Universal Rights versus Sharia? Reflections on the Moral and Legal Dimensions of Human Rights Law and Sharia

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-161
Author(s):  
Elena Namli

Abstract This article develops a critique of the monopoly of liberal ideology in the field of human rights by considering how law, morality and politics are related to each other. The author argues that the constructive potential of international human rights law does not lie in its being understood and practiced as a positive law. On the contrary, to focus on human rights law as positive law is to conceal the political nature of human rights and to prevent effective development of its moral and political potential. Further, the author considers the case of Sharia law and argues that Sharia, for it to be implemented concretely in the social, political, and legal spheres, must be understood as a moral and religious ‘way’. These interpretations of human rights law and Sharia are used as the basis for a critique of the idea that human rights law and Sharia contradict each other.

Legal Studies ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic McGoldrick ◽  
Thérèse O'Donnell

Racism has climbed the political agenda at national, European and international levels. Reports from national and international non-governmental organisations (NGO’s) and inter-governmental organisations have focused considerable attention on racism and xenophobia and document an increase in racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and race-related activities. As racism has climbed the political agendas, so there has been a substantial increase in the number of national, European and international legal instruments devoted to it. In particular, race-related restrictions on freedom of expression (‘hate-speech’) are increasing and seem likely to continue to do so. Such restrictions give rise to controversy in terms of constitutionality, legal policy and consistency with European and international human rights law. There are also differences of views between the policies of NGO's on restrictions on racist speech.


Author(s):  
Kate Nash

Although international human rights law is globalizing, it has inherent limits due to the fundamental paradox through which it is being institutionalized: humans have rights as such, but citizens must give themselves the law. Moreover, sociologically, respect for human rights in practice depends on how states are structured and on the political projects of officials who act ‘in the name of the state’. It depends on material and moral resources—economic, military, legitimacy, and authority—organized across nominal divisions between state and civil society and across state borders. From a sociological perspective, the author argues that human rights are necessarily political, and that the entanglement of the ‘international’ and the ‘national’, ‘human’ and ‘citizen’, is unavoidable for the progressive construction of human rights.


2021 ◽  
pp. 29-45
Author(s):  
Gauthier de Beco

This chapter starts by outlining the existing models of disability and by relating these models to the Convention. The aim is not to advance debates about the models themselves but to examine the extent to which these models have influenced the CRPD’s own understanding of disability. The focus lies especiallyon the social model of disability, which has transformed the view of disability around the world. This is followed by an investigation of the way in which this understanding of disability bears upon the entire field of international human rights law. The chapter further examines the mainstreaming of disability and its consideration by the treaty bodies as well as its consequences for the field as a whole. It finally looks beyond international human rights law by evaluating how disability is addressed by UN agencies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document