scholarly journals Disparity in Human Rights Violations: A Political and International Law Perspective

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 349
Author(s):  
Aidir Amin Daud
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Rational Solution ◽  
Double Series ◽  
Mass Murder ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Natural Right ◽  
International Court ◽  
Political Interests

Right to life is non-derogable rights. A natural right that should not be revoked arbitrarily by anyone, including the state. A mass murder in events 1 October 1965 and Timor-Timor is a double series of states’ failure in protecting the rights of Indonesian peoples. Moreover, these two events get different treatment in its handling. The disparity in treatment between two cases is a big question related to the consistency of human rights enforcement in Indonesia. This study is a descriptive-qualitative research. While, to prove the truth, this study will use a comparative study. The findings show that the attitude of the United Nations that treat serious human rights violations in Timor-Timor and the events of 1965 in Indonesia, cannot be answered differently in the perspective of international law. Since it has a weakness where the political interests of ruling is very strong in influencing the decisions of the UN. The disparity in law enforcement in the event of serious human rights violations in 1965 and Timor-Timor due to the dynamics of international politics when it does not allow for the demands of human rights violations to the UNs’ International Court due to advantage for a certain state after the event. In order to reduce disparities in human rights violations, reconciliation is the most rational solution at this time compared remains demand the state for the violations. Besides, many human rights violations in certain countries that have successfully resolved through reconciliation approach.

scholarly journals The Uglier Side of Bonnie Scotland: the Tinker Housing Experiments

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-208
Author(s):  
Shamus McFee
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Local Authority ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
State Party ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Scottish Government

The aim of this paper is to illumine the insidious and covert nature of the racially motivated programme of measures, implemented by the State Party and other key stakeholders in Scottish society, ostensibly designed to crush and eradicate age-old Scottish Gypsy Traveller culture. To best rationalise those actions committed necessitates exploration of various themes: the treatment meted out, the mindset underpinning those actions, the attitudinal context, the intersectionality of the human rights violations and the long term effects of the damage sustained, both at an individual and collective level, by those subjected nationally to such assimilatory schemes, culminating in an inquisition of the reasons furnished by the Scottish Government for its subsequent refusal to grant an apology to the victims – despite repeated appeals to that end. The methodology will include personal photographs, reference to historical papers, relevant newspaper articles, and files from both national and local authority archives. The corollary of these investigations will conclude that the human rights of Scottish Gypsy Travellers have been irrefutably violated under international law; this has been executed with impunity by the authorities and, inarguably, constitutes a crime against humanity.

scholarly journals Non-pecuniary damages before the European Court of Human Rights: Forget the victim; it’s all about the state

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-369
Author(s):  
Veronika Fikfak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Individual Justice

AbstractThis article studies how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, the Court) adjusts damages for human rights violations. The article empirically analyses 13 years of ECtHR’s case law in relation to Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (torture, inhuman and degrading treatment), and 5 (arbitrary detention) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, the Convention). The goal is to understand whether the statements made by the Court about the aims pursued through just satisfaction are confirmed in practice. Through an empirical quantitative study relating to non-pecuniary damages, the article analyses the practice of the Court in awarding non-pecuniary damages for human rights violations and compares it to the competing visions of the ECtHR’s function. In particular, I am interested in determining whether just satisfaction is aimed at redressing the suffering of the victim, her circumstances and vulnerability, or whether the focus is more on the respondent state, its conduct and its past human rights record. The answers to these questions will contribute to the debate whether the ECtHR’s role is one of delivering ‘individual justice’ or whether the Court is – as an international court enforcing an international treaty – focused on the ‘state’.

Jus CogensafterGermanyv.Italy: Substantive and Procedural Rules Distinguished

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 979-1002 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEFAN TALMON
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Limited Effect ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractIn the case concerningJurisdictional Immunities of the State, the ICJ held that rules ofjus cogensdid not automatically displace hierarchically lower rules of state immunity. The Court's decision was based on the rationale that there was no conflict between these rules as the former were substantive rules while the latter were procedural in character. The ‘substantive–procedural’ distinction has been heavily criticized in the literature. Much of the criticism seems to be motivated by the unwanted result of the distinction, namely de facto impunity for the most serious human rights violations. This paper takes a step back from the alleged antinomy of human rights and state immunity and broadens the picture by looking at the relationship between substantive and procedural rules more generally. It is shown that substantive rules of ajus cogenscharacter generally leave procedural rules unaffected and, in particular, do not automatically override such rules. Substantive rules may, however, have a limited effect upon the interpretation and application of procedural rules. It is argued that the ‘substantive–procedural’ distinction is well established in international law and makes eminent sense even when substantive rules ofjus cogensand procedural rules of immunity are involved.

scholarly journals Геноцид как Тяжкое Преступление (Genocide As Extraordinary Crime)

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 951-962
Author(s):  
Nur Rohim Yunus ◽  
Latipah Nasution ◽  
Siti Nurhalimah ◽  
Siti Romlah
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
State Obligations

The state is a subject of international law who has power or power, so that the state is required not to abuse its authority. State obligations have been regulated in various international legal instruments. The protection of human rights has implications for the emergence of the fulfillment of human rights as a form of state responsibility. The state in this case must ensure to protect, to ensure, and to fulfill the human rights. Therefore, all acts of the state that discriminate against citizens of a certain ethnicity by committing genocide are serious human rights crimes that must be prosecuted by the International Court of Justice. This study uses qualitative research with a sociological and juridical approach. The results of the study state that the State of Indonesia has also regulated the behavior of preventing the crime of genocide in order to protect human rights.Keywords: Genocide; HAM; Extraordinary Crime Abstrak:Negara merupakan subjek hukum internasional yang memiliki kekuasaan atau power, sehingga negara dituntut tidak melakukan penyalahgunaan wewenang. Kewajiban negara telah diatur dalam berbagai instrumen hukum internasional. Perlindungan terhadap HAM berimplikasi terhadap munculnya pemenuhan HAM sebagai wujud tanggungjawab negara. Negara dalam hal ini harus memastikan to protect, to ensure, and to fulfill the human rights. Oleh karenanya, segala tindakan negara yang melakukan diskriminasi kepada warga negara dari etnis tertentu dengan melakukan genosida merupakan kejahatan HAM berat yang harus dituntut oleh Mahkamah Internasional. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian kualitatif dengan pendekatan sosiologis dan yuridis. Hasil penelitian menyatakan bahwa Negara Indonesia juga telah mengatur perilaku pencegahan tindak kejahatan Genosida guna menjaga HAM.Kata Kunci: Genosida; HAM; Extraordinary Crime Абстрактный:Государство является субъектом международного права, обладающим властью или властью, поэтому от государства требуется не злоупотреблять своей властью. Обязательства государства регулируются различными международно-правовыми документами. Защита прав человека имеет значение для возникновения реализации прав человека как формы ответственности государства. Государство в этом случае должно гарантировать защиту, обеспечение и соблюдение прав человека. Следовательно, все действия государства, дискриминирующие граждан определенной этнической принадлежности путем совершения геноцида, являются серьезными преступлениями в области прав человека, которые должны преследоваться Международным Судом. В данном исследовании используются качественные исследования с социологическим и юридическим подходом. Результаты исследования показывают, что государство Индонезия также регулирует действия по предотвращению преступления геноцида в целях защиты прав человека.Ключевые слова: Геноцид; Ветчина; Чрезвычайное Преступление

scholarly journals The State Duty to Protect against Human Rights Violations through Transnational Business Activities

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 13-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Krajewski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Environmental Laws ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Duty To Protect ◽  
Respective State

Transnational corporations are currently not formally bound by international human rights obligations. Instead, states have a duty to protect individuals against human rights abuses by third parties, including corporations. While it is undisputed that this obligation extends to all individuals living on the territory of the respective state, the extraterritorial scope of the duty to protect remains contested. This is especially the case for human rights violations through transnational business activities. The state on whose territory the violation occurs has a duty to protect human rights by adopting and implementing labour and environmental laws applicable in that state. However, it is less clear if and to what extent the state of the main seat of the mother company or the global ordering company — the ‘home state’ — also has a human rights duty to regulate transnational business activity. This article argues that such a duty can be based on existing human rights doctrine and standards of general international law such as the ‘no harm’ rule and the due diligence principle. It argues that states have a duty to regulate transnational business activities of corporations over which they exercise jurisdiction if human rights violations caused by such activities are predictable and preventable. In its final part, the article assesses various approaches in state practice which could be seen as instruments in the fulfilment of the duty to regulate transnational business activities.

scholarly journals Legal Protection of Uighur Muslim Ethnics in China from Perspective Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-40
Author(s):  
Endah Rantau Itasari
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Court ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Right

Legal protection of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang, China in the perspective of Human Rights and to find out and study the resolution of cases of gross international human rights violations against ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang, China. Legal protection of ethnic Uighurs based on Article 3,4,5,9,10,11, Universal Declaration of Human Rights by providing protection in the form of protection of the right to life, rights to freedom, and the right to self-security, etc. which is regulated in international legal instruments. 2) gross human rights violations committed by the Xinjiang government, China are not justified by international law because they violate the provisions stipulated in the subsequent Universal Declaration of Human Rights for incidents of human rights violations, then the dispute resolution between the two parties is carried out by negotiation or mediation first first If this method is not effective, the UN Security Council can submit the case to an international court such as the International Criminal Court set out in article 1 of the 1998 Rome Statute.

The ECHR and Responsibility of the State: Moving Towards Judicial Integration

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iulia Motoc ◽  
Johann Justus Vasel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
First Time

This chapter discusses the recent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), reaching the conclusion that the Court’s approach evolves towards judicial integration. After analysing the notion of lex specialis with regards to the question of responsibility and jurisdiction, as (implicitly) proposed by the ECtHR in the Catan judgement, the chapter considers the question of the attribution of conduct introduced for the first time in the Jaloud judgment. The chapter draws a parallel between the notion of effective control used in the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ’s) Nicaragua case and the Chiragov case. It argues that the Courts ruling in Chiragov is closer to the criteria of effective control imposed by the ICJ. The analysis will display that, in both recent decisions, the Court is moving towards judicial integration in the sense of a reasoned difference between the responsibility of human rights and general international law. It is evident that the European Convention of Human Rights is no self-contained regime.

scholarly journals Remarks by Maria Flores

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 79-82
Author(s):  
Maria Flores
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Small Department ◽  
The University

I first became involved with international law while I was at university. After graduating, I decided to teach public international law. As an undergraduate, I particularly enjoyed this branch of study. I was attracted to it because it helped me to understand the problems, challenges, and breakthroughs in the field of international relations on a global scale. Therefore, after facing a competitive entry process, I joined the international law department of the Universidad de la República. It was a small department, but the university had produced some well-known scholars like Eduardo Jiménez de Aréchaga, who became a judge at the International Court of Justice, and Hector Gross Espiell, who served as a judge at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Diplomatic Assurances Against Torture – An Effective Strategy? A Review of Jurisprudence and Examination of the Arguments

2008 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Skoglund
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
The State ◽  
Security Threats ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Actual Risk ◽  
Substantial Risk ◽  
International Human ◽  
Controversial Area

AbstractHuman rights organisations have warned repeatedly that basic human rights are being challenged in the so-called 'War on Terror'. One particularly controversial area is the use of diplomatic assurances against torture. According to international human rights instruments, the state shall not return anyone to countries in which they face a substantial risk of being subjected to torture. In the 'War on Terror', an increasing number of non-citizens are being deemed 'security threats', rendering them exempt from protection in many Western states. To be able to deport such 'threats' without compromising their duties under international law, states are increasingly willing to accept a diplomatic assurance against torture – that is, a promise from the state of return that it will not subject the returnee to torture. There is wide disagreement as to whether and/or when diplomatic assurances can render sufficient protection to satisfy the obligations of non-refoulement to risk of torture. Whereas the human rights society label such assurances as 'empty promises', others view them as effective, allowing states to retain their right to remove non-citizens without violating international law. This article reviews international and selected national jurisprudence on the topic of diplomatic assurances against torture and examines if and/or when such assurances might render sufficient protection against torture to enable removals in accordance with international law. The courts and committees that have reviewed the use of diplomatic assurances against torture have identified essential problems of using them, thus rejecting reliance on simple promises not to torture. However, they have often implied that sufficient protection might be rendered by developing the assurances. I argue that this approach risks leading the governments into trying to perfect a system that is inherently flawed – whilst, incidentally, deportations to actual risk of torture continue. Even carefully modelled assurances render only unreliable protection against torture. For this, and reasons connected to undesirable side-effects of their use, I argue that the practice should be rejected.

Remarks by Sean D. Murphy

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 193-199
Author(s):  
Sean D. Murphy ◽  
Claudio Grossman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Human Rights Movement ◽  
Interstate System ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Individual

Our conversation might begin by looking backward a bit. The human rights movement from 1945 onward has been one of the signature accomplishments of the field of international law, one that refocused our attention from a largely interstate system to a system where the individual moved in from the periphery to the center. Human rights champions point to numerous landmark treaties, numerous institutions, and the rise of NGOs as a critical vehicle for developing and monitoring human rights rules. Yet others look at the international human right system and still see the state as overly central, tolerating and paying lip service to human rights, but too easily discarding them when they prove to be inconvenient. The persistence of racism comes to mind. As a general matter, how would you assess the strengths and weaknesses of the system that was built essentially during your lifetime?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document