scholarly journals Non-universal Human Rights? How Article 6 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Undermines Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-117
Author(s):  
Billy Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Final Section ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Universal Human Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights facilitates inequality regarding the imposition of the death penalty and thus, it cannot ensure universality for the protection of the right to life. Paragraph two of this article states: ‘sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes.’ This article argues that the vagueness of the phrase ‘the most serious crimes’ allows states to undermine human rights principles and human dignity by affording states significant discretion regarding the human rights principles of equality and anti-discrimination. The article posits that this discretion allows states to undermine human dignity and the concept of universal human rights by challenging their universality; by facilitating legal inequality between men and women. Accordingly, it asserts that the implications of not expounding this vague phrase may be far-reaching, particularly in the long-term. The final section of this article offers a potential solution to this problem.

scholarly journals Interpreting ‘Most Serious Crimes’ under Article 6(2) of ICCPR

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 419
Author(s):  
Devita Kartika Putri
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Security ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Loss Of Life ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Article 6 of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights protects the right to life. Meanwhile, Article 6(2) stipulates an exception where death penalty may only be imposed for the ‘most serious crimes.’ The Human Rights Committee had previously provided that ‘most serious crimes’ exclude other crimes which do not result in loss of life regardless of how severe the crime may be, including—crimes that threaten national security. In this regard, this Article will attempt to explore the scope of ‘most serious crimes’ by means of interpretation and margin of appreciation.

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.

scholarly journals Death Penalty under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Some Reflections for African States

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 187-202
Author(s):  
Zonke Majodina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The World ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Selection Of

As part of the ongoing movement in support of the abolition of the death penalty across the world, this article presents a selection of cases brought before the United Nations Human Rights Committee (the Committee) on violations of the right to life. With a special focus on Zambian cases, the objective is to demonstrate how the Committee’s views reflect its longstanding jurisprudence that the death penalty should only be applied in the most exceptional circumstances.

scholarly journals The Right to Life

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter examines the rules and principles of the international humanitarian law (IHL) governing the right to life. It discusses the origins and scope of the right to life and clarifies that the protection provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) does not cease in times of war. It also considers some widely-recognized exceptions to or limitations upon the right to life, including killing in self-defence and the lethal use of force by the authorities in order to prevent crime. This chapter argues that while resorting to armed force may be necessary to prevent human rights violations, its benefits should not be exaggerated.

scholarly journals Extraterritorial application of the right to life on the high sea . Commentary to the Views adopted by the Human Rights Committee of 27 January 2021, A.S., D.I., O.I. and G.D. against Italy, Communication No. 3042/2017

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Pacholski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Rescue Operation ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

The subject matter of this commentary, which instigates the Views of the Human Rights Committee of 27 January 2021, is the protection of one of the fundamental human rights – the right to life. The Committee, as an authority appointed to oversee compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, had to decide on the issue of Italy’s responsibility for failing to provide assistance to a boat in distress, even if the area in which the vessel was located was not within the territory of this state and other acts of international law attribute the responsibility for executing the rescue operation to a third country. According to the Committee’s views, which applied extraterritorial approach to the protection of the right to life, whenever states have the opportunity to take action for the protection of human rights they should do everything possible in a given situation to help people in need.

Views adopted by the Committee under article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol, concerning A.S., D.I., O.I., and G.D. V. Italy, Communication No. 3042/2017 (U.N. Hum. Rts. COMM.)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Patricia Vella De Fremeaux (Mallia) ◽  
Felicity G. Attard
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Optional Protocol ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

On January 27, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC or Committee) published two separate decisions in response to communications brought against Malta and Italy. Both decisions concerned the same incident, which occurred on October 11, 2013, where over 200 migrants drowned in a shipwreck in the Mediterranean. The first complaint brought against Malta was dismissed by the Committee on procedural grounds. In the second case, A.S., D.I., O.I. and G.D. v. Italy, the HRC found that Italy had failed to protect the right to life of the migrants under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This introductory note discusses the significance of the Committee's findings in this decision and its ramifications with respect to the protection of human rights at sea.

General Comment No. 36 (2018) on Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, on the Right to Life (H.R. Comm.)

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 849-871
Author(s):  
Sarah Joseph
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Right

In October 2018, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) adopted General Comment 36 on Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the guarantee of the right to life.

KEBIJAKAN MODERASI PIDANA MATI

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 193
Author(s):  
Mei Susanto ◽  
Ajie Ramdan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Moderation Model ◽  
The Right

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 2-3/PUU-V/2007 selain menjadi dasar konstitusionalitas pidana mati, juga memberikan jalan tengah (moderasi) terhadap perdebatan antara kelompok yang ingin mempertahankan (retensionis) dan yang ingin menghapus (abolisionis) pidana mati. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam putusan a quo dikaitkan dengan teori pemidanaan dan hak asasi manusia dan bagaimana kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 dikaitkan dengan putusan a quo. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian doktrinal, dengan menggunakan bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, berupa peraturan perundang-undangan, literatur, dan hasil-hasil penelitian yang relevan dengan objek penelitian. Penelitian menyimpulkan, pertama, putusan a quo yang memuat kebijakan moderasi pidana mati telah sesuai dengan teori pemidanaan khususnya teori integratif dan teori hak asasi manusia di Indonesia di mana hak hidup tetap dibatasi oleh kewajiban asasi yang diatur dengan undang-undang. Kedua, model kebijakan moderasi pidana mati dalam RKUHP tahun 2015 beberapa di antaranya telah mengakomodasi amanat putusan a quo, seperti penentuan pidana mati di luar pidana pokok, penundaan pidana mati, kemungkinan pengubahan pidana mati menjadi pidana seumur hidup atau penjara paling lama 20 tahun. Selain itu masih menimbulkan persoalan berkaitan dengan lembaga yang memberikan pengubahan pidana mati, persoalan grasi, lamanya penundaan pelaksanaan pidana mati, dan jenis pidana apa saja yang dapat diancamkan pidana mati.Kata kunci: kebijakan, KUHP, moderasi, pidana mati. ABSTRACTConstitutional Court’s Decision Number 2-3/PUU-V/2007, in addition to being the basis of the constitutionality of capital punishment, also provides a moderate way of arguing between retentionist groups and those wishing to abolish the death penalty (abolitionist). The problem in this research is how the moderation policy of capital punishment in aquo decision is associated with the theory of punishment and human rights and how the moderation policy of capital punishment in the draft Criminal Code of 2015 (RKUHP) is related with the a quo decision. This study is doctrinal, using primary and secondary legal materials, in the form of legislation, literature and research results that are relevant to the object of analysis. This study concludes, firstly, the aquo decision containing the moderation policy of capital punishment has been in accordance with the theory of punishment, specificallyy the integrative theory and the theory of human rights in Indonesia, in which the right to life remains limited by the fundamental obligations set forth in the law. Secondly, some of the modes of moderation model of capital punishment in RKUHP of 2015 have accommodated the mandate of aquo decision, such as the determination of capital punishment outside the main punishment, postponement of capital punishment, the possibility of converting capital punishment to life imprisonment or imprisonment of 20 years. In addition, it still raises issues regarding the institutions that provide for conversion of capital punishment, pardon matters, length of delay in the execution of capital punishment, and any types of crime punishable by capital punishment. Keywords: policy, criminal code, moderation, capital punishment.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document