7 Immunity, 7.1 Manderlier v Organisation des Nations Unies and Etat Belge ( Ministre des Affaires Etrangères ), Tribunal Civil de Bruxelles, 11 May 1966, Journal des Tribunaux, 10 December 1966, No. 4553, 121

Author(s):  
Schmitt Pierre

This 1966 case constitutes one of the first cases in which UN immunity from jurisdiction was challenged. Apart from the question whether the UN had legal personality under domestic law, all other arguments raised by the plaintiff in this case—seeking to restrict UN immunity from jurisdiction—are still debated nowadays before domestic jurisdictions. The Brussels Civil Tribunal notably examined whether the UN’s immunity was conditional upon the latter’s respect of art. VIII, Section 29 of the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, whether the immunity could be rejected in favour of a human rights argument based on the right of access to justice, and whether it could only be invoked in relation to actions or situations that were necessary for the UN to achieve its goals. Finally, it assessed the existence of a waiver in this particular case.

2008 ◽  
Vol 77 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 105-140
Author(s):  
Julia Werzer

AbstractOn the basis of the transitional administrations in Kosovo and East Timor, this article analyzes the compatibility of the UN human rights obligations with the wide scope of immunity enjoyed by the organization and its officials. By focusing on the right to a fair trial (and especially the right of access to a court), the author submits that the almost absolute lack of judicial mechanisms to review acts of UN transitional administrations violates the local population's human rights. Although institutions such as an Ombudsperson or a Human Rights Advisory Panel (in Kosovo) have been established, they do not constitute means of protection that are reasonable alternatives to independent and impartial courts. As a corollary, the international responsibility of the United Nations is entailed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (4) ◽  
pp. 884-890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Katz Cogan

On June 11, 2013, in Stichting Mothers of Srebrenica, a chamber of the European Court of Human Rights found that the Dutch courts’ grant of immunity to the United Nations in a case brought by and on behalf of relatives of individuals killed by the Army of the Republika Srpska in and around Srebrenica in July 1995 did not run afoul of Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention). Those provisions guarantee, respectively and among other things, the right of access to a court and the right to “an effective remedy before a national authority” if any Convention right is violated. Having found that the challenged decisions accorded with Dutch obligations under the Convention, the chamber declared the application before the Court inadmissible as “manifestly ill-founded” and “rejected” it pursuant to Article 35(3)(a) and 4. The chamber’s decision was unanimous.


Author(s):  
Gillian MacNaughton ◽  
Mariah McGill

For over two decades, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has taken a leading role in promoting human rights globally by building the capacity of people to claim their rights and governments to fulfill their obligations. This chapter examines the extent to which the right to health has evolved in the work of the OHCHR since 1994, drawing on archival records of OHCHR publications and initiatives, as well as interviews with OHCHR staff and external experts on the right to health. Analyzing this history, the chapter then points to factors that have facilitated or inhibited the mainstreaming of the right to health within the OHCHR, including (1) an increasing acceptance of economic and social rights as real human rights, (2) right-to-health champions among the leadership, (3) limited capacity and resources, and (4) challenges in moving beyond conceptualization to implementation of the right to health.


2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (2) ◽  
pp. 400-406
Author(s):  
Riccardo Pavoni

With Judgment No. 238/2014, the Italian Constitutional Court (hereinafter Court) quashed the Italian legislation setting out the obligation to comply with the sections of the 2012 decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy; Greece intervening) (Jurisdictional Immunities or Germany v. Italy) that uphold the rule of sovereign immunity with respect to compensation claims in Italian courts based on grave breaches of human rights, including—in the first place—the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Court found the legislation to be incompatible with Articles 2 and 24 of the Italian Constitution, which secure the protection of inviolable human rights and the right of access to justice (operative paras. 1, 2).


Author(s):  
Robert Palmer ◽  
Damien Short ◽  
Walter Auch

Access to water, in sufficient quantities and of sufficient quality is vital for human health. The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (in General Comment 15, drafted 2002) argued that access to water was a condition for the enjoyment of the right to an adequate standard of living, inextricably related to the right to the highest attainable standard of health, and thus a human right. On 28 July 2010 the United Nations General Assembly declared safe and clean drinking water and sanitation a human right essential to the full enjoyment of life and all other human rights. This paper charts the international legal development of the right to water and its relevance to discussions surrounding the growth of unconventional energy and its heavy reliance on water. We consider key data from the country with arguably the most mature and extensive industry, the USA, and highlight the implications for water usage and water rights. We conclude that, given the weight of testimony of local people from our research, along with data from scientific literature, non-governmental organization (NGO) and other policy reports, that the right to water for residents living near fracking sites is likely to be severely curtailed. Even so, from the data presented here, we argue that the major issue regarding water use is the shifting of the resource from society to industry and the demonstrable lack of supply-side price signal that would demand that the industry reduce or stabilize its water demand per unit of energy produced. Thus, in the US context alone, there is considerable evidence that the human right to water will be seriously undermined by the growth of the unconventional oil and gas industry, and given its spread around the globe this could soon become a global human rights issue.


Author(s):  
Paul A. Rodgers

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is widely acknowledged as a landmark document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives from all over the world, the declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard for all peoples and all nations. The declaration sets out a series of articles that articulate a number of fundamental human rights to be universally protected. Article 23 of the declaration relates to the right to work and states that people have a human right to work, or engage in productive employment, and may not be prevented from doing so. The right to work is enshrined in international human rights law through its inclusion in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, where the right to work emphasizes economic, social and cultural development. This paper presents ongoing research that highlights how a disruptive co-design approach contributes to upholding UN Article 23 through the creation of a series of innovative working practices developed with people living with dementia. The research, undertaken in collaboration with several voluntary and third sector organizations in the UK, looks to break the cycle of prevailing opinions, traditional mindsets, and ways-of-doing that tend to remain uncontested in the health and social care of people living with dementia. As a result, this research has produced a series of innovative work opportunities for people living with dementia and their formal and informal carers that change the perception of dementia by showing that people living with dementia are capable of designing and making desirable products and offering much to UK society after diagnosis. In this ongoing research, the right to continue to work for people living with dementia post-diagnosis in creative and innovative ways has clearly helped to reconnect them to other people, helped build their self-esteem, identity and dignity and helped keep the person with dementia connected to their community, thus delaying the need for crisis interventions. This paper reports on a series of future work initiatives for people living with dementia where we have used design as a disruptive force for good to ensure that anyone diagnosed with dementia can exercise their right to work and engage in productive and rewarding employment.


1962 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 898-898

The following dissertation was omitted from the bibliography “Doctoral Dissertations in American Universities Concerning the United Nations, 1943–1961,” by Sidney N. Barnett, which appeared in the Summer 1962 (Vol. 16, No. 3) issue of International Organization:Tobiassen, Leif Kr. The Right of Access to the United Nations. New York University, 1959.


Author(s):  
Kovudhikulrungsri Lalin ◽  
Hendriks Aart

This chapter examines Article 20 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Personal mobility is a prerequisite for inclusion in a society. According to the European Court of Human Rights, to be mobile and to have access to transport, housing, cultural activities, and leisure is a precondition for the ‘right to establish and develop relations with other human beings’, ‘in professional or business contexts as in others’. The CRPD does not establish new rights for persons with disabilities. It is merely thought to identify specific actions that states and others must take to ensure the effectiveness and inclusiveness of all human rights and to protect against discrimination on the basis of disability. However, the fact that there is no equivalent of the right to personal mobility in any other human rights treaty makes it particularly interesting to examine the genesis and meaning of this provision.


Worldview ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 23 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 36-39
Author(s):  
Kesang Tseten

AbstractIt has been twenty years since the Tibetan uprising. Last March, Tibetans and their American supporters rallied outside the United Nations building to commemorate that uprising against Chinese troops occupying the Tibetan homeland.Roger Baldwin, founder of the American Civil Liberties Union and honorary president of the International League for Human Rights, was there calling for support of resolutions passed three times by the U.S. General Assembly, in 1959, 1961, and 1965. The U.S. called “for respect for the fundamental human rights of the Tibetan people and for their right to self-determination.” The rally, Baldwin said, was to protest the “subjection of six million people to foreign rule” and to uphold “the right to live in your own house.” The nonagenarian champion of civil liberties expressed some hope: “It may be that autonomy, semi-independence in Tibet, may be granted when China settles down into the modernization it seeks.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document