scholarly journals Kiobel and the New Battle Over Congressional Intent

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 107 ◽  
pp. 9-13
Author(s):  
David H. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Alien Tort Statute

Transnational human rights litigation under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) has been plagued by the overarching question of the domestic legal status of customary international law (CIL). Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. is the Supreme Court's second installment on the ATS. Like Sosa v. Alvarez-Machainbefore it, Kiobel does not expressly address the domestic legal status of CIL, but it does provide clues. Those clues suggest two insights: the Court views CIL as external to U.S. law, rather than as part of federal common law, and the role of CIL in future cases may be affected less by arguments about CIL's status as federal common law than by arguments about congressional intent.

scholarly journals Looking Forward Looking Back: Customary International Law, Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Shea Esterling
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract Two of the most laudable achievements of human rights are the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (udhr) and the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (undrip). Aside from advancing human rights, both are examples of soft law. For the undrip, this soft law status has generated significant controversy which is evocative of the earlier debate surrounding the legal status of the udhr. Yet unexamined, this article analyses this contemporary controversy surrounding the undrip in light of the historical debate surrounding the legal status of the udhr. Fleshing out points of convergence and divergence, these debates unearth narratives which shed light on the claims and advocacy strategies of Indigenous Peoples and the role of customary international law within human rights. Ultimately, it reveals that these narratives do little to secure the enforcement of indigenous rights.

scholarly journals Roles of the Courts in New Zealand in Giving Effect to International Human Rights - with Some History

1999 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J Keith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Common Law ◽  
General Effect ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Domestic Law

The Right Honourable Sir Kenneth Keith was the fourth speaker at the NZ Institute of International Affairs Seminar. In this article he describes and reflects upon the role of courts and judges in relation to the advancement of human rights, an issue covered in K J Keith (ed) Essays on Human Rights (Sweet and Maxwell, Wellington, 1968). The article is divided into two parts. The first part discusses international lawmakers attempting to protect individual groups of people from 1648 to 1948, including religious minorities and foreign traders, slaves, aboriginal natives, victims of armed conflict, and workers. The second part discusses how from 1945 to 1948, there was a shift in international law to universal protection. The author notes that while treaties are not part of domestic law, they may have a constitutional role, be relevant in determining the common law, give content to the words of a statute, help interpret legislation which is in line with a treaty, help interpret legislation which is designed to give general effect to a treaty (but which is silent on the particular matter), and help interpret and affect the operation of legislation to which the international text has no apparent direct relation. 

scholarly journals COMMON LAW RIGHTS: BALANCING DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL EXIGENCIES

2016 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eirik Bjorge
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
Principle Of Legality

AbstractThe protection of human rights through common law principles and values has a greater potential than has been recognised hitherto. First, the adoption at common law of the proportionality test of interferences with rights shows that, when human rights are at issue, the courts will apply an exigent test, allowing interferences only if, amongst other things, a less intrusive measure could not have been used. Secondly, the principle of legality, along with common law constitutionalism as developed recently by the Supreme Court, now means that there is a common law pendant to the rule in s. 3(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998. Thirdly, in cases where the protection offered by the Act is displaced by obligations under the Charter of the United Nations, there is no displacement of common law rights, which continue to operate. Fourthly, common law rights are more open to the influences of the customary international law of human rights than are Convention rights. These factors combine to mean that the future of common law rights is an auspicious one.

Group Identities and Human Rights: How Do We Square the Circle in International Law?

2018 ◽  
Vol 75 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 94-106
Author(s):  
Gaetano Pentassuglia
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Human Rights Practice ◽  
Group Identities ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Group Diversity ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship

The identity of groups of an ethno-cultural variety has long fallen within the remit of internati­onal human rights law. In this context, discussions have been largely concerned with the legal status of groups and/or the nature of the legal right(s) in question. While acknowledging the importance of these dimensions, in this article I seek to provide an alternative account by dis­cussing the continuities and discontinuities in articulating the very concept of group identity. I first examine the potential, limitations and eventual hybridity of human rights practice across the spectrum of minority/indigenous identities. Then, I critique a range of instabilities in human rights discourse relating to the idea of group identities, their personal scope and the role of international law. I argue that such instabilities do not merely mirror the ambivalent outlook of the relationship between human rights and group identities; they raise the broader question of whether there is a relatively more coherent way to capture the legitimacy of group claims. I conclude by pointing to the outer limits of identity claims, the understated interplay of sove­reignty and inter-group diversity, and the need to unpack the reasons why certain groups merit protection in the way they do.

5 Customary International Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley Curtis A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Common Law ◽  
State Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Executive Authority ◽  
Law Of Nations ◽  
The Status ◽  
The U.S

This chapter considers the status in the U.S. legal system of customary international law, which was historically referred to as part of the “law of nations.” After considering what the text of the Constitution suggests about this issue, the chapter discusses how courts historically applied customary international law in cases in which it was relevant and how courts referred to it (in cases such as The Paquete Habana) as “part of our law.” The chapter also recounts the modern debates and uncertainties about the current domestic legal status of customary international law. In particular, the chapter explores the possibility that customary international law might have the status of post-Erie “federal common law” and what such a status might mean for questions of jurisdiction, preemption of state law, and limitations on congressional and executive authority. It also discusses various ways in which customary international law can be important in the U.S. legal system even if it is not applied directly by the courts, such as through the Charming Betsy canon of construction. The chapter concludes by discussing controversies concerning the Supreme Court’s consideration of foreign and international law materials when interpreting the U.S. Constitution.

scholarly journals The Role of the United Nations in the Formation of Customary International Law in the Field of Human Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sufyan Droubi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Social Processes ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Constructivist Perspective ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The present work addresses the role of un in the formation of customary international law from a constructivist perspective. It dialogues with the International Law Commission and, in contrast with the latter, it argues that the importance of the un is a matter to be defined empirically. Its organs are capable of acting as norm entrepreneurs, articulating and promoting new norms. They are capable of affecting social processes in order to create pressure on the states that resist emergent norms. Thus, instead of a mere agent of states the un is capable of deeply influencing them both in behavioural and attitudinal terms. Furthermore, the un promote the formalization and institutionalization of new norms, elucidating their scope, application, and embedding them in consistently coherent amalgamation of norms and practices. Hence, it is capable of fostering the processes that lead to the crystallization of norms as customary international law.

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.: The Supreme court and the Alien Tort Statute

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P. Stewart ◽  
Ingrid Wuerth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
Alien Tort Statute

The U.S. Supreme Court has finally decidedKiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.It is the Court’s second modern decision applying the cryptic Alien Tort Statute (ATS), which was enacted in 1789. Since the 1980 court of appeals decision inFilartiga v. Pena-Iralapermitting a wide of range human rights cases to go forward under the statute’s auspices, the ATS has garnered worldwide attention and has become the main engine for transnational human rights litigation in the United States. The statute itself and the decisions that it generates also serve as state practice that might contribute to the developing customary international law of civil universal jurisdiction, immunity for defendants in human rights cases, the duties of corporations, and the right to a remedy for violations of fundamental human rights. During the 1990s, the ATS became the focal point for academic disputes about the status of customary international law as federal common law. Indeed, to the extent that the “culture wars” have played out in U.S. foreign relations law, the ATS has been their center of gravity.

The Normative Status of the Responsibility to Protect after Libya

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-Eve Loiselle
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
International Community ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Normative Status

The responsibility to protect concept has evolved rapidly in the last decade but its normative and legal status is still disputed. This paper assesses the degree of recognition the concept has attracted since its inception and the significance of resolutions 1970 and 1973 for the transformation of the responsibility to protect into a new norm of customary international law. It argues that despite claims about the centrality of the concept in the decision to intervene in Libya, the language of both resolutions, and the statements made by members of the Security Council surrounding their adoption, indicate that member states did not consider that they were legally bound to protect the population of Libya. Consequently, the intervention in Libya has not promoted the development of a legal obligation upon the international community to protect the world’s populations against gross violations of human rights.

The Legal Status of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) in Contemporary International Human Rights Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 242-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvanus Gbendazhi Barnabas
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Human ◽  
United Nations Declaration

This article explores the legal status or effect of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (undrip) in contemporary international human rights law. As a United Nations General Assembly (unga) resolution, the legal significance of undrip may appear uncertain on the surface. However, several unga resolutions do carry some legal weight with far-reaching legal implications in international law. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 (udhr) has been widely accepted, at least in part, as forming part of customary international law. Through a critical examination of relevant literature and some decisions of international, regional and national courts, this article examines whether the undrip, in whole or in part, reflects customary international law. It also considers the relationship of the undrip with other international human rights instruments, and whether it should be applied as part of general principles of law on issues that are essential to indigenous peoples such as non-discrimination, self-identification, land rights and development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document