Human Rights: The Impact of International Action

The golden jubilee of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) coincides with the emergence of Asia as a centre of global attention. However, greater attention to Asia has been accompanied by some scepticism over its attitude towards human rights. The chapter provides an overall assessment of the impact of the ICCPR on the major Asian States, with an analysis of the factors affecting such influence. The chapter considers the involvement in, observance of, and compliance with the provisions of the ICCPR by these States. It further delves into the academic and judicial discourse on the ICCPR within these States, recording the domestic disposition towards judgments of foreign courts, the output of the Human Rights Committee, and the work of other international human rights bodies. It makes suggestions for developing mechanisms to improve the effectiveness of the ICCPR and for creating databases to perform further research in the area.

Procedural fairness: Between human rights law and social psychology

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights ◽

10.1177/0924051921992749 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 092405192199274

Author(s):

Cathérine Van de Graaf

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Procedural Justice ◽

Well Being ◽

Fair Trial ◽

European Convention ◽

Public Confidence ◽

Social Psychological ◽

Justice Research ◽

The Right ◽

The Impact

Fair procedures have long been a topic of great interest for human rights lawyers. Yet, few authors have drawn on research from other disciplines to enrich the discussion. Social psychological procedural justice research has demonstrated in various applications that, besides the final outcome, the manner in which one’s case is handled matters to people as well. Such research has shown the impact of procedural justice on individuals’ well-being, their acceptance of unfavourable decisions, perceptions of legitimacy and public confidence. The ECtHR has confirmed the desirability of these effects in its fair trial jurisprudence. Thus far, it remains unclear to what extent the guarantees offered by Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to a fair trial) coincide with the findings of empirical procedural justice research. This article aims to rectify this and uncover similarities between the two disciplines.

The Journalist—Source Relationship in Context: A Comparative Review of US and English Law

Common Law World Review ◽

10.1350/clwr.2009.38.3.0190 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 38 (3) ◽

pp. 268-294

Author(s):

Stuart Wallace

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Legal Protection ◽

State Level ◽

Potential Threat ◽

Shield Law ◽

Special Procedure ◽

European Court ◽

Comparative Review ◽

The Uk ◽

The Impact

This paper analyses the legal protection of the journalist–source relationship from both sides and the underlying interests involved. The paper begins by analysing why the relationship deserves protection. The position of journalists at common law is analysed with a discussion of the application of the principle established in Norwich Pharmacal v Customs and Excise to journalists. The development of immunity from contempt in s. 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 is examined to illustrate the ideological clash between the judiciary and journalists. The impact of the Human Rights Act and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights are analysed to assess whether this will lead to a change in attitudes in the UK. Finally, the potential threat to journalists posed by compelled evidentiary disclosure in criminal cases is reviewed, with a particular look at ‘special procedure’ material. The US section begins with an analysis of the law at federal level, the decisions of the Supreme Court, including the leading decision of Branzburg v Hayes, as well as the role the legislature has played. The paper then analyses protections provided at state level, with a case study of the California shield law and a review of Californian jurisprudence.