scholarly journals PENGATURAN ADVOKASI TERHADAP HAK-HAK PENYANDANG DISABILITAS TERHADAP DISKRIMINASI DI BIDANG PENEGAKAN HUKUM

Author(s):  
Ni Komang Sutrisni

Human Rights is the rights of human beings are naturally without exception and a privilege for the group, as well as the level of a particular social group. These rights are freedom  speech with freedom from all forms of oppression that must be upheld, not only by each individual of a State that recognizes the existence and respect of Human Rights itself, but must also be guaranteed by countries without any exceptions, including persons with disabilities in dealing with legal issues.This study used normative research for examining the principles and rules of law by using the legislation approach, and case-based approach. The regulation is regarding human rights in general stipulated in the Constitution Republif of Indonesia 1945, Act 39 of 1999 on Human Rights, Law No. 4 of 1997 on Persons with Disabilities, Law 19 of 2011 on the Ratification of Convention on the Rights of persons with Disabilities, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The right to non-discriminatory treatment as a continuation of the right to equal treatment before the law for persons with disabilities can be realized through the exercise of the right to a fair trial. All such regulations prohibit all forms of discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and will be effective protection against discrimination on any basis.  

2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 859-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lappin

AbstractThe right to vote is the most important political right in international human rights law. Framed within the broader right of political participation, it is the only right in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights not guaranteed as a universal human right but rather as a citizen's right. While limitations on the right to vote are permissible in respect of citizenship and age, residency-based restrictions are not explicitly provided. However, recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights endorse a view that voting rights may be conditioned on residency on the grounds of an individual's bond to their country-of-origin and the extent to which laws passed by that government would affect them. This article questions this proposition and explores whether disenfranchisement based solely on residency constitutes an unreasonable and discriminatory restriction to the essence of the right.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 132
Author(s):  
Mahmoud MOURAD ◽  
Rim FARHAT

This study carried out a quantitative analysis of several variables in both Lebanon and France. Specific aspects related to education, unemployment, vulnerable employment, gender gap, and participation in parliamentary life were studied. We started from the rationale that human rights necessitate that human beings so it is imperative that each individual enjoy civil and political rights, which means in addition to the right to life and the right equality, there should be the right to the legal recognition and participation in public life whether through employment or elections. These rights have been recognized by the international human rights laws, mainly in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by United Nations and by the existing local laws both in Lebanon and France.The tests of homogeneity for the panel data models from Lebanon and France have been implemented carefully considering the linear relationship between the real GDP as a dependent variable  and three of the independent variables consisting of the rate of women teachers in the secondary education , the rate of female to male ratio in labor force participation , the rate of women’s vulnerability to risks in the female labor force . The study demonstrated the importance of the Random Effects Model (REM) using the the log-transformed data. The study revealed a positive impact of both  and  on the real GDP  while the variable  has a negative impact both in Lebanon and France during the period (2008-2017).


Author(s):  
Bielefeldt Heiner, Prof ◽  
Ghanea Nazila, Dr ◽  
Wiener Michael, Dr

This chapter emphasizes that the outer manifestations of freedom of religion or belief (forum externum) are not in any sense less important than the inner nucleus of a person’s religious or belief-related conviction (forum internum), even though only the latter is protected unconditionally under international human rights law. This chapter also discusses the largely overlapping elements of the right to manifest one’s religion or belief ‘in worship, observance, practice and teaching’. Furthermore, it analyses the implications of the religion-related reservations, declarations, and objections made by a number of States when signing, ratifying, or acceding to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Broderick

The traditional dichotomy of rights between civil and political rights, on the one hand, and economic, social and cultural rights, on the other hand, has been increasingly eroded in scholarly and judicial discourse. The interdependence of the two sets of rights is a fundamental tenet of international human rights law. Nowhere is this interdependence more evident than in the context of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD or UN Convention). This article examines the indivisibility and interdependence of rights in the CRPD and, specifically, the positive obligations imposed on States Parties to the UN Convention, in particular the reasonable accommodation duty. The aim of the paper is to analyse, from a disability perspective, the approach adopted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or ‘Strasbourg Court’) in developing the social dimension of certain civil and political rights in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), namely Articles 2 and 3 (on the right to life and the prohibition on torture, inhuman and degrading treatment, respectively), Article 8 (on the right to private and family life) and Article 14 ECHR (on non-discrimination). Ultimately, this paper examines the influence of the CRPD on the interpretation by the Strasbourg Court of the rights of persons with disabilities under the ECHR. It argues that, while the Court is building some bridges to the CRPD, the incremental and often fragmented approach adopted by the Court could be moulded into a more principled approach, guided by the CRPD.


2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 521-556
Author(s):  
Michael Hamilton

AbstractInformed by the ‘assembly’ jurisprudence of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, this article addresses fundamental questions about the meaning and scope of ‘assembly’ in Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In seeking to determine when the right of peaceful assembly might properly be engaged, the article explores the interrelationship of assembly with expression and association and proposes a definition of ‘assembly’—for the purposes of its protection—as ‘an intentional gathering by two or more people (including in private and online/virtual spaces)’. Such definitional reflection is particularly timely in light of the Human Rights Committee's drafting of General Comment No 37 on Article 21.


2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gauthier de Beco

AbstractThis article argues that a new understanding of the indivisibility of human rights has emerged through the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The CRPD has blurred the distinction between civil and political rights, on the one hand, and economic and social rights, on the other. After showing how this distinction has been blurred in the Convention, the article critically analyses the impact this has had on the concept of indivisibility, as well as its consequences for international human rights law more generally. It shows that there is now a shift away from a preoccupation with different categories of rights and towards concern for the real and actual enjoyment of human rights.


Criminology ◽  
2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay S. Albanese

The concept of human rights is an old idea, but its application to criminology and criminal justice is fairly new. Human rights are those rights seen as being fundamental freedoms to which all human beings are entitled. In the United States, they are referred to as civil rights, most of which are enumerated in the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights and which include freedom of speech, assembly, privacy, equality before law, and other civil and political rights. Other countries have similar lists of rights guaranteed to all citizens. The notion of human rights goes beyond civil and political rights, however, and also commonly includes the right to opportunities for work, education, and fair treatment in all aspects of life. Writings on human rights cover centuries, consisting of many works of political and social philosophy that provide the basis for natural and individual rights in the face of the greater power of governments. Many of these classic works are summarized in other reference works, such as The Encyclopedia of Human Rights and The Oxford Handbook of Political Theory, both cited in this entry. This guide to sources focuses on contributions to human rights literature and their connections to criminology and criminal justice.


1978 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 145-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicente Navarro

This paper presents an analysis and critique of the U.S. government's current emphasis on human rights; and (a) its limited focus on only some civil and political components of the original U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, and (b) its disregard for economic and social rights such as the rights to work, fair wages, health, education, and social security. The paper discusses the reasons for that limited focus and argues that, contrary to what is widely presented in the media and academe: (1) civil and political rights are highly restricted in the U.S.; (2) those rights are further restricted in the U.S. when analyzed in their social and economic dimensions; (3) civil and political rights are not independent of but rather intrinsically related to and dependent on the existence of socioeconomic rights; (4) the definition of the nature and extension of human rights in their civil, political, social, and economic dimensions is not universal, but rather depends on the pattern of economic and political power relations particular to each society; and (5) the pattern of power relations in the U.S. society and the western system of power, based on the right to individual property and its concomitant class structure and relations, is incompatible with the full realization of human rights in their economic, social, political, and civil dimensions. This paper further indicates that U.S. financial and corporate capital, through its overwhelming influence over the organs of political power in the U.S. and over international bodies and agencies, is primarily responsible for the denial of the human rights of the U.S. population and many populations throughout the world as well.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-123
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

Abstract Article 12(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) provides that ‘[n]o one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.’ The jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee shows that Committee members have often disagreed on the question of whether the right under Article 12(4) is reserved for citizens only or it can be claimed by non-citizens who consider the countries in which they were born or they have lived for longer periods as their own. In its earlier case law, the Committee held that Article 12(4) is applicable to nationals only. Since 1999, when General Comment No.27 was adopted, the Committee has moved towards extending the right under Article 12(4) to non-nationals. Its latest case law appears to have supported the Committee’s position that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals. Central to both majority and minority decisions in which the Committee has dealt with Article 12(4), is whether the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) support either view. This article relies on the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) to argue that it does not support the view that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document