The Protection of Human Rights in British State Practice

1948 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 174-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Schwarzenberger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
Power Politics ◽  
International Protection ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Individual ◽  
British State

The international protection of human rights has in recent years become a prominent topic in the literature on international law and on the agenda of international conferences. The explanation for this is not far to seek. The experiences of two world wars and the ‘oppression of dictators’ would in themselves be sufficient reasons for such interest. Re-assertion of the inalienable rights of man serves as a reminder of the truth that man is not meant to be merely a means to the attainment of transient ends. Though the academic character of the many schemes propounded is only too apparent, they evoke sympathy; for they voice widely-felt anxiety over the ever-increasing pressure of organized groups upon the individual, the ultimate basis of life in national and international society. Charters of human rights, suitably formulated in the abstract, have also an undeniable utility value in war and peace. They provide a convenient common denominator for allies who are primarily united in negatives, that is to say, by common enmity towards their adversaries. Once victory has eliminated the unifying element, the functions of such wartime ideologies change. They become ‘artillery of popular excitation’ in the peacetime struggles of world power politics and, like religion in former times, a ‘cloak to shadow divers factious designes.’

scholarly journals Emergence of the Individual as an International Juristic Entity: Enforcement of International Human Rights

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 534-572 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Cassidy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
The State ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Norm ◽  
State Practice ◽  
International Rights ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Individual

In this article it is contended that state practice, as evidenced in the declarations of the judiciary and the many treaties and conventions guaranteeing human rights, reveals a consensus of opinion acknowledging the individual to be an international juristic entity. So extensive is this practice that it could be seen as marking the emergence of a new customary international norm; or at least a general principle of international law, yet to crystallise into a custom; acknowledging the individual as the beneficiary of international rights. This is important for individuals and minority groups because if they possess international rights independently of the State, enforcement of their rights will no longer depend on the interests of the State. Where the State is often the offender of human rights, international law will not effectively confer any real rights unless the individual is so recognised as an inter- national juristic entity.

Protecting minorities in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) process

1994 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan E. Helgesen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Historical Evolution ◽  
International Protection ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Individual

AbstractThis article gives an analysis of the protection of minorities in the CSCE documents. It explains the historical evolution of the set of norms pertaining to the minority question in the CSCE Process. The author shows how this kind of questions, form the beginning, played a modest role in the crusade for the protection of human rights. Emphasis was on the protection of the individual, not on the group as such. Gradually, however, more importance has been given to the protection of minorities. The author is convinced that the CSCE is an interesting option for those wanting to enhance the international protection of the rights of minorities. He puts particular emphasis on the establishment of the CSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities.

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe and Other European Fora on Migration

1994 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 580-590
Author(s):  
Jan Niessen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Scientific Cooperation ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Prevention Center ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
General Secretary

In the 1970s, during the Cold War era, European and North American states began a dialogue in Helsinki which became known as the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), or the Helsinki process. For Western states the CSCE served as a platform to raise questions related to security in Europe and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Eastern European states considered the CSCE as a means to secure the postwar borders and an opportunity to discuss economic and scientific cooperation. Today, 51 European States, plus the United States of America and Canada, participate in this process. Notwithstanding the many and often intense political tensions between the West and the East during those twenty years, quite a number of conferences, seminars and other meetings were held and a great many agreements were adopted and documents issued, dealing with matters related to CSCE's three main areas of concern: security in Europe; cooperation in the fields of economics, science, technology and environment; the promotion of human rights. In response to the fundamental changes in Europe in the late 1980s, the CSCE was given a new impetus and its operational framework was broadened. CSCE offices were established in Prague (CSCE Secretariat), Vienna (Conflict Prevention Center) and Warsaw (Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) with the aim to strengthen and monitor compliance with CSCE commitments, especially in the area of human rights. A Parliamentary Assembly was established and met twice, first in Budapest and then in Helsinki. A General Secretary and a High Commissioner on Minorities were appointed, with offices in Vienna and The Hague, respectively.

scholarly journals The Right to Dignity of Refugees: A Response to Fleur Johns

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 193-195
Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Mass Migration ◽  
International Refugee Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

Fleur Johns' thesis about the increasing role of data in the verification of the condition of the world and how this impacts on international law is stimulating and bears reflection. This is an extremely interesting and innovative approach to the issue of data and its role in state engagement with mass migration. From the perspective of a scholar on international refugee law, a number of issues arise as a result of the analysis. One of the contested aspects of mass migration and refugee protection is the inherent inconsistency between two ways of thinking about human rights—the first is the duty of (some) international organizations to protect human rights in a manner which elides human rights and humanitarian law, and the second is the right of the individual to dignity, the basis of all human rights according to the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1949. The first enhances the claims of states to sovereign right to control their borders (mediated through some international organizations), while the second recognizes the international human rights duties of states and international organizations to respect the dignity of people as individuals (including refugees). Fleur is completely correct that human rights abuses are at the core of refugee movements. While there are always many people in a country who will stay and fight human rights abuses even when this results in their sacrifice, others will flee danger trying to get themselves and their families to places of safety; we are not all heroes. Yet, when people flee in more than very small numbers, state authorities have a tendency to begin the language of mass migration. The right to be a refugee becomes buried under the threat of mass migration to the detriment of international obligations. Insofar as mass migration is a matter for management, the right of a refugee is an individual right to international protection which states have bound themselves to offer.

scholarly journals INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS DURING GENOMIC RESEARCHES

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-165
Author(s):  
Екатерина Шипова
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Genomic Research ◽  
Ethical Framework ◽  
International Level ◽  
Aim Analysis ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Analysis And Synthesis ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Normative Basis

International and regional human rights law offers a normative basis for researches conducted with human participation. Despite the fact that the goal of conducting medical researches, including genomic researches, is to obtain new knowledge, it should never prevail over human rights and freedoms. This principle goes through all international legal acts relating to bio-medical researches and the human genome. Aim: analysis of the existing regulatory and ethical framework for conducting genomic researches at the international level. Methods: empirical methods are used: comparison, analysis and synthesis, generalization, description; special methods: comparative legal, logical, systemic. Results: the study examines the basic regulatory and ethical framework for conducting genomic researches at the international level. The basic principles of the protection of human rights and freedoms during genomic research are formulated, which are enshrined in international regulatory and ethical acts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document