Equal Recognition

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Patten
Keyword(s):  
Minority Culture ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Equal Recognition ◽  
Major Argument ◽  
Cultural Justice

This chapter explores the question of under what conditions, if any, are there reasons for thinking that people have a complaint based on justice about the decline of the minority culture? More specifically: under what conditions can people justifiably make such a complaint while adopting a broadly liberal account of what justice is? It examines the implications of neutrality of treatment for the justification of minority cultural rights. It distinguishes between procedural and nonprocedural accounts of cultural justice and, within the former category, between “basic” and “full” liberal proceduralism. The major argument is that neutrality of treatment mandates the latter form of proceduralism, which incorporates a concern for what referred to as “equal recognition.” The second half of the chapter considers and responds to several objections to this defense of cultural rights.

scholarly journals Equal Recognition: A Reply to Four Critics

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-191
Author(s):  
Alan Patten
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Preservation ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Normative Basis ◽  
Equal Recognition ◽  
Liberal Multiculturalism

Equal Recognition seeks to restate the case in favour of liberal multiculturalism in a manner that is responsive to major objections that have been advanced by critics in recent years. The book engages, among other questions, with two central unresolved problems. First, how should ideas of culture and cultural preservation be understood, given widespread suspicion that these ideas rely on an unavowed, but objectionable, form of essentialism? And, second, what exactly is the normative basis of cultural rights claims, and what are the limits on those claims? My four commentators advance a variety of different criticisms of the book’s answers to these questions. I offer replies to each of their main challenges.

scholarly journals Culture, neutrality and minority rights

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-374
Author(s):  
Aurélia Bardon
Keyword(s):  
Significant Role ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Liberal Neutrality ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Fair Treatment ◽  
Cultural Minority ◽  
Equal Recognition

Alan Patten’s Equal Recognition offers a new and powerful argument to support the ‘strong cultural rights thesis’. Unlike other culturalist arguments, his argument is not based on a problematic and essentialist conception of culture but on a particular understanding of liberal neutrality as fair treatment and equal recognition. What justifies the existence of such rights is not culture itself but what culture means for people and the negative consequences it can have for them when they form a cultural minority. Patten’s argument, however, faces another challenge: I argue that culture and neutrality cannot be fully reconciled, and that, ultimately, the concept of culture might not be playing any significant role in his argument for minority rights.

scholarly journals Multiculturalism on the Back Seat? Culture, Religion, and Justice

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-146
Author(s):  
Jocelyn Maclure
Keyword(s):  
Normative Theory ◽  
Social Cooperation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Liberal Egalitarianism ◽  
Cultural Minorities ◽  
The Status ◽  
Equal Recognition ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
Sophisticated Version

Alan Patten’s Equal Recognition is a major contribution to the normative literature on minority rights. I nonetheless suggest that liberal culturalism as a normative theory, even in Patten’s sophisticated version, is ill suited to deal with the challenges related to the status of religion in the public sphere that are so prevalent in contemporary democracies. In addition, I submit that Patten did not supply a fully convincing answer to the argument that liberal egalitarianism, well understood, is capacious enough to secure fair terms of social cooperation for members of cultural minorities, making the (allegedly burdensome) language of “cultural rights” and “cultural recognition” superfluous.

scholarly journals Neutrality as a Basis for Minority Cultural Rights

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-156
Author(s):  
Andrew Lister
Keyword(s):  
Main Issue ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Equal Recognition

This comment examines the idea of ‘neutrality of treatment’ that is at the heart of Alan Patten’s defense of minority cultural rights in Equal Recognition. The main issue I raise is whether neutrality of treatment can do without an ‘upstream’ or foundational commitment to neutrality of justification.

Review: Islam and politics in Iranian Kurdistan at a time of revolution: the life of Ahmad Moftizadeh

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
Martin Van Bruinessen
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Political Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Islam And Politics ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Revolutionary Regime

Ali Ezzatyar, The Last Mufti of Iranian Kurdistan: Ethnic and Religious Implications in the Greater Middle East. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. xv + 246 pp., (ISBN 978-1-137-56525-9 hardback).For a brief period in 1979, when the Kurds had begun confronting Iran’s new Islamic revolutionary regime and were voicing demands for autonomy and cultural rights, Ahmad Moftizadeh was one of the most powerful men in Iranian Kurdistan. He was the only Kurdish leader who shared the new regime’s conviction that a just social and political order could be established on the basis of Islamic principles. The other Kurdish movements were firmly secular, even though many of their supporters were personally pious Muslims.

Provision of Remedies for Violation of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: A Comparative Study of the United Nations, Inter-American and African Human Rights Systems

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 298-318
Author(s):  
Roman Girma Teshome
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
Regional Monitoring ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
The Past ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
To Receive

The effectiveness of human rights adjudicative procedures partly, if not most importantly, hinges upon the adequacy of the remedies they grant and the implementation of those remedies. This assertion also holds water with regard to the international and regional monitoring bodies established to receive individual complaints related to economic, social and cultural rights (hereinafter ‘ESC rights’ or ‘socio-economic rights’). Remedies can serve two major functions: they are meant, first, to rectify the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage sustained by the particular victim, and second, to resolve systematic problems existing in the state machinery in order to ensure the non-repetition of the act. Hence, the role of remedies is not confined to correcting the past but also shaping the future by providing reforming measures a state has to undertake. The adequacy of remedies awarded by international and regional human rights bodies is also assessed based on these two benchmarks. The present article examines these issues in relation to individual complaint procedures that deal with the violation of ESC rights, with particular reference to the case laws of the three jurisdictions selected for this work, i.e. the United Nations, Inter-American and African Human Rights Systems.

Some Comments on the Highest Attainable Standard of Health

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 134-140
Author(s):  
Gabriela Belova ◽  
Stanislav Pavlov
Keyword(s):  
Health Resources ◽  
Right To Health ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Special Rapporteur ◽  
Health It ◽  
Significant Development ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Optional Protocol ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe last decades present a significant development of the economic, social and cultural rights and specifically, the right to health. Until 2000, the right to health has not been interpreted officially. By providing international standards, General Comment No.14 on the right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health has led to wider agreement that the right to health includes the social determinants of health such as access to various conditions, services, goods or facilities that are crucial for its implementation. The Reports of the Special Rapporteur on the right to health within the UN human rights system have contributed to the process of gaining the greater clarity about the right to health. It is obvious that achieving the highest attainable level of health depends on the principle of progressive implementation and the availability of the necessary health resources. The possibility individual complaints to be considered by the Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights was introduced with the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, entered into force in 2013.

Proposing a Way to Develop the Substantive Content of the Right of Access to Adequate Housing: An Alternative to the Reasonableness Review Model

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-93
Author(s):  
Gustav Muller
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Municipal Services ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Convincing Case ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
Review Model ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

In this article an attempt is made to put forward a convincing case for giving substantive content to the right of access to adequate housing and looks towards relevant international law elaborations on the meaning of this right as contained in the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). It does so while being aware of the Constitutional Court’s prior rejection of an international law-based minimum core interpretation of the right and opting, instead, for the so-called model of reasonableness breview. Given that the court has so expressly taken and stuck to this stance, it is argued in the article that an international law-based substantive interpretation of the right is possible – given that South Africa has recently ratified the ICESCR – and that it is preferable given the shortfalls of the model of reasonableness review. The article further highlights what difference the preferred reading of section 26(1) would make as to how courts ‘interpret’ reasonableness, that is, how courts review compliance with section 26 at present if ‘adequate’ housing is understood as having security of tenure and access to basic municipal services; is affordable, habitable and accessible; is located in close proximity to social facilities; and is culturally adequate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document