International Human Rights Law

Human Rights Law ◽

The Status ◽

Civilized Society ◽

The U.S

This chapter focuses on the two sources of international law: custom and treaties. Customary international law is the term used to describe rules that are so widely accepted and so deeply held that they help to define what it means to belong to a civilized society. The question of whether customary international law is binding on the United States came before the U.S. Supreme Court as long ago as 1900 in a case called Paquete Habana. Whereas treaty law often covers the same ground as customary international law. Torture is forbidden by customary international law, for example, and prohibitions against torture are also set forth in several multilateral treaties. The effect is to reinforce recognition that a particular norm set forth in a treaty has the status of customary law.

International Human Rights Law

The International Human Rights Movement ◽

10.23943/princeton/9780691200989.003.0004 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 94-116

Author(s):

Aryeh Neier

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

The United States ◽

Customary Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

The Status ◽

Civilized Society ◽

The U.S

This chapter discusses custom and treaties as the two sources of international law. It explains the customary international law as the term used to describe rules that are widely accepted and deeply held and are used to define what it means to belong to a civilized society. It also recounts the case called “Paquete Habana” in the U.S. Supreme Court that addresses the question of whether customary international law is binding on the United States. The chapter talks about the treaty law or conventional law as the source of multilateral conventions that often covers the same ground as customary international law. It analyzes the prohibitions against “torture” that are set forth in several multilateral treaties and reinforce recognition that a particular norm set forth in a treaty has the status of customary law.

The Idea of International Human Rights Law

10.1093/oso/9780198749844.001.0001 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Steven Wheatley

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Moral Concept ◽

Fragmentation Of International Law

Human Rights Treaties ◽

International Human ◽

International Human Rights Law has emerged as an academic subject in its own right, separate from, but still related to, International Law. This book explains the distinctive nature of the new discipline by examining the influence of the moral concept of human rights on general international law. Rather than make use of moral philosophy or political theory, the work explains the term ‘human rights’ by examining its usage in international law practice, on the understanding that words are given meaning through their use. Relying on complexity theory to make sense of the legal practice in the United Nations, the core human rights treaties, and customary international law, The Idea of International Human Rights Law shows how a moral concept of human rights emerged, and then influenced the international law doctrine and practice on human rights, a fact that explains the fragmentation of international law and the special nature of International Human Rights Law.

Jurisdictional Immunities of the State for Serious Violations of International Human Rights Law or the Law of Armed Conflict

Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international ◽

10.1017/s0069005800010857 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 50 ◽

pp. 243-287 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Paul David Mora

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

The State ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Law Of Armed Conflict ◽

International Human

SummaryIn its recent decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy: Greece Intervening), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that Italy had failed to respect immunities enjoyed by Germany under international law when the Italian courts allowed civil actions to be brought against Germany for alleged violations of international human rights law (IHRL) and the law of armed conflict (LOAC) committed during the Second World War. This article evaluates the three arguments raised by Italy to justify its denial of immunity: first, that peremptory norms of international law prevail over international rules on jurisdictional immunities; second, that customary international law recognizes an exception to immunity for serious violations of IHRL or the LOAC; and third, that customary international law recognizes an exception to immunity for torts committed by foreign armed forces on the territory of the forum state in the course of an armed conflict. The author concludes that the ICJ was correct to find that none of these arguments deprived Germany of its right under international law to immunity from the civil jurisdiction of the Italian courts.

Introduction The customary law of human rights is hiding in plain sight

10.1093/oso/9780192845696.003.0001 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-8

Author(s):

William A. Schabas

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Customary Law ◽

Political Rights ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Regional Systems ◽

Second World

Many areas of international law developed first as custom and were only subsequently, generally in the course of the twentieth century, subject to codification. Human rights law was different. It was viewed as quintessentially a matter of domestic concern, a subject shrouded in State sovereignty. Only following the Second World War was international human rights law recognised as a source of binding obligations, mainly through the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other instruments of the United Nations as well as the regional systems. Later, jurists began contending that the norms in these instruments might also be customary in nature. They struggled with identifying the two classic elements in the determination of custom, opinio juris and State practice. Most analysis of the content of customary international law was rather perfunctory and also quite conservative, confining itself largely to civil and political rights.

4. Human Rights in International Law

Human Rights: Politics and Practice ◽

10.1093/hepl/9780198708766.003.0005 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Rhona K. M. Smith

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Legal Context ◽

National Human ◽

International Human ◽

United Nations System

This chapter examines the international legal context of human rights. It first considers the historical evolution of international human rights law, with particular emphasis on the reincarnation of philosophical ideals as international laws (treaties), before discussing the principal sources of international human rights law such as customary international law and ‘soft’ law. It then describes the various forms of expressing human rights, along with the core international human rights instruments. It also explores the mechanisms for monitoring and enforcing human rights, including the United Nations system, regional human rights systems, and national human rights systems. Finally, it explains the process followed for a state wishing to be bound to the provisions of a treaty and the benefits of listing human rights in treaties.

Customary International Law and International Human Rights Law: A Proposal for the Expansion of the Alien Tort Statute

Indiana International & Comparative Law Review ◽

10.18060/17886 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 23 (3) ◽

pp. 523-554

Author(s):

Anne Lowe

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

International Human ◽

Alien Tort Statute

Part III The Limitations and Role of the Persistent Objector Rule, 8 Maintaining Exemption: ‘Fundamental’ Norms and Extra-Legal Factors

10.1093/law/9780198704218.003.0009 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Green James A

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Actual State ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

State Practice ◽

The Face ◽

Jus Cogens

A notable minority critique of the persistent objector rule is that the rule is not supported by actual state practice. The first part of this book dismissed these critiques. This chapter explores the ‘softer’ versions of the persistent objector rule. The first is that persistent objection is not permissible in relation to particularly ‘fundamental’ customary international law norms, even those that have not attained jus cogens status. This claim has most commonly been made with regard to norms of customary international human rights law. The chapter then turns to a related claim made by critics of the persistent objector rule, which is that it is commonly unavailing, not just in the face of especially ‘fundamental’ norms, but in general.

American Courts, Global Norms

Restoring the Global Judiciary ◽

10.23943/princeton/9780691179124.003.0011 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 220-251

Author(s):

Martin S. Flaherty

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

The United States ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

High Profile ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Heated Area ◽

International Human

This chapter considers a phenomenon that has consistently been among the most contentious of modern legal controversies—the application by American courts of international human rights. Recent years have witnessed high-profile conflicts over international human rights law. One major battle involves whether, when, and how U.S. courts should recognize rights set out in the nation's treaty obligations. Another heated area of contention has arisen under an act of Congress, the Alien Tort Statute. Perhaps most heated of all have been debates over the use of foreign legal materials, including customary international law, to interpret the Constitution of the United States. In these areas as well, the Supreme Court, and the judiciary generally, has wavered. Yet once more, a fresh appreciation of the principles the Founders entrenched, the subsequent custom that on balance confirms that original vision, and the consequences of the way nations interact in a globalized age—all these imperatives point away from the path that the judiciary appears more and more to be considering, and back to the course first established.

Armed Groups and Customary International Human Rights Law

10.1093/oso/9780198808381.003.0011 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Katharine Fortin

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Armed Groups ◽

Legal Obligations ◽

International Human

Chapter 11 analyses arguments that armed groups are bound by human rights law by virtue of customary international law. In doing so, the chapter draws together theories that have been explored in Chapters 7 and 9 about the relevance of territory to the acquisition of legal obligations. The chapter starts by examining the debates about how customary international human rights law binding upon armed groups should be constituted, finding that it will be formed through State practice and opinio juris. It ends by examining different articulations of the theory that armed groups are bound by customary international law by accountability mechanisms, evaluating their credence and making suggestions for their improvement.

Sex as a Protected Ground in International and Domestic Law

Brill Research Perspectives in Comparative Discrimination Law ◽

10.1163/24522031-12340010 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 4 (3-4) ◽

pp. 1-124

Author(s):

Christine Forster ◽

Vedna Jivan

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Sex Discrimination ◽

The United States ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Research Perspectives ◽

Evolution And Development ◽

Legal Contexts ◽

Domestic Law

Abstract This volume in the Brill Research Perspectives in Comparative Discrimination Law addresses sex as a protected ground in international and domestic law. It compares sex discrimination protection through three thematic lenses. Firstly, it charts and compares the evolution and development of sex discrimination protection in international human rights law in three treaty-bodies – the CEDAW Committee, the HRC and the CESCR. Secondly, it then takes up the evolution and development of sex discrimination protection in three domestic law frameworks – the United States, Australia and India. Finally, the development of sex discrimination protection in international law is compared with the development of sex discrimination protection in the domestic legal contexts of the three country examples, with the implications of that comparison analysed. This volume seeks to show that despite differences in the way that international approaches to sex discrimination are translated into domestic law and differences in social, political and cultural contexts women face similar limitations in accessing justice through sex discrimination frameworks.