Aside from the intriguing political dimensions of this incident, the Judgment, while interpreting the Egyptian Constitution of 2014, sheds light on some fundamental aspects of international law, namely: the identity of the “holder” of sovereignty and its relations with the “delegatee,” i.e., the government; the contribution of human rights as an analytical frame for this issue; and the validity of a treaty concluded in violation of a state's treaty-making powers, a question for which there is limited practice.

A Call for Public Participation in the Treaty-making Process in South Africa: What can South Africa Learn from the Kingdom of Thailand?

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Retselisitsoe Phooko
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Future Situation ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction

On 2 August 2002 South Africa signed the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol on Tribunal and the Rules of Procedure Thereof, thus effectively recognising and accepting the jurisdiction of the SADC Tribunal. Among the cases received by the SADC Tribunal was a complaint involving allegations of human rights violations by the government of Zimbabwe. It ruled that the government of Zimbabwe had violated human rights. Consequently, Zimbabwe mounted a politico-legal challenge against the existence of the Tribunal. This resulted in the review of the role and functions of the Tribunal in 2011 which resulted in the Tribunal being barred from receiving new cases or proceeding with the cases that were already before it. Furthermore, on 18 August 2014, the SADC Summit adopted and signed the 2014 Protocol on the Tribunal in the SADC which disturbingly limits personal jurisdiction by denying individual access to the envisaged Tribunal, thus reducing it to an inter-state judicial forum. This article critically looks at the decision of 18 August 2014, specifically the legal implications of the Republic of South Africa’s signing of the 2014 Protocol outside the permissible procedure contained in article 37 of the SADC Protocol on the Tribunal. It proposes that South Africa should correct this democratic deficit by introducing public participation in treaty-making processes in order to prevent a future situation where the executive unilaterally withdraws from an international treaty that is meant to protect human rights at a regional level. To achieve this, this article makes a comparative study between South Africa and the Kingdom of Thailand to learn of any best practices from the latter.

Contributory Fault under International Law: A Gateway for Human Rights in ISDS?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farouk El-Hosseny ◽  
Patrick Devine
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Multinational Enterprises ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Government ◽  
Bear Creek ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract The intersection between foreign investment and human rights is gaining attention, as is evident from an increasing number of investment treaty awards analysing legal issues relating to human rights. In the recent International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) arbitration of Bear Creek v Peru, Philippe Sands QC posited, in a dissenting opinion, that the investor’s contribution to events—ie protests against its allegedly adverse environmental impact and disregard of indigenous rights, namely resulting from its ‘inability to obtain a “social licence”’—which led to the unlawful expropriation of its investment, was ‘significant and material’. He further noted that the investor’s ‘responsibilities are no less than those of the government’ and found that damages should thus be reduced. Last year, the Netherlands adopted a new model bilateral investment treaty (BIT), which allows tribunals to ‘take into account non-compliance by the investor with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises’ when assessing damages. These recent developments shed light on how states and tribunals, as part of their decision-making process, can take into account human rights in practice, and crucially in respect of damages analyses. By first dissecting the concept of contributory fault, then shedding light on the intersection of investment treaty law and human rights, as elucidated in recent jurisprudence, this article questions whether there now exists a gateway for human rights obligations (soft or hard) in the investment treaty arbitration realm through the concept of contributory fault.

scholarly journals HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLEMENTATION ON INDONESIAN NATIONALITY LAW

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-96
Author(s):  
Koesmoyo Ponco Aji
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Universal Instrument ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Main Instrument ◽  
Nationality Law

Since introduced with Universal Declaration at 1948 by United Nations Organization, human rights  has becoming a main instrument in international law and national laws. In Indonesia, regulations  concerning human rights has been legalized by Act Number 39 Year 1999. Study is needed to  explosure the extend of the rules of human rights that has determined in Indonesia Laws. This  journal analyze Indonesia Nationality Law based on universal instrument of human rights by  descriptive analysis research. Its found that Act Number 12 Year 2006 concerning Nationality of the  Republic of Indonesia has accommodate universal instrument of human rights.   

scholarly journals Hukum Internasional sebagai Alat Interpretasi dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Umbu Rauta ◽  
Ninon Melatyugra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Constitutional Tradition ◽  
The Relationship

Tulisan ini ingin menjawab dua isu utama mengenai hubungan hukum internasional dan pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi RI (MKRI). Isu pertama adalah legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai alat interpretasi dalam pengujian undang-undang, sedangkan isu kedua adalah urgensi penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MKRI. Tulisan ini merupakan penelitian hukum yang menggunakan pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan historis dalam menjelaskan perkembangan pengujian undang-undang di Indonesia sekaligus menemukan legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional oleh MK RI. Kesimpulan dari tulisan ini menegaskan bahwa hukum internasional memiliki sumbangsih yang penting dalam perannya sebagai alat interpretasi dalam proses pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, khususnya terkait hak asasi manusia. Justifikasi keabsahan praktik penggunaan hukum internasional tersebut ditarik dari tradisi ketatanegaraan yang secara implisit dikehendaki UUD NRI Tahun 1945. Manfaat positif yang diberikan hukum internasional nyatanya harus disertai juga dengan penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK RI supaya hukum internasional dapat digunakan secara tepat. Pembahasan dalam tulisan ini dibagi ke dalam empat sub bahasan inti yakni, pengujian undang-undang, penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang oleh MK, legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang, pentingnya penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK.This article intentionally answers two principal issues regarding the relationship between international law and judicial review by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The first issue is the legitimacy of international use as an interpretative tool in judicial review. The second issue talks about the necessity of urgent international law mastery by the Constitutional Court’s judges. This legal research utilizes both a conceptual approach and a historical approach to explain the development of judicial review in Indonesia, and to find legitimacy of international law by the Constitutional Court. The analysis in this article affirms that international law positively contributes as an interpretative tool in judicial review by the Constitutional Court, particularly pertaining to human rights. A justification of a legitimate international law use is withdrawn from constitutional tradition which is implicitly desired by the Indonesian Constitution (UUD NRI 1945). Since international law has provided better insights into norms, a mastery of international law should be encouraged. There are four main discussions in this article: judicial review, application of international law in judicial review process, legitimacy of international law application in judicial review, and the importance of international law mastering by Constitutional Court judges.

scholarly journals Legal Protection Model for Indonesian Migrant Workers

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (02) ◽  
pp. 291-304
Author(s):  
Anis Widyawati
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Migrant Workers ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Low Level ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

The emergence of several large cases of migrant workers in Malaysia and Singapore as well as in several Middle Eastern countries, especially Saudi Arabia, made all the nation's components flinch. Many people argue that the problem occurs because of the low level of education of migrant workers. There are also those who say that this problem occurs because employers of Indonesian labor services companies (Pengerah Jasa Penyalur Tenaga Kerja Indonesia, PJTKI, now called Perusahaan Penyalur Tenaga Kerja Indonesia Swasta, PPTKIS) are not nationally minded and only pursue profit (profit-oriented). There were also those who argued that the cases of migrant workers occurred due to the inactivity of regulative and punitive functions of the Government of the Republic of Indonesia. Based on the background above, the problem can be formulated is how the urgency of legal protection for Indonesian migrant workers abroad and how the legal protection model for Indonesian migrant workers abroad. Research carried out at BP3TKI and the Semarang Manpower and Transmigration Office underlined that legal protection for Indonesian migrant workers abroad is very important. The urgency in legal protection due to fulfillment of the rights of victims who work legally abroad but also cannot be fully implemented properly, due to differences in legal systems with migrant workers recipient countries that do not necessarily want to protect the rights of migrant workers who experience treatment not please from their own citizens. The migrant workers who work illegally the government has not been able to fully protect the rights of victims who have experienced criminal acts. The legal protection model for migrant workers currently emphasizes the fulfillment of victims’ rights who work legally abroad, such as obtaining legal assistance from a local lawyer appointed by the ambassador of the Republic of Indonesia in the country receiving the migrant workers, mentoring by psychologists and clergy, bringing the families of victims, compensation, and insurance claims. And at the same time, for migrant workers who work illegally the government has not been able to fully protect the rights of the victims.

Between Anglophone and Francophone Cameroon

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-43
Author(s):  
E. H. Ngwa Nfobin ◽  
Nchotu Veraline Nchang Minang
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Political Scene

Abstract In 2016, the reputation for stability of the Republic of Cameroon, a state made up of Francophones that constitute the majority (three quarters of the population of 25000000) and Anglophones that constitute a minority abruptly came an end when Anglophone secessionists took up arms to fight for the independence of the former Southern Cameroons. It was no surprise to keen observers of the Cameroon political scene in the last decades, If the government of the day is determined to give what it will take to keep the country united, the secessionists are equally convinced of the rectitude of their cause which they base on the principle of self-determination in international law, contesting the legality of the UN-organised plebiscite of!961 that led to the Reunification of the country. This paper assesses the legality of the claims of the protagonists for better information of all the stakeholders in the ongoing conflict..

scholarly journals Protecting the Best Interests of the Child: A Comparative Analysis of the Youth Justice Systems in Ireland, England and Scotland

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raymond Arthur
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
International Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Youth Justice ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Offending Behaviour ◽  
Best Interest Principle

AbstractIn the Republic of Ireland the government has proposed amending the Irish Constitution in order to improve children's rights. In this article I will argue that the proposed amendment represents a serious diminution in the rights historically afforded to young people who offend, disregards Ireland's commitments under international law and also ignores the well established link between child maltreatment and youth offending. The Irish approach echoes developments in the English youth justice system where the welfare concerns of young people who offend have become marginalised. I will compare the Irish and English approaches with the Scottish youth justice system which looks beyond young people's offending behaviour and provides a multi-disciplinary assessment of the young person's welfare needs. I will conclude that in Ireland, and in England, the best interest principle must be applied fully, without any distinction and integrated in all law relevant to children including laws regulating anti-social and offending behaviour.

Intervention by Invitation

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory H. Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Government ◽  
Internal Armed Conflicts

This chapter examines the debate concerning a state’s intervention in internal armed conflicts based on invitation, either from the government or from a rebel group fighting against the government. It looks at the issues that arise from intervention by invitation, particularly those relating to the territorial integrity of the state, the status of the actors involved, the nature of the consent, and implications for international law in general and for politics and human rights in particular. The chapter first considers the traditional view of intervention by invitation and the recent challenges to that view. It then discusses the negative equality principle as it applies to intervention in civil wars, as well as the link between intervention by invitation and democratic legitimacy. It also analyses the position of the UN Security Council on intervention by invitation.

Famine Crimes in International Law

2003 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Marcus
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Natural Disaster ◽  
Major Element ◽  
Foreign Minister ◽  
Soviet Government ◽  
Weather Patterns ◽  
Ethiopian Government ◽  
The Government

Some of the worst human rights catastrophes of the twentieth century were famines created or manipulated by governments. In 1932 at least five million Ukrainians starved to death, while hunger was largely unknown across the border in Russia.The Soviet government imposed disastrous grain quotas on the Ukraine, then let its own citizens literally collapse in the streets while it exported grain to further its “revolutionary” objectives.The Ethiopian famine of 1983-1985, preserved in popular memory as a natural disaster of biblical proportions, most fiercely struck those parts of the country that harbored irredentist movements. In a stunning, but telling, rejoinder to international pity for the purportedly hapless Ethiopian government, the Ethiopian foreign minister told a U.S. chargé d’affaires that “food is a major element in our strategy against the secessionists.” Since 1994, more than two million out of a population of twenty-two million in North Korea have starved to death, while South Koreans, affected by similar weather patterns, have remained completely untouched by famine. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), trying to distribute aid earmarked for famine victims, have watched helplessly as the government callously interfered and have arrived at the conclusion that “the authorities are deliberately depriving hundreds of thousands of truly needy Koreans of assistance.”

The Agreement on the Establishment of the Extraordinary African Chambers within the Senegalese Judicial System Between the Government of the Republic Of Senegal and the African Union and the Statute of the Chambers

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 1020-1036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roland Adjovi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
African Union ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

On August 22, 2012, the Republic of Senegal and the African Union (AU) signed an agreement to create a tribunal within the Senegalese judicial system to prosecute the perpetrators of international law violations in Chad between 1982 and 1990. To be called the Extraordinary African Chambers (Chambers), the tribunal is the result of years of political and judicial bargaining around Hissein Habré, the former President of Chad. The Chambers were inaugurated in February 2013, following the agreement upon a Statute of the Chambers in January 2013. On July 2, 2013, Hissein Habré was charged with crimes against humanity, torture, and war crimes, and placed in pre-trial detention. To date, Habré is the only indictee, but the Prosecutor reportedly intends to seek the indictment of five officials of Habré’s administration suspected of having committed international crimes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document