Crafting human rights in a constitution: Gay rights in the Cayman Islands and the limits to global norm diffusion

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM VLCEK
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Cayman Islands ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Norm Diffusion ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Norm ◽  
Historical Trajectory ◽  
Overseas Territories ◽  
Human Rights Norms

AbstractThis paper considers the introduction of a bill of rights to a territory’s constitution as an example of the transnational transfer of norms. Using the case of the Cayman Islands Constitution promulgated in 2009 this analysis looks specifically at the creation of its bill of rights in light of local debate following the legalisation of homosexuality forced by the United Kingdom in 2000. The unique constitutional structure framing the political relationship between the United Kingdom and its Overseas Territories is outlined as explanation for the nature of the Cayman constitution, as well as the historical trajectory leading to it. This trajectory informs the context for the local debate over homosexuality and substantial local resistance to the transfer of an emerging European norm recognizing same-sex marriage to a Caribbean island firm in its Christian heritage. This case interrogates the transference and reproduction of ‘global human rights norms’ in the construction of constitutions in postcolonial societies anticipated by proponents of ‘norm diffusion’ and highlights the contested acceptance offered exogenous norms by the postcolonial society.

scholarly journals Protection Against Slavery in New Zealand

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katja Heesterman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Modern Problem ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
European Court

The decision of the European Court of Human Rights in CN v The United Kingdom highlighted that slavery remains a modern problem. It may no longer resemble the traditional picture of slavery dramatically presented by Hollywood but it is no less an issue. Modern slavery is less visible; it is hidden away within homes, normal workplaces or in overseas factories. This article argues that New Zealand's current treatment of slavery is inadequate, exemplified by the absence of prosecutions. Thorough protection of slavery requires clear definitions that courts can easily apply. This article explores how the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 could be used to remedy this situation. This article argues for the application of the Drittwirkung concept to give a horizontal effect to a right against slavery. Furthermore it is argued that New Zealand is under positive obligations to actively prevent rights violations, not merely avoid them. These positive obligations are a key component of modern human rights jurisprudence and can be read into the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This article speculates that one action courts could take is to undertake the development of a tort action against slavery.

17. Freedoms and liberties in the United Kingdom

2020 ◽  
pp. 407-450
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Uk

This chapter is concerned with how freedoms and liberties might be protected in the UK. It begins with an attempt to distinguish between human rights and civil liberties, whilst recognizing that this is by no means a straightforward task. It then covers political and social or economic rights, the traditional means of protecting civil liberties in the UK, the European Convention on Human Rights, the incorporation of the Convention into English law, and judicial deference/discretionary areas of judgment. The Human Rights Act 1998 is reviewed from a protection of rights perspective. Finally, the question of a Bill of Rights for the UK is considered.

The British Overseas Territories of Anguilla, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat, and Turks and Caicos Islands

2020 ◽  
pp. 187-215
Author(s):  
Susan Dickson
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Virgin Islands ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Cayman Islands ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Look Ahead ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Overseas Territories

This chapter starts with a summary of the historical background to these five British overseas territories in the Caribbean. It goes on to describe their constitutional status and their constitutional relationship with the United Kingdom, examining the powers and position of the United Kingdom Parliament, the Crown and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. It describes in detail the powers of the Governor in these territories, as well as their governance in accordance with their respective constitutions, looking at executive, legislative and judicial powers. The chapter examines the protection of human rights in the territories and the exercise of their external relations. It concludes with a look ahead to the future for these territories. The chapter includes copious references to the relevant constitutional provisions, relevant legislation and case law.

The Prospective (Ir)Relevance of Section 3 of the Human Rights Act: A Comparative Perspective

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benedict Coxon
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Constitutional Theory ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Principle Of Legality

Abstract This article suggests that the power conferred on United Kingdom courts by section 3(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 (UKHRA) is legitimate as a matter of the interpretation of that provision. It sets out a contextual approach to the interpretation of section 3(1) consistent with general principles of statutory interpretation. This differs from most analyses of this provision, whether comparative or jurisdiction-specific, which tend to use constitutional theory as the framework for analysis. The article adopts a comparative perspective, applying the same approach to section 6 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA). It concludes that the approach of New Zealand courts to section 6 is also correct as a matter of the interpretation of that provision. The different approaches of United Kingdom and New Zealand courts to these equivalent provisions is explained by a number of important differences between the UKHRA and NZBORA; including especially the context in which each statute falls to be interpreted. Some implications of this analysis for the development of the principle of legality in the United Kingdom in the event of repeal of section 3(1) of the UKHRA are briefly identified.

scholarly journals The Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Parliamentary Sovereignty ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Victorian Charter) was enacted 16 years after the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (NZBORA). Like the NZBORA and the United Kingdom’s Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), the Victorian Charter is an ordinary act of Parliament which seeks to preserve parliamentary sovereignty by limiting the courts’ ability to strike down legislation. The Victorian Charter drew heavily upon the experience of New Zealand and the United Kingdom. The Victorian Charter expressly adopts some aspects of the NZBORA and the HRA (such as the interpretative rule), rejects other aspects (such as the ability to obtain damages for breach), but also includes some provisions that are quite different from either the NZBORA or the HRA. 

scholarly journals The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act: going beyond declarations

2014 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Hickman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Cultural Pressures

The process of capturing and entrenching fundamental rights remains very much a live one in both New Zealand and the United Kingdom. In both countries there is pressure to move on from the current bill of rights legislation: the UK Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA). While the two jurisdictions are subject to quite different political and cultural pressures, there remains a great deal of scope for exchange of ideas and experiences. 

scholarly journals Protection Against Slavery in New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Katja Heesterman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Modern Problem ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
European Court

<p>The European Court of Human Rights decision in CN v The United Kingdom highlighted that slavery remains a modern problem. It may no longer resemble the traditional picture of slavery dramatically presented by Hollywood but it is no less on an issue. Modern slavery is less visible; it is hidden away within homes, normal workplaces or in overseas factories. This paper argues that New Zealand’s current treatment of slavery is inadequate exemplified by the absence of prosecutions. Thorough protection of slavery requires clear definitions that courts can easily apply. This paper explores how the Bill of Rights could be used to remedy this situation. This paper argues for the application of the Drittwirkung concept to give a horizontal effect to a right against slavery. Furthermore it is argued that New Zealand is under positive obligations to actively prevent rights violations, not merely avoid them. These positive obligations are a key component of modern human rights jurisprudence and can be read into the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This paper speculates that one action courts could take is to undertake the development of a tort action against slavery.</p>

scholarly journals Protection Against Slavery in New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Katja Heesterman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Modern Human ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Modern Problem ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
European Court

<p>The European Court of Human Rights decision in CN v The United Kingdom highlighted that slavery remains a modern problem. It may no longer resemble the traditional picture of slavery dramatically presented by Hollywood but it is no less on an issue. Modern slavery is less visible; it is hidden away within homes, normal workplaces or in overseas factories. This paper argues that New Zealand’s current treatment of slavery is inadequate exemplified by the absence of prosecutions. Thorough protection of slavery requires clear definitions that courts can easily apply. This paper explores how the Bill of Rights could be used to remedy this situation. This paper argues for the application of the Drittwirkung concept to give a horizontal effect to a right against slavery. Furthermore it is argued that New Zealand is under positive obligations to actively prevent rights violations, not merely avoid them. These positive obligations are a key component of modern human rights jurisprudence and can be read into the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. This paper speculates that one action courts could take is to undertake the development of a tort action against slavery.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document