ARIO and Human Rights Protection: Leaving the Individual in the Cold

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Armin von Bogdandy ◽  
Mateja Steinbrück Platise

International organizations may be regarded as international public authorities, since their acts increasingly impinge on individuals, private associations, enterprises, States, or public institutions. However, this development has not been followed by the creation of a corresponding system of international legal responsibility for international organizations. Some are even seen as a risk to fundamental rights. The Articles on Responsibility of International Organizations (ARIO) bring some progress in this regard, but nevertheless leave the victims of human rights violations largely overlooked. The article analyses some of the achievements and gaps of ARIO with respect to human rights protection and explores the possibilities for victims of human rights violations to seek remedies against international organizations.

2021 ◽  
pp. 141-148
Author(s):  
V. V. Vynokurov

The article is devoted to the analysis of the essence and content of the categories «human rights», «protection of human rights», «human rights enforcement» in terms of the substantive relationship between the constitutional state and the individual in modern society. It is emphasized that addressing these terms through the prism of human rights in order to effectively implement them, it is necessary to clearly understand their content and scope of possible actions covered by them, as well as to distinguish between «protection» and «enforcement» at both scientific and legislativelevels, taking into account, inter alia, their lexical meaning. It is determined that everyone, on the one hand, should be able to freely choose the way to protect their rights, and on the other – must be sure that the state guarantees equal opportunities for everyone, regardless of race, language, skin color, political, religious and other beliefs, gender, ethnic and social origin, property status, place of residence, etc., to use these methods of protection. The role and importance of public authorities in the process of protection and enforcement of human rights and freedoms and the state responsibility to the individual as an integral part of ensuring constitutional human rights are also defined. It is concluded that an integral part of constitutional human rights enforcement is certainly the existence of an effective and efficient mechanism of legal responsibility of the state to the individual. Keywords: human rights, protection of human rights, human rights enforcement, public authorities, state responsibility.


Author(s):  
Tilman Rodenhäuser

Chapter 5 adds to the contemporary discourse on human rights obligations of non-state armed groups by showing that in many situations, there is a clear legal need for these obligations. This chapter first engages in the debate on whether and to what extent certain human rights treaties address armed groups directly. Second, it shows that under the law of state responsibility, states are generally not responsible for human rights violations committed by non-state entities. Third, it recalls that under international human rights law, states have an obligation to protect human rights against violations committed by armed groups. However, it argues that because this cannot be a strict obligation but is one that depends on states’ capacities and the particular circumstances, often this framework cannot adequately protect individuals against human rights violations by armed groups. The result is a legal and practical need for human rights obligations of non-state armed groups.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-127
Author(s):  
Nicoletta Varani ◽  
Enrico Bernardini

Abstract Planetary interdependence makes the task of states and international organizations to guarantee security inside and outside national borders ever more urgent. The tendency is to widen the space from national to international and to conceive of security as multidimensional for the satisfaction of human needs, assumed as priority needs with respect to those of the States. The old concept of national security must today confront the new concept of human security cultivated within the United Nations, which places the fundamental rights of the individual and of people at the centre of attention and lays the foundations for overcoming the traditional politics of power. The concept of human security emphasises the security of the individual and his protection from political violence, war and arbitrariness. It takes account of the strong correlation between peace policy, human rights policy, migration policy and humanitarian policy. The contribution provides, through a series of social indicators such as the Global Peace Index (GPI), Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) and the World International Security and Policy Index (WISPI), a framework on risk, security, human rights violations in the African continent and examines some significant case studies related to sub-Saharan Africa.


Author(s):  
Siuzanna Mnatsakanian

Conceptual approaches to defining the nature and the scope of interim measures implementation as an instrument of human rights protection at international and national level are analyzed. The widespread use of interim measures as international standard of urgent respond to alleged violations of human rights has not led to the implementation of the legal institute concerned at the national level. Accordingly, this analysis aimed at defining the grounds of interim measures as human rights protection instrument application to be used by the state as an immediate response to human rights violations and possible violations. European Court of Human Rights has a great practice of interim measures granting. Interim measures are granted by the Court only in clearly defined conditions, namely where there is a risk that serious violations of the Convention might occur. A high proportion of requests for interim measures are inappropriate and are therefore refused. Besides, interim measures are applied upon request of the applicant claiming about alleged violations of his or her human rights. At the national level interim measures should/may be granted upon request of the applicant or by the duty-bearer’s initiative to prevent possible human rights violations. The grounds of interim measures granting should also be defined – the best international practice should be used taking into account the Ukrainian context. Another core issue analyzed is defining duty-bearers – subjects enforced to grant interim to prevent abuse in the sphere concerned. It is obvious that court shall be the only authority to resolve the substantive case of alleged human rights violation. However, public and local authorities shall be enabled to grant interim measures to prevent the possible violations. With this, the scope and the sphere of its application at the national level shall be broader in comparison with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.


Author(s):  
Jorge Ernesto ROA ROA

LABURPENA: Kasuen ikerketa-metodologia erabiliz, Santo Domingo vs. Kolonbia epaiari buruzko iruzkinean, nagusiki, inter-amerikar esparruko giza eskubideen babesari lotutako egiturazko alderdiak aipatzen dira; besteak beste, eta bereziki: nola erabiltzen duen Inter-amerikar Auzitegiak Nazioarteko Zuzenbide Humanitarioa barne-gatazka armatuetako egoeretan; zer erlazio dagoen zigor-jurisdikzio militarraren eta Indar Armatuetako kideek egindako giza eskubideen urraketen ikerketaren artean; zein diren Estatuaren erantzukizuna aitortzeko egintzetarako baldintzak, eta zer elkarreragin dagoen nazioetako eta nazioarteko instantzia judizialen artean giza eskubideen urraketen ordainaz den bezainbatean. Egokiera-arrazoiengatik, alde batera utziko da Kolonbiako Estatuak urratu zituen Amerikar Konbentzioko eskubideetako bakoitzari buruz Giza Eskubideetarako Nazioarteko Auzitegiak erabakitakoaren azterketa. RESUMEN: Mediante la aplicación de la metodología de estudio de caso, el comentario a la Sentencia Santo Domingo vs. Colombia se centra en aspectos estructurales sobre la protección de los derechos humanos en el ámbito interamericano, en especial, el uso que la Corte Interamericana hace del Derecho Internacional Humanitario en situaciones que se producen en contextos de conflictos armados internos, la relación entre la jurisdicción penal militar y la investigación de las violaciones a los derechos humanos cometidas por miembros de las Fuerzas Armadas, los requisitos de los actos de reconocimiento de la responsabilidad del Estado y la interacción entre las instancias judiciales nacionales e internacionales en materia de reparación de violaciones a los derechos humanos. Por razones de oportunidad, se prescinde del análisis del pronunciamiento de la Corte IDH sobre cada uno de los derechos de la Convención Americana que fueron violados por el Estado de Colombia. ABSTRACT: By means of the problem based learning methodology, the analysis of the judgment Santo Domingo vs. Colombia focuses on structural features of the human rights protection within the Inter-American area, specially, the use made by the Inter-American Court of International Humanitarian Law in situations within contexts of internal military conflict, the relationship between military criminal jurisdiction and the investigation of human rights violations committed by Army forces, the requirements of the acts of recognition of the State responsibility and the interaction between the national and international judicial instances regarding the redress for human rights violations. For reasons of practical expediency, we will not analyze the judgment by the Inter-American Court on each of the rights of the American Convention breached by the State of Colombia.


Author(s):  
Nussberger Angelika

This introductory chapter provides a background of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), a multilateral treaty based on humanism and rule of law. Similar to the—albeit non-binding—Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the ECHR is a document that marks a change in philosophy and gives a new definition of the responsibility of the State towards the individual. It fixes basic values in times of change and paves the way towards reconciliation in Europe. Unlike in a peace treaty, not all wartime enemies participate in its elaboration, but, one by one, all the European States accede to it, signalling their consent to the values fixed by a small community of States in the early 1950s. Seven decades later, forty-seven European States have ratified the Convention. Admittedly, the new start based on common values could not prevent the outbreak of violent conflicts between Member States. At the same time, the resurgence of anti-democratic tendencies could not be successfully banned in all Member States, but such tendencies could be stigmatized as grave human rights violations in binding judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Thus, it is not surprising that the European model of human rights protection has been attractive and inspirational for other parts of the world. Nevertheless, there was and is a debate in some Member States to withdraw from the Convention as the Court’s jurisprudence is seen to be too intrusive on national sovereignty.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 331-335
Author(s):  
Jimena Reyes

Until recently, the United Nations and regional systems of human rights protection had shown considerable reluctance to address human rights violations resulting from corruption. Instead, these actors would underline the negative impacts of corruption on human rights without identifying corruption itself as a violation of human rights. Since 2017, however, this has begun to shift. The UN, regional human rights institutions, and civil society have begun to devise concrete ways for human rights institutions and instruments to better contribute to the fight against corruption. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (“the Court”), in particular, has taken preliminary steps to establish a legal link between corruption and human rights violations.


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 53-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sionaidh Douglas-Scott

AbstractThe EU’s ‘Area of Freedom, Security and Justice’ is a hugely important area covering criminal law, terrorism, immigration, visa control and civil justice, as well as the massive area of free movement of persons. What is clear, however, is that measures which fall within its scope have the capacity to alienate EU citizens rather than making them feel aware of their European identity in a positive sense. This chapter examines some of the measures taken by the EU in this broad field which cause particular concern, namely a lack of democratic and legal accountability as well as inadequate regard to human rights. It focuses in particular on two areas in which human rights protection in the EU has been undermined. The first is in the field of data protection. The second is in the field of suspects’ rights, particularly in the context of the European arrest warrant. The chapter concludes by considering why so many restrictions on freedom have been allowed to come about and suggests some possible solutions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document