scholarly journals The 2013 Elections in Zimbabwe: End of an Era for Human Rights Discourse?

2013 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cornelias Ncube
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Coalition Government ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Strained State ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This paper examines the implications of Zimbabwe's 2013 harmonised elections on the opposition's continued deployment of the rights-based discourse to make moral and political claims against and demands of the state. Since 2000, two polarising strands of the human rights discourse −1) the right to self-determination and 2) civil and political rights – were deployed by the state and the opposition, respectively, in order to challenge extant relations and structures of power. The acutely strained state–society relations in post-2000 Zimbabwe emanated from human rights violations by the state as it responded to challenges to its political power and legitimacy. However, the relative improvement in the human rights situation in the country since the 2009 coalition government came into office, and during and since the recently concluded peaceful 2013 elections – the flawed electoral process itself notwithstanding – suggests a need for alternative new ways to make moral and political demands of the state in the future.

scholarly journals O direito estatal à suspensão das obrigações do Pacto Internacional de Direitos Civis e Políticos | The state right to the suspension of the obligations of the international covenant on civil and political right

KPGT_dlutz_1 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-48
Author(s):  
Vivianny Galvão
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
The Face ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Right ◽  
Political Right

O direito estatal à suspensão das obrigações do Pacto Internacional de Direitos Civis e Políticos Resumo: Este artigo dedica-se à análise do artigo 4.º do Pacto Internacional de Direitos Civis e Políticos de 1966, com especial atenção à interpretação do direito estatal à suspensão das obrigações internacionais. Cabe, atualmente, ao Conselho de Direitos Humanos das Nações Unidas a tarefa de investigar os casos em que esta suspensão acontece, bem como fiscalizar os motivos da suspensão e estabelecer os parâmetros considerados legítimos. Os direitos humanos trazidos pelo Pacto Internacional sobre os Direitos Civis e Políticos, além dos demais tratados em matéria de direitos humanos, limitam o direito estatal de suspensão. As medidas aplicadas pelo Estado que evocam o direito de derrogação precisam ser consideradas estritamente necessárias e sua adoção, fundamentada e temporária; caso contrário, o Estado derrogador será considerado violador das obrigações assumidas na ordem internacional. Somente o instrumento da denúncia é capaz de desobrigar o Estado dos acordos firmados e, ainda assim, essa desvinculação não alcançariam em tese certos costumes internacionais nem, tampouco, as normas de ius cogens ou obrigações erga omnes. Infere-se que a lógica do artigo 4.º, também presente na Convenção Europeia de Direitos Humanos, está norteada pela preservação do Estado Democrático de Direito conforme se extraiu da criação da categoria dos direitos irrevogáveis. Além disso, mesmo diante da possibilidade de suspensão parcial e temporária dos direitos, o Conselho de Direitos Humanos não deixa de fiscalizar a atuação do Estado, pelo contrário, esse Conselho passa a emitir recomendações mais contundentes contra o Estado. Palavras-chave: Direito de suspensão. Direitos humanos. Direito Internacional. Pacto Internacional de Direitos Civis e Políticos. _____ The state right to the suspension of the obligations of the international covenant on civil a: nd political right Abstract: This article is devoted to the analysis of the article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966, with special attention to the interpretation of state law to the suspension of international obligations. The UN Human Rights Council is now responsible for investigating the cases in which this suspension takes place, as well as monitoring the reasons for the suspension and establishing the parameters considered legitimate. The human rights brought by the ICCPR, in addition to the other human rights treaties, limit the State's right to suspend. The measures applied by the State that evoke the right of derogation must be considered strictly necessary and the adoption, substantiated and temporary. Otherwise, the derogating State shall be considered as violating the obligations assumed in the international order. Only the instrument of denunciation can release the State from the agreements reached and, even so, that untying would not achieve in theory certain international customs nor the norms of jus cogens or obligations erga omnes. It is inferred that the logic of Article 4, which is also present in the European Convention on Human Rights, is guided by the preservation of the Democratic Rule of Law as derived from the creation of the category of irrevocable rights. Moreover, even in the face of the possibility of partial and temporary suspension of rights, the Human Rights Council does not cease to supervise the actions of the State; on the contrary, this Council is issuing more forceful recommendations against the State. Keywords: Human rights. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. International Law. Right of suspension.

scholarly journals Human Rights Discourse and Interculturality: Insights from the Margins

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (20) ◽  
pp. 543
Author(s):  
Raimundo César Barreto Jr.
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Women's Movements ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Common Currency ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

Since the early 1970s, human rights discourse has swept across the globe, becoming common currency in world politics.  Approaching the end of the 20thcentury, not only was there a significant increase in the use of the term “human rights” in official documents but the number of countries ratifying important international treatises protecting human rights also proliferated. According to Emilie Hafner-Burton and James Ron, 150 countries have ratified the two principal human rights treatises, namely, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Covenant Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). On top of that, new global social movements employ the language of “rights” or “human rights” in their reasoning; such movements include women’s movements, green movements, and indigenous peoples’ movements. Despite the sweeping use of human rights language, important questions have been asked about its efficacy.Interrogando as reivindicações universalistas em articulações discursivas dos Direitos Humanos, este artigo promove a necessidade de tornar os direitos humanos mais significativos e eficazes para as vidas daqueles que são empobrecidos, oprimidos, excluídos ou discriminados em diferentes culturas e contextos. Levando em consideração o atual cenário marcado ambiguamente pela globalização e pela pluralidade, bem como a ascensão da África e da Ásia  pós-colonial , além do discursos decoloniais latino-americanos, o artigo sugere uma abordagem intercultural dos direitos humanos que considera mais plenamente  diferentes vozes, entendimentos e interpretações, bem como estruturas e relações de poder que desempenham um papel em eclipsar e obstruir a liberdade de discursos pós-coloniais. Em contraste com uma imposição de cima para baixo de um discurso abstrato de universalização dos direitos humanos, esse artigo propõe uma abordagem de baixo para cima dos direitos humanos que leva a sério a multiplicidade de tradições e culturas que informam as visões de mundo e a vida cotidiana das pessoas. 

Hunting by Indigenous Peoples of Charismatic Mega-Fauna: Does Human Rights Approach Challenge the Way Hunting by Indigenous Peoples is Regulated?

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamrul Hossain
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Underdeveloped Area ◽  
Regulatory Approach ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

AbstractTwo International Covenants (the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) in common Article 1 highlighted that 'all peoples' have the right to self-determination to freely determine their 'political status' and freely dispose of their 'natural wealth and resources'. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in Article 27 provides protection of the rights belonging to minority cultures, religion and language. The idea of 'indigenous peoples' was apparently an underdeveloped area at the time of the adoption of the Covenants. The concept of indigenous peoples' rights has developed relatively recently. Thus, whether indigenous peoples are 'peoples' within the meaning of the Covenant, and thereby may be capable of enjoying the right to self-determination has been an unsettled case. When in many countries indigenous peoples form a minority, they are, however, identical as distinct from other minority groups in those countries because of their own way of livelihood and preservation of traditional culture and knowledge. Recent normative development pronounced by the Human Rights Committee suggests that indigenous peoples should be treated as 'peoples' within the meaning of Article 1 of the Covenant and as 'people' they have right to enjoy their traditional way of livelihood including right to enjoy their culture. Thus, the main focus of the article is to examine whether a human rights approach to indigenous peoples' rights has evolved to challenge the international regulatory approach currently applicable to the management of Whale and Polar Bear regime and their traditional hunt by the indigenous peoples.

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.

The Taming of the Shrill: From Indicators to Indicatorization

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-115
Author(s):  
Siobhán Airey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Economic Relations ◽  
Right To Development ◽  
International Economic Relations ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
The Right ◽  
High Level ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This article addresses the specific norm-generation function of indicators in a human rights context, focusing on ways that indicators foreground and legitimize as ‘truth’ particular worldviews or values. It describes the stakes of this process through elaborating on the concept of ‘indicatorization’, focusing on one moment in which the relationship between human rights and development was defined through indicators: the indicatorization of the Right to Development by a un High Level Task Force in 2010. In this initiative, different perspectives on human rights, equality, participation and development from within the un and the World Bank were brought together. This resulted in a subtle but significant re-articulation of ideas contained in the 1986 un Declaration on the Right to Development. The article argues that how indicatorization happens, matters, and has important implications for the potential role of human rights discourse within international economic relations.

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.

Reformative and rehabilitative programs for prisoners with cognitive impairments: Australia’s international obligations

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-106
Author(s):  
Emma Henderson ◽  
Nicole Shackleton ◽  
Stephanie Falconer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cognitive Impairments ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Mental Impairment ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Civil And Political Rights

While there has been much recent controversy relating to the abusive treatment of young prisoners and the failure of the State to properly facilitate the rehabilitation and reformation of young detainees, little attention has been paid to similar failures in relation to prisoners with cognitive impairments. In this article, we argue that Article 10.3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 26 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities require Australia to ensure that the conditions of detention of all prisoners are primarily reformative and rehabilitative. Analysing relevant jurisprudence, we argue that Australia is systematically failing to meet its human rights obligations to prisoners found ‘not guilty’ by reason of mental impairment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document