Conclusion

2021 ◽  
pp. 341-346
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas

Custom poses challenges for its identification but at the same time it offers a potential for dynamism that may often be superior to that of treaty law. Recent developments, most importantly the near-universal ratification of major human rights treaties and the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council, greatly facilitate the identification of customary law. It is clear that most of the rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are unquestionably part of customary international law. Doubts may persist about a few rights, such as the right to property. Customary law also extends to ‘solidarity rights’ or ‘peoples’ rights’, whose reflection in treaty law is not so universal. Recognition of rights does not ensure that there are effective mechanisms for their enforcement and implementation.

2021 ◽  
pp. 40-101
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas

References to customary law by national and international courts tend to be perfunctory, with only summary attempts to analyse the evidence. It is the same for jus cogens or peremptory norms. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is increasingly viewed as a source of legal obligation. The near-universal ratification of human rights treaties facilitates the identification of custom, bearing in mind the phenomenon of reservations. Materials generated by the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council provide rich evidence not only of State practice but also of the views taken by States about the content of international legal obligations. Regional custom, jus cogens, and the persistent objector are examined.


Author(s):  
William A. Schabas

Customary international law is one of the principal sources of public international law. Unlike many branches of international law, human rights law did not first develop as custom and subsequently become codified. Human rights law was viewed as quintessentially a matter of sovereign concern to States until the mid-twentieth century, when treaties and declarations were adopted by the United Nations and other international bodies. Jurists only began to speak of human rights as customary law in the 1960s. Although its existence is uncontroversial, the content of customary international law in the area of human rights has not previously been analysed in a comprehensive manner. This book discusses the emergence of the customary law of human rights, the debates about how it is to be identified, and the efforts at formulation of customary norms. It examines human rights norms in order to determine whether they may be described as customary, using as a basis the content of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Much reliance is placed upon relatively new sources of evidence of the two elements for the identification of custom, namely State practice and opinio juris, in particular the increasingly universal ratification of major human rights treaties and the materials generated by the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council. The study concludes that a large number of human rights norms may be described as customary in nature, and that courts should make greater use of custom as a source of international law.


Author(s):  
Frans Viljoen

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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona McGaughey

Abstract Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) play an important, albeit limited, role in the United Nations most recent human rights monitoring mechanism, the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Drawing on empirical data from an Australian case study and interviews with international stakeholders, the study explores the NGO role and influence in this state-centric, peer review mechanism. Case study findings indicate that recommendations made by NGOs, in particular a coalition of domestic NGOs, correlate closely with many UPR recommendations but that United Nations sources are more influential. This suggests that other United Nation human rights mechanisms complement the UPR, so that NGOs should continue to engage with both these and the UPR.


Author(s):  
Lambert Hélène

This chapter explores customary refugee law. Refugee law is primarily treaty law. However, many of the major refugee-receiving countries are not parties to either the Refugee Convention or the Refugee Protocol, for example Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Iran, Jordan, and Lebanon. Hence, customary international refugee law can be critically important in the identification of key principles of refugee protection and as an indication of what is permitted or not. While customary international law may not play as significant a role in refugee law as it does in other areas of international law, there are at least three practices of refugee protection aimed at safeguarding access and admission to refugee protection for which varying degrees of agreement exist in favour of a rule (or emerging rule) of customary law: non-refoulement, temporary refuge, and the right to be granted (to receive) asylum. These practices are deeply intertwined in their humanitarian purpose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document