Human rights obligations in military occupation

2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (885) ◽  
pp. 317-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Lubell
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Military Occupation ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Contextual Approach ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Legal Challenges

AbstractThis article examines the applicability of international human rights law in situations of military occupation. Proceeding from the position that human rights obligations can exist in these circumstances, the article provides an analysis of the precise modalities of application. It examines the tests for the determination of human rights applicability, and how these are linked to the concept of occupation. Finally, it recognizes the practical and legal challenges to the implementation of human rights obligations, and argues for a contextual approach that provides for human rights protection while recognizing the realities of military occupation.

The Fallacy of Effective Human Rights Protection under Relevant Treaty Law when Armed Groups Commit Violations

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tilman Rodenhäuser
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
International Human

Chapter 5 adds to the contemporary discourse on human rights obligations of non-state armed groups by showing that in many situations, there is a clear legal need for these obligations. This chapter first engages in the debate on whether and to what extent certain human rights treaties address armed groups directly. Second, it shows that under the law of state responsibility, states are generally not responsible for human rights violations committed by non-state entities. Third, it recalls that under international human rights law, states have an obligation to protect human rights against violations committed by armed groups. However, it argues that because this cannot be a strict obligation but is one that depends on states’ capacities and the particular circumstances, often this framework cannot adequately protect individuals against human rights violations by armed groups. The result is a legal and practical need for human rights obligations of non-state armed groups.

Part VII Assessments, Ch.37 Compliance

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gori Gisella
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Conceptual Tool ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Protection Mechanisms ◽  
International Human

This article examines the compliance of States with international human rights law. It explains the distinction between judicial and non-judicial compliance mechanisms, focusing on the United Nations (UN) in the context of non-judicial mechanisms and the Council of Europe and the Organization of American States (OAS) in the context of judicial mechanisms. It highlights the central role of the principle of subsidiarity in all international mechanisms for human rights protection and explains that this principle provides a conceptual tool for understanding the relation between the role of states in human rights protection and the role of the international human rights protection mechanisms that states create at the global and regional levels.

10. Substantive rights—general comments

2019 ◽  
pp. 171-184
Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
International Human ◽  
Almost All

This chapter discusses the reality of human rights protection within States. It addresses the limitations of various rights and the extent to which States can deviate from responsibility in terms of international human rights law. It covers issues such as State discretion in selecting and applying rights, particularly through derogations, reservations, declarations, and denunciations. These are issues which impact on almost all human rights and almost all States in some way.

Human Rights Protection the ASEAN Way: Non-Intervention and the Newest Regional Human Rights System

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 276-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Aguirre ◽  
Irene Pietropaoli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Structural Problems ◽  
Civil Society Participation ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Standards

The Association of South East Nations (ASEAN) is a regional body working towards the integration of disparate states. The creation of a human rights mechanism, a critical part of this integration, confronts the central philosophy of ASEAN: deference to conservative notions of sovereignty and non-interference, often referred to as the ASEAN Way. This doctrine has been necessary to promote cooperation and trust between these neighbours but may prove incongruent with a human rights body that attempts to monitor and enforce international human rights law. This article looks at the challenges posed by the ASEAN way and how they developed in section 2. Section 3 follows with an examination of the ASEAN Way’s impact on the development of the regional human rights bodies. Section 4 addresses structural problems arising from the ASEAN Way: the limited human rights mandate; the lack of civil society participation; and the lack of common human rights standards among ASEAN states. Overall, this article examines the central irony that the while the ASEAN Way is necessary, it undermines the regional human rights body.

Against All Odds: How Single and Divorced Migrant Mothers were Eventually able to Claim their Right to Respect for Family Life

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah van Walsum
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
International Human

AbstractFeminist and post-colonial theorists challenge the supposed neutrality of international human rights law which, in their view, should be seen as a product of asymmetrical power relations. On the basis of this premise, it seems unlikely that single and divorced migrant mothers from outside of the EU will be able to mobilize international human rights law to their advantage. And yet, after twenty years of litigation, single and divorced migrant mothers in the Netherlands are now finally able to claim their right to respect for family life and reunite with children left behind in their countries of origin. This chapter seeks to explain how this increase in human rights protection could come about. While some litigants are less powerful than others, they do not always stand alone. Increasing the scope of analyses makes it possible to include case law produced by more powerful actors. Their gains can offer strategic opportunities to those less powerful.

11. Substantive rights—general comments

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
International Human ◽  
Almost All

This chapter discusses the reality of human rights protection within States. It addresses the limitations of various rights and the extent to which States can deviate from responsibility in terms of international human rights law. It covers issues such as State discretion in selecting and applying rights, particularly through derogations, reservations, declarations, and denunciations. These are issues which impact on almost all human rights and almost all States in some way.

scholarly journals International Human Rights Law and the Accountability of Civil Society Organizations: the case of the INGO accountability charter/accountable now

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 215-235
Author(s):  
Alexandre Fontenelle-Weber
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
International Human ◽  
Analytical Tools

The central objective of this Paper is to develop an analysis of the position occupied by civil society organizations in International Human Rights Law, specifically in human rights protection at the international level. In this regard, the proposed examination will focus on the discussion regarding the accountability of said organizations, at this level.  Introducing, from a historical perspective, the form of interaction of these actors with supranational organizations, it is possible to draw conclusions regarding its legitimacy and its accountability or lack thereof. By drawing on the concept of legitimacy as used in the international sphere, to which the idea of accountability is directly linked, it can be developed certain analytical tools that permit the identification of specific aspects of accountability that are fundamental in understanding the mode of operation of civil society organizations in International Human Rights Law. As a practical example, it is studied the case of the INGO Accountability Charter, currently known as Accountable Now.     Recebido em: agosto/2018.Aprovado em: dezembro/2018.

The Missing Elephant in the Room—the Jurisdiction of International Human Rights Tribunals over International Humanitarian Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-408
Author(s):  
Ka Lok Yip
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Practical Implications

Abstract Treaty-based tribunals that render binding decisions on states under international human rights law (IHRL) have long engaged with international humanitarian law (IHL) in their judgements but little attention has been given to the basis of their jurisdiction, if any, to do so. By revisiting fundamental questions on the jurisdictional basis of international tribunals, this article presents a methodological challenge to the uncritical engagement with IHL by certain IHRL tribunals. After surveying the jurisdiction of different IHRL tribunals explicitly founded on treaties, the article seeks not only to justify, but also delimit, the inherent jurisdiction of IHRL tribunals to consider IHL for interpretive purpose, in contrast to directly applying it to the dispute. Finally, the article analyses the substantive and practical implications of stricter observance of the jurisdictional limits of IHRL tribunals on the interpretation of IHRL, the determination of ‘absent’ states’ legal interest under IHL and the future of IHL dispute settlement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document