“Nothing to offer in return”: Refugees, human rights, and genocide in Cambodia, 1975–1979

2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-236
Author(s):  
Laura Madokoro
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Khmer Rouge ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Mass Violence ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
International Human ◽  
Khmer Rouge Regime ◽  
The Relationship

From 1975 to 1979, Canadian politicians and diplomats observed and discussed the possibility that a genocide was taking place in Cambodia. The situation was difficult to ascertain, however, given the limited history between the two countries and the deep isolation in which the Khmer Rouge regime operated after rising to power, as well as the Canadian government’s limited interest in international human rights until the late 1970s. It wasn’t until large numbers of refugees began to cross into Thailand in 1977–78, and began to tell their stories to Western diplomats, that human rights discussions at the United Nations began to focus more closely on the situation in Cambodia. Exploring the Canadian government’s use of refugee testimonies, this article explores the relationship between narratives of mass violence and the burgeoning human rights agenda of the late 1970s to highlight the role of refugees in shaping an international human rights agenda.

Final Remarks

2020 ◽  
pp. 181-196
Author(s):  
Elvira Domínguez-Redondo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Open Access ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Heated Debate ◽  
International Human ◽  
Transnational Space ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Rights Issues

This final chapter situates the analysis of the role of politics in the development of the Special Procedures within the heated debate over the future of the international human rights agenda as articulated by a growing number of scholars. It suggests that the alleged failures of international human rights may be a reflection of the rigidity of the Westphalian edifice in accommodating the struggles of individuals and communities beyond the human rights framework. Only human rights mechanisms have demonstrated enough flexibility, accompanied by political will, to open access for non-state actors to the transnational space. This accessibility has not been accompanied by an acknowledgment of the conceptual, normative, institutional, and practical problems inherent in the attempt to combine agendas that are not always compatible, as illustrated in the relationship between development, security, and human rights issues. This important gap is compounded by the myth this book seeks to discredit, namely, the presumption that politicization of human rights should be eliminated and that some groups of states are rigidly associated with preconceived political alignments.

scholarly journals Navigating Human Rights in a ‘Post-Human Rights’ Era

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-194
Author(s):  
Rhona Smith ◽  
Sean Molloy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
State Compliance ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract International human rights law and mechanisms tasked with promoting state compliance with it are being increasingly challenged. Opposition is originating from, amongst others, countries that have historically supported the global human rights project. These new trends and sites of contestation bolster opposition from other countries and regions that have consistently diverged from international human rights norms. Examining the relationship between the United Nations human rights system and states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in this broader context of opposition to human rights, this article argues that existing theories on why states do, or ought to, comply with international human rights law are often inadequate to either explain or inspire state adherence to human rights norms. What is required, this article will argue, is not another theory but rather more targeted and incremental efforts to address the gap between rhetoric and compliance.

Human Rights for and against Empire – Legal and Public Discourses in the Age of Decolonisation

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 317-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Klose
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Ongoing Debate ◽  
Paradoxical Situation ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
International Human

Against the background of an ongoing debate about the role of human rights in the age of decolonisation this essay approaches the issue from two different angles. It concentrates on the paradoxical situation that anti-colonial movements as well as colonial powers instrumentalised international human rights documents such as the Genocide Convention, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and the European Conventions on Human Rights for achieving their political goals. In combining legal and public discourses in a significant way both sides accused each other of gross human rights violations while at the same time presenting themselves as respecting and even guaranteeing fundamental human rights. Especially during the course of the wars of decolonisation after 1945 this phenomenon became obvious in various diplomatic debates at the United Nations and made universal rights a diplomatic pawn in international debates.

Cul-de-sac to the West: Human Rights and Hypocrisy between Turkey and Europe in the 1980s

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 177-192
Author(s):  
Bennett G. Sherry
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The West ◽  
Amnesty International ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Human Rights Movement ◽  
International Human

Abstract In the 1980s, over a million Iranian asylum seekers transited through Turkey on their way west, most moving through irregular migration channels. While much has been made of Turkey’s evolving role in more recent refugee crises, this literature neglects the importance of the 1980s Iranian refugee migrations in shaping the global refugee system. By connecting the story of the international human rights movement to the Ankara office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), this paper emphasizes the role of non-state actors. Based on research in the archives of the UNHCR, this paper argues that the UNHCR and Amnesty International used human rights as a tool to pressure Turkey to open its doors to Iranian refugees in the early 1980s, and that this tactic backfired when the West closed its own doors on refugees later in the decade. The result was the increased forcible return of refugees by Turkish authorities to Iran and newly restrictive asylum policies, which would shape refugee migrations through Turkey for decades. For millions of refugees, Turkey has served as transit hub on their journey west; in the 1980s, human rights hypocrisy made it a cul-de-sac.

scholarly journals Title to Territory and Jurisdiction in International Human Rights Law: Three Models for a Fraught Relationship

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-334
Author(s):  
LEA RAIBLE
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Approximation Model ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Threshold Criterion ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Separation Model

AbstractIt is by now uncontroversial that states may owe human rights obligations to individuals outside their territory. The debate about extraterritoriality has, so far, focused on the concept and interpretation of jurisdiction. The role of territory in general, and title in particular, in the conceptual landscape has received less attention in comparison. This article aims to fill this gap by showing that (a) title to territory continues to shape interpretations of jurisdiction, and (b) that this should be avoided. To this end, the article first defines jurisdiction in international human rights law and title to territory. Jurisdiction is best understood as a threshold criterion that triggers human rights obligations of states towards particular individuals. Title to territory, on the other hand, is a set of claims to territory designed to uphold minimal stability. The article then introduces three models – the approximation model, the differentiation model, and the separation model – of the relationship between title to territory and jurisdiction in international human rights law and evaluates them in light of their fit with the relational nature of human rights. The result is that the approximation and differentiation models – that is, those that maintain title's influence on the interpretation of jurisdiction in various degrees – fail the success criterion, while the separation model satisfies it.

scholarly journals The Implementation of Human Rights Conventions at the National Level: The Case of Palestine

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-52
Author(s):  
Mutaz Qafisheh ◽  
Osayd Awawda
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
National Level ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Historical Sources ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Domestic Level

The accession of the State of Palestine to seven core human rights conventions provides an opportunity for lawyers and judges for implementing those conventions at the domestic level, especially in a plural legal system with multiple traditions that contradict international standards. Lawyers may plead before courts to apply such conventions by relying on the interpretation endorsed by United Nations treaty bodies: general comments, concluding observations, and decisions on individual complaints. Lawyers and other legal practitioners may refer to reports of human rights Special Rapporteurs, along with the juridical interpretation methods, including official/authentic languages, preparatory works, historical sources, along with scholars’ opinions. This article deals with the relationship between international human rights conventions and domestic law in Palestine. Each section presents the measures that have been taken by Palestine in relation with the UN monitoring committees and comprises two hypothetical examples as cases to demonstrate the convention’s relation to existing legislation and practices.

The Influence of the Two Covenants on States Parties Across Regions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Besson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Domestic Institutions ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The Third ◽  
International Human ◽  
Domestic Influence ◽  
Domestic Law

As a companion to the five regional reports in this volume, this chapter’s aim is a double one: first, to bring the comparison up to the regional level, and second, to analyse the international and domestic institutions, procedures, and mechanisms that affect how international human rights instruments influence domestic law. The chapter is therefore both a study in comparative international human rights law and a contribution to its methodology. Its structure is four-pronged. The first section clarifies the aim, object, and method of the comparison. The second section presents a comparative assessment of the Covenants’ domestic influence across regions and develops a grid of comparative analysis. The third section addresses the authority of the Committees’ interpretations of the Covenants, relying on a bottom-up comparative law argument. The fourth section discusses the role of human rights comparison and of regional human rights law in enhancing the legitimacy of the Committees’ future interpretations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document