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. 

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.

The Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Lands Once Part of the Old Dominions of the Crown

1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 812-830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Mason
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Land Resources ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
The World ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Rights Issue

Of all the rights of indigenous people, none is more central to the survival of their culture than the claim to their ancestral lands. The resolution of their claims to ancestral lands is one of the fundamental issues of our time—indeed of all time. Often called a human rights issue—a description apt to reinforce the strong moral foundations of the claims of the indigenous peoples—it is an issue which we cannot ignore. Throughout the world people of all races and all colours have a powerful emotional attachment to their ancestral lands. That attachment is the very core of a people's culture and is vital to the survival of the culture. As the UN Human Rights Committee has recognised, in the context of the exercise of cultural rights protected by Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, “culture manifests itself in many forms, including a particular way of life associated with the use of land resources”.

scholarly journals Decolonizing Law and expanding Human Rights: Indigenous Conceptions and the Rights of Nature in Ecuador

2019 ◽  
pp. 59-86
Author(s):  
Juan José Guzmán
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Anthropological Theory ◽  
Rights Of Nature ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Symbolic Ecology ◽  
Discourse Practice ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This article critically addresses the crucial aspects for understanding the rights of nature as a resistance platform for indigenous peoples in Ecuador. By basing my arguments in a post-colonial approach to human rights and the concept of coloniality of power, I argue that the lack of inclusion of indigenous knowledge in human rights is a manifestation of neocolonialism. Thus, the introduction of non-Western narratives into the human rights discourse/practice is an attempt to decolonize what has traditionally been a colonialist discourse. Later on, I develop the concept of ‘rights of nature’ arguing that they are a practical example of the inclusion of indigenous narratives in human rights. In the end, the biggest problem is that the dominant Western thought does not challenge the human-nature relationships that are responsible for nature’s degradation. In this regard, I use ethnographic material, post-colonial anthropological theory, and symbolic ecology to argue that Amazonian indigenous nature ontologies —which understand the nature/culture relationship in a very different way— are contained in the rights of nature that the Ecuadorian Constitution enshrines. Therefore, becoming a legal tool with a significant potential for indigenous people’s historical justice.Received: 01 September 2019Accepted: 05 December 2019Published online: 20 December 2019

Part I The UNDRIP’s Relationship to Existing International Law, Ch.3 Relationship to Human Rights, and Related International Instruments

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scheinin Martin ◽  
Åhrén Mattias
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Specific Reference ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
International Instruments

This chapter analyses how the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) fits within the broader picture of international legal instruments, with specific reference to related human rights norms. In many respects, the general approach the UNDRIP takes towards indigenous rights is natural. Largely from the very day indigenous peoples' representatives started to address the UN in order to claim recognition of and respect for their rights, the focus of such claims has been on allowing indigenous peoples the possibility to preserve, maintain, and develop their own distinct societies, existing side by side with the majority society. In other words, political rights — or sovereign rights — have always been at the forefront of the indigenous rights regime. In that way, indigenous peoples' rights distinguish themselves from those that apply to minority groups that are primarily individual rights. Thus, when placing emphasis on peoples' rights, the UNDRIP follows in the tradition of the indigenous rights discourse in general, as reflected in Article 3 of the Declaration.

scholarly journals Protection AgainstRefoulementfrom Europe: Human Rights Law Comes to the Rescue

1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 515-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hélène Lambert
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
The Status ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Domestic Jurisdiction ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
Scope Of Protection

A growing opinion has appeared in refugee and human rights discourse that the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the European Convention) provides more extensive protection againstrefoulementthan the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (the Refugee Convention). However, uncertainties remain as to whether the protection offered by the 1984 UN Convention against Torture (the Torture Convention) and the 1966 UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the Political Covenant) may substitute, or, rather, reinforce, that of the European Convention. Which of these four instruments offers the greatest protection against a decision ofrefoulementfrom a European country? The answer to this question is far from being academic. The rule that an international organ may only be competent to consider an individual petition or communication provided “the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of individual investigation or settlement” is embodied in all three instruments providing a procedure for individual complaints. It is therefore crucial for an asylum-seeker to give his or her best shot first, even if, as rightly pointed out by Liz Heffernan, the Strasbourg organs and the Geneva organs are not in competition.1This article will review the scope of protection afforded under the three of these treaties which provide an international enforcement mechanism to persons who have sought refugee status in the domestic jurisdiction.

Poma Poma v. Peru

2021 ◽  
Vol 193 ◽  
pp. 317-331
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Community ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
State Party ◽  
The Andes ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
Article 5

317Human rights — Tribunals — United Nations Human Rights Committee — Minority rights — Indigenous peoples — Members of indigenous community constituting a minority — Author member of ethnic minority — Right to enjoy own culture — Indigenous peoples — Indigenous community land in the Andes in Peru — State project to divert water from Andes to provide water for city of Tacna — Community land in the Andes — Degradation of author’s land — Death of livestock — State activities — Whether substantially compromising or interfering with culturally significant economic activities of a minority — Right of minority to participate in decision-making process — Proportionality — Right to effective remedy — Admissibility of author’s complaint — Article 5(2)(a) of Optional Protocol to International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Whether same matter being examined under another international procedure — Whether referral to Commission on Human Rights constituting another international procedure within meaning of Article 5(2)(a) — Whether State Party violating its obligations under Articles 27 and 2(3)(a) of CovenantEnvironment — Alleged damage to ecosystem — Indigenous community land — Degradation of author’s land due to water diversion operations — Indigenous peoples — Rights of minorities — Right to enjoy own culture — Traditional customs — Whether State Party violating its obligations under Article 27 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966Damages — Reparation — Reparation commensurate to harm sustained — Obligation on State to provide authors of complaint with effective remedy — Article 2(3)(a) of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — United Nations Human Rights Committee

Biocultural Rights

2018 ◽  
pp. 115-141
Author(s):  
Giulia Sajeva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
National Park ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

Chapter 5 explores the difficult and challenging questions that arise from the sui generis nature of biocultural rights: they carry certain characteristics that are typical of human rights discourse as well as others that are difficult to fit into its categories. A reflection is provided on the potential positive and negative implications biocultural rights entail from political and practical points of view, stressing the different status of indigenous peoples and local communities in international law, and pointing out how this influences the potential dangers and advantages of biocultural rights. In order to explore how biocultural rights could be valuable, albeit to be handled with care, the chapter provides the analysis of the case of the Khwe indigenous peoples of Bwabwata National Park, investigating their struggles and claims through the lens of biocultural rights.

scholarly journals THE PROHIBITION OF TORTURE, CRUEL OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (91) ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Jelena Girfanova
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
European Regional

In the paper “The prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment in closed Institutions” the author has examined the obxervasnce of  persons’  in detention,  custody or imprisonment human rights in the European regional acts and national instruments as well as the provision of health care for detainees and convicted persons alike.All basic human rights’ documents, namely: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United Nations and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms state that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, degrading his or her human dignity”.  All persons who have been punished, regardless of the crimes for which they were convicted, have the right to humane treatment and respect for their personality. No actions of people, whatever they may be, justify the inhuman treatment of them or the humiliation of their personality.  

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document