Springtime for Freedom of Religion or Belief: Will Newly Democratic Arab States Guarantee International Human Rights Norms or Perpetuate Their Violation?

Indonesia has entered the era of human rights characterized by increasingly massive domestication of the international human rights norms in national legal system. In such a situation, in fact, the rights to freedom of religion and of belief for minorities have not received their benefits and instead they become victims. This Article seeks to investigate how it can happen by using the legal politics analysis as perspective. Legal politics here will focus on how the governments of several regimes in Indonesia have used their legislation and policy to regulate matters relating to the rights to freedom of religion and belief. In addition, it will also see how the Constitutional Court contributed to this issue by influencing the legal politics as this Court is the sole authority in interpreting the constitutional right to the freedom of religion and belief thereby affecting its normation and implementation. Key words: Religious minority group, human rights, legal politics of Indonesia

Download Full-text

Germany

10.1093/oso/9780198786627.003.0006 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Valentin Aichele

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Direct Effect ◽

Federal Courts ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Persons With Disabilities ◽

Public International Law ◽

Monitoring Mechanism ◽

International Human ◽

Human Rights Norms

This chapter analyses the use and interpretation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in sixty-nine decisions of German federal courts between 2009 and mid-2016. German courts’ failure to be proactive in demonstrating ‘friendliness towards public international law’ when dealing with international human rights norms has been criticised. The National CRPD Monitoring Mechanism addressed problems in the application of the law. This chapter investigates the courts’ understanding of basic CRPD concepts, judicial techniques, interpretation methods and specific CRPD provisions. The importance of the concepts of self-executing provisions and direct effect is discussed. In quantitative terms, German courts have referred to the CRPD more often than any other UN international human rights instrument. Furthermore, in qualitative terms, federal courts have become more receptive towards the CRPD. However, it is clear that much of the potential for courts to use the CRPD in the realisation of the rights of persons with disabilities remains untapped.

Download Full-text

Virtuous Flexibility. The Application of International Human Rights Norms by the Bosnian Human Rights Chamber

International Law in Domestic Courts: Rule of Law Reform in Post-Conflict States ◽

10.1017/9781839700729.010 ◽

2012 ◽

pp. 175-194

Author(s):

Antoine Buyse

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Human Rights ◽

International Human ◽

Human Rights Norms

Download Full-text

When the State No Longer Kills: International Human Rights Norms and Abolition of Capital Punishment. By Sangmin Bae. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2007. 178p. $65.00 cloth, $21.95 paper.

Perspectives on Politics ◽

10.1017/s1537592708081723 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 6 (3) ◽

pp. 637-639

Author(s):

Howard Tolley

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Human Rights ◽

Capital Punishment ◽

The State ◽

State University ◽

International Human Rights ◽

International Human ◽

Human Rights Norms

Download Full-text

Municipal Courts and the International Interpretive Principle: Al-Kateb v Godwin

University of New South Wales Law Journal ◽

10.53637/jfvk4689 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 43 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Michael Kirby

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Common Law ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Human Rights ◽

Global Problems ◽

The Common ◽

International Human ◽

Human Rights Norms ◽

Constitutional Adjudication

This article examines the decision in Al-Kateb v Godwin (2004) 219 CLR 562. It revisits the suggested ‘heresy‘ that international human rights law may influence the interpretation of the Australian Constitution and other legal texts. Accessing universal human rights law, including in constitutional adjudication, was endorsed in the Bangalore Principles on the Domestic Application of International Human Rights Norms 1988. The author suggests that interpreting statutory language in this way is not dissimilar to the common-law principle of interpreting statutes so as to uphold basic rights. But should an analogous approach be permissible in deciding the meaning of constitutional language? Although arguably invoked by the majority of the High Court in Mabo v Queensland [No 2] (1992) 175 CLR 1, in the context of declaring the common-law, so far this approach has not been accepted for constitutional elaboration in Australia. But should this be so in the age of global problems and internationalism?

Download Full-text