scholarly journals The Legal Dimensions of the Principle of Non-refoulement in International Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-96
Author(s):  
Ahmed El-MohtadyBellah
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Asylum ◽  
International Protection ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
The Status ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the principle of non-refoulement, which is widely recognized as indispensable for providing an effective international protection for refugees. Considering the fact that the right to asylum remains within the discretion of the receiving State, some exceptions to this principle have been recognized in the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Although the principle of non-refoulement was adopted by an international convention (the 1951 Convention), it has considerably developed since then until it became a part of customary international law. This means that its binding force extends to all states of the international community, even those that are not bound by the terms of the Convention. Indeed, there has been controversy in jurisprudence on the extent to which the principle of non-refoulement has evolved as one that owns jus cogens character within the rules of international law, which means that its application will not be confined to persons who acquire the status of refugees, but extends to all persons whose lives, freedoms or safety are at risk. The State of Qatar issued Law No. (11) of 2018 regulating political asylum, affirming the principle of non-refoulement in Article (15). The Law did not provide for any exceptions to the principle of non-refoulement, as the case within article (33) of the 1951 Refugee Convention. This reflects State of Qatar’s commitment as to current developments regarding the principle of non-refoulement.

Part I The UNDRIP’s Relationship to Existing International Law, Ch.1 Who Are ‘Indigenous Peoples’?: An Examination of Concepts Concerning Group Membership in the UNDRIP

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Castellino Joshua ◽  
Doyle Cathal
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The People ◽  
The Status ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Continuum

This chapter assesses the question of the people and peoples to whom the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) applies, tracking the concepts of person, persons, groups, people, and peoples in international law, and the UNDRIP's contribution to these concepts. The opening section of the chapter illustrates that the status of indigenous peoples in customary international law stands closer to peoples in the continuum between minorities and peoples. Minorities, while gaining the right to protection and promotion of their group identity, do not automatically gain the right to self-determination. Indigenous peoples ought to, but their rights towards this are constrained by state interests.

scholarly journals The Binding Force of the Nuclear Disarmament Obligation upon North Korea and Its Legal Implication under International Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 07 (01) ◽  
pp. 121-140
Author(s):  
Diajeng Christianti ◽  
Jaka Rizkullah
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
International Law ◽  
Nuclear Weapon ◽  
North Korea ◽  
Nuclear Disarmament ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
The Status ◽  
Nuclear Tests ◽  
Legal Implication

Article VI of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) requires all state parties to disarm nuclear weapon. Following its official withdrawal from NPT in 2003, North Korea maintains to develop its nuclear weapon and conducts several nuclear tests. Moreover, it even proudly declared as a nuclear state in its Constitution's preamble. It also argues that the nuclear weapon developments and tests were conducted within their territory and, currently, North Korea is not bound by any treaty prohibiting such developments and tests. The statement is strongly opposed by the international community, particularly their neighboring states: Japan and South Korea. This article argues that the obligation to disarm nuclear weapon deriving from the NPT still binds North Korea since such obligation has reached the status of customary international law and consequently binds every state unless such state persistently objects the rule from the beginning of its formation. In this case, North Korea has failed to prove itself as a persistent objector due to the fact it used to be a party to the NPT. This article also argues that, according to 2001 ILC Articles, Japan and South Korea still have a proper legal basis to claim for reparation against North Korea despite the fact that they are not specifically affected by North Korea’s conducts.

9. Integrity of the person

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel S Rodley
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Right ◽  
Peremptory Norms

This chapter examines rights at the core of the concept of integrity of the person. Specifically, it considers the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment and the right to life. The chapter addresses complex definitional issues of what constitutes torture, and addresses other ill-treatment, mainly in the light of treaty definitions and case law of courts and other bodies charged with applying relevant treaties. The same approach is taken with respect to the right to life, where the central issues of the limits international law places on the death penalty and on the use of force by security forces and law enforcement officials are considered. Both rights are considered to be rules of customary international law and probably peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens).

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.: The Supreme court and the Alien Tort Statute

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 601-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P. Stewart ◽  
Ingrid Wuerth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
International Law ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
Alien Tort Statute

The U.S. Supreme Court has finally decidedKiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.It is the Court’s second modern decision applying the cryptic Alien Tort Statute (ATS), which was enacted in 1789. Since the 1980 court of appeals decision inFilartiga v. Pena-Iralapermitting a wide of range human rights cases to go forward under the statute’s auspices, the ATS has garnered worldwide attention and has become the main engine for transnational human rights litigation in the United States. The statute itself and the decisions that it generates also serve as state practice that might contribute to the developing customary international law of civil universal jurisdiction, immunity for defendants in human rights cases, the duties of corporations, and the right to a remedy for violations of fundamental human rights. During the 1990s, the ATS became the focal point for academic disputes about the status of customary international law as federal common law. Indeed, to the extent that the “culture wars” have played out in U.S. foreign relations law, the ATS has been their center of gravity.

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.

Grotian Moments and Peremptory Norms of General International Law: Friendly Facilitators or Fatal Foes?

Grotiana ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-353
Author(s):  
Dire Tladi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
High Threshold ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The One ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
The Right ◽  
Peremptory Norms ◽  
Law Making

Abstract The concept of a Grotian moment remains rather obscure in international law. On the one hand, it can refer simply to an empirical fact which galvanises the ordinary law-making processes, whether treaty-making or State practice, resulting in major shifts in international law. On the other hand, a Grotian moment might be seen as an event so significant that it results in an extraordinary shift in international law without full adherence to the processes for law-making. The former understanding has little legal significance, while the latter, which would be legally significant, would be controversial and without legal basis. Against this background the article discusses the intersections between peremptory norms and Grotian Moments. It does this by looking at the intersection between the two concepts as well as the intersection between Grotian Moments, on the one hand and, on the other hand, particular jus cogens norms. With respect to the former, for example, the article will consider whether the high threshold of peremptory status facilitates and hinders Grotian moments. With respect to the latter, the article will consider particular norms that have been said to have shifted on account of the Grotian moments, namely the right to use of force in self-defence as well humanitarian intervention.

Why the Prohibition of Enforced Disappearance Has Attained Jus Cogens Status in International Law

2012 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Historical Developments ◽  
Jus Cogens

This article examines the question whether jus cogens includes the prohibition of enforced disappearances, and why this is important. It surveys the meaning, context, development, status and position of jus cogens as well as enforced disappearance in international law, including their relationship to each other. It surveys the status of enforced disappearance in international law in general, as well as in international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law. The article scans the historical developments of international law, including developments over the last few decades, to indicate that the prohibition against enforced disappearance has attained jus cogens status. The legal framework is examined, including the jurisprudence that has emanated from a variety of sources. Specific treaties that deal with enforced disappearance are reviewed including the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICED). What jus cogens is, what the controversies are that surround it, the different ways that it is understood within different schools of thought, and how these issues impact on whether the prohibition of enforced disappearance has attained jus cogens status are studied. The historical developments around enforced disappearances are examined in some detail to determine what its status is, particularly in relation to state practice, so as to determine whether it is jus cogens.

scholarly journals The Role of Customary International Law in Regulating the Activities of Armed Groups in the Field of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 195-204
Author(s):  
R. I. Sharipov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
Peremptory Norms

Over the past decades, there has been a significant increase in the number of armed groups involved in armed conflicts around the world, as well as in their impact on the rights and freedoms of the population under their control. Facing various situations of systematic violations of human rights by non-state actors, experts in the field of international human rights law began to consider the theoretical justification for the mandatory nature of the provisions on the observance and protection of human rights for armed groups. In this regard, a number of scholars have turned to the theory of customary international law, the acceptability of which is being investigated by the author of this paper. The author examines the provisions underlying this theory and the persuasiveness of the argumentation used by its supporters. Based on an analysis of the nature of customary international law, its structural elements, their interpretation by the UN International Court of Justice in its decisions and the relationship of customary international law with peremptory norms of jus cogens, the author concludes that the theory under consideration is currently unable to explain the existence of obligations of armed groups in the field of human rights.

scholarly journals Unmuddying the Waters: Evaluating the Legal Basis of the Human Right to Water Under Treaty Law, Customary International Law, and the General Principles of Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 455
Author(s):  
Ndjodi Ndeunyema
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Reflective Equilibrium ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Treaty Law ◽  
Sliding Scale ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Water Provision ◽  
The Right

This article evaluates the existence of a freestanding, general human right to water under each of the three principal sources of international law: treaty, customary international law, and the general principles of law. To date, the right to water has been derived from treaty law, most prominently as part of the right to an adequate standard of living in article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (as implied by General Comment 15 to the ICESCR). The potential importance of a non-treaty based right to water––as a matter of customary international law or a general principle of law––is that it would bind all states, including states that are not parties to treaties with right to water provisions. Therefore, this article evaluates the state practice and opinio juris elements of custom supporting a right to water. Recognizing the disputed nature of how these two elements generally interact to crystallize into a customary norm, the article considers the problem using two distinct methodological approaches: the sliding scale approach and the reflective equilibrium approach. Finally, the paper considers whether a right to water is supported by the general principles of law. Although the right to water is not directly created by the general principles of law, the principles can nevertheless be applied to develop states’ positive and negative obligations for water provision.

International Human Rights Law

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aryeh Neier
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Customary International 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document