14 Remedies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clooney Amal ◽  
Webb Philippa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Financial Compensation ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Miscarriage Of Justice

This chapter examines the right to a remedy for fair trial violations. The right to a remedy is recognised in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and regional human rights treaties, many of which also recognise a specific right to compensation when there has been a miscarriage of justice. Financial compensation and declaratory relief are awarded most frequently although some international bodies also regularly award more far-reaching remedies, such as the release of the defendant, the quashing of a conviction, a reduction in the sentence, a retrial of the defendant, or reforms to legislation. This chapter compares the practice of international and regional courts and human rights bodies and comments on states’ record of compliance with such remedies. It concludes that greater attention should be paid to this issue by practitioners and decision-makers at international bodies.

The Right to Compensation for Wrongful Conviction/Miscarriage of Justice in International Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-244
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Wrongful Conviction ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
African Commission ◽  
Miscarriage Of Justice

Human rights treaties (including Article 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr); Article 3 of the Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; and Article 10 of the American Convention on Human Rights) explicitly protect the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights is silent on this right. The Human Rights Committee, the European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have developed rich jurisprudence on the ambit of the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. States have adopted different approaches to give effect to their obligation under Article 14(6) of the iccpr. Relying on the practice and/or jurisprudence from States in Africa, Europe, North America, Asia, and Latin America and on the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee, the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the article illustrates the approaches taken by some States to give effect to Article 14(6) of the iccpr and the relevant regional human rights instruments.

The Right to Life and the Progressive Abolition of the Death Penalty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christof Heyns ◽  
Thomas Probert ◽  
Tess Borden
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Global Level ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Global Norms ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

This chapter begins with the contention that global norms surrounding the death penalty have evolved considerably over the last fifty years. It reviews the extent to which international human rights treaties, including the United Nations (UN) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and some of the regional human rights treaties, allow for and indeed arguably require the progressive abolition of the death penalty. It then further examines the trends at a global level in terms of the imposition of the death penalty, and some of the potential spaces for advocacy or litigation, in both retentionist and abolitionist states, aimed at reducing and ultimately ending the practice.

Introduction

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clooney Amal ◽  
Webb Philippa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Preparatory Work

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the right to a fair trial. An unfair trial can be devastating to an individual defendant—removing their liberty, destroying their reputation, even taking away their life. Unfair trials are also damaging to entire societies as they are used to undermine democracy and oppress minorities. As such, the right to a fair trial is one of the most fundamental components of human rights. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is the starting point and organising principle of the right to a fair trial, but the scope and content of the right is not always easy to discern given the multitude of international-law sources that define it. Understanding the right to a fair trial may require reference not only to its interpretation by courts, treaty bodies, rapporteurs, experts, and scholars, but also the preparatory work of the treaty and the circumstances of its conclusion.

scholarly journals Theoretical and practical aspects regarding solving civil cases in an optimal and predictable time

2019 ◽  
pp. 11-19
Author(s):  
MĂDĂLINA DINU
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
The Other ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Constitutional Level ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right

The existence of a fair trial implies the granting of guarantees to the litigant in order to ensure compliance with the principle enshrined, first and foremost, at the constitutional level, but also in the Civil Procedure Code, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on civil and political rights. The fair trial involves, on the one hand, the right of the litigant to a (independent and impartial) court, and on the other hand, the resolution of the case in an optimal and predictable time. In order to respect the optimal and predictable time frame for solving a civil case, the legislator has established a series of obligations, terms and penalties in case of non-compliance by the participants in the trial, but also by the court invested in solving the case.

The Economic and Political Determinants of Human (Including Health) Rights

1978 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicente Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Individual Property ◽  
Socioeconomic Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Fair Wages ◽  
The Right ◽  
The U.S

This paper presents an analysis and critique of the U.S. government's current emphasis on human rights; and (a) its limited focus on only some civil and political components of the original U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, and (b) its disregard for economic and social rights such as the rights to work, fair wages, health, education, and social security. The paper discusses the reasons for that limited focus and argues that, contrary to what is widely presented in the media and academe: (1) civil and political rights are highly restricted in the U.S.; (2) those rights are further restricted in the U.S. when analyzed in their social and economic dimensions; (3) civil and political rights are not independent of but rather intrinsically related to and dependent on the existence of socioeconomic rights; (4) the definition of the nature and extension of human rights in their civil, political, social, and economic dimensions is not universal, but rather depends on the pattern of economic and political power relations particular to each society; and (5) the pattern of power relations in the U.S. society and the western system of power, based on the right to individual property and its concomitant class structure and relations, is incompatible with the full realization of human rights in their economic, social, political, and civil dimensions. This paper further indicates that U.S. financial and corporate capital, through its overwhelming influence over the organs of political power in the U.S. and over international bodies and agencies, is primarily responsible for the denial of the human rights of the U.S. population and many populations throughout the world as well.

The Right to Enter One’s Own Country: The Conflict between the Jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee and the Travaux Préparatoires of Article 12(4) of the iccpr

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-123
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Abstract Article 12(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) provides that ‘[n]o one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.’ The jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee shows that Committee members have often disagreed on the question of whether the right under Article 12(4) is reserved for citizens only or it can be claimed by non-citizens who consider the countries in which they were born or they have lived for longer periods as their own. In its earlier case law, the Committee held that Article 12(4) is applicable to nationals only. Since 1999, when General Comment No.27 was adopted, the Committee has moved towards extending the right under Article 12(4) to non-nationals. Its latest case law appears to have supported the Committee’s position that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals. Central to both majority and minority decisions in which the Committee has dealt with Article 12(4), is whether the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) support either view. This article relies on the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) to argue that it does not support the view that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals.

How to Think about Advocacy

2020 ◽  
pp. 34-56
Author(s):  
Michelle Jurkovich
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Food ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Right ◽  
Spiral Model

This chapter focuses on contemporary international anti-hunger advocacy, which describes the nature of contemporary campaigns across top international anti-hunger organizations. It introduces dominant human rights models, namely Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink's “boomerang model” and Thomas Risse, Stephen C. Ropp, and Kathryn Sikkink's “spiral model.” It also provides an alternative model of advocacy, the “buckshot model,” which describes and explains advocacy around hunger and the right to food. The chapter identifies the hidden assumptions behind dominant human rights models and explores their limitations by using the hunger case to set up a contrast with more-often-studied civil and political rights campaigns. It reviews interviews with international anti-hunger activists that were completed by 2015, which reflected contemporary campaigns and efforts until 2014.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

2020 ◽  
pp. 694-706
Author(s):  
Frans Viljoen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time ◽  
Family Code

The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights is the newest of the three regional human rights courts. This brief analysis provides an overview of the most salient aspects of the Court’s 2018 case-law with respect to jurisdiction, provisional measures, admissibility, merits decisions, and reparations orders. Continuing its trajectory of increasing productivity, the Court in 2018 handed down the highest number of merits decisions in its brief history. As in previous years, most of these were fair-trial-related cases against Tanzania. The Court’s 2018 case-law contains a number of firsts. In Gombert v. Côte d’Ivoire, the Court for the first time ruled as inadmissible a case previously settled by an African subregional court, the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States. In Anudo v. Tanzania, dealing with the right to nationality, the Court for the first time found a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, on the basis that the Declaration has attained the status of customary international law. In Makungu v. Tanzania, it for the first time ordered the applicant’s release as an appropriate remedy for serious fair trial violations. The Court’s most significant decision of 2018 is the Mali Marriage case, in which it held aspects of the 2011 Malian Family Code to be in violation not only of human rights treaties emanating from the African Union, but also the UN Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document