An Afro-Communitarian Compatibilist View on Rights?

Theoria ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (159) ◽  
pp. 142-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siseko H. Kumalo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
African Philosophy ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Civil Union ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
African Charter ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Individual Human

The historical debate, in African philosophy, on personhood has been characterised by radical and moderate communitarianism seen through the scholarship of Menkiti (1984) and Gyekye (1997) and continues contemporarily with scholars considering its implications on contemporary conceptions of rights.Responding to Chemhuru’s compatibilist view that, he maintains, safeguards and guarantees individual rights, I showcase how his conception of the community as prior to the individual betrays his project. Using the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights to contextualise rights discourse in Afro-communitarianism, Chemhuru avers that once collective rights have been gained, individuals can claim their rights. I critique this position to suggest that Chemhuru undermines his own project of compatibilism through placing the community prior to the individual. Using the Civil Union Act (2006) as a legislative framework that safeguards and guarantees individual human rights, I test Chemhuru’s compatibilist view. I conclude by highlighting the divergences between constitutionalism and Afro-communitarianism.

THE COLLECTIVE RIGHTS IN THE CONDITIONS OF LIBERAL MULTICULTURAL SOCIETIES AND THEIR LEGAL NATURE

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-95
Author(s):  
Борис Молчанов ◽  
Boris Molchanov ◽  
Григорий Стародубцев ◽  
Grigoriy Starodubtsyev ◽  
Жанна Иванова ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Identity ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Representation ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Language Minorities ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Individual Human

In article individual human rights on cultural identity, political representation or on participation in the collective or group rights in the sphere of human rights in the liberal states are analyzed. Especially international law gives the collective rights for physical existence, protection against economic and cultural destruction and originality preservation ethnic, religious and language minorities. In detail also the legislation of a number of the states on a combination of the collective and individual rights of the small people for protection of their primordial habitat, a traditional way of life, customs, managing and crafts is in details analysed.

scholarly journals IN RELATION TO CONCEPT OF COLLECTIVE HUMAN RIGHTS

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
D.A. Gadzhieva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Group Rights ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Legal Entities

This article is devoted to the analysis of some of the issues related to the definition of the content of the concept of collective human rights. The author examines the issues related to the definition of methods of exercising and the range of subjects of collective rights, some problems concerning their relations with individual rights, as well as whether the term “collective rights of the individual” is a proper one to be used in law science. The author analyzes the difference between the concepts of “collective” and group” rights, and also substantiates the reasons why these categories of human rights cannot be equated or why group rights cannot be singled out into an independent category of individual rights. In addition, the author substantiates the impossibility of possessing of collective rights by legal entities.

Is the assessment under Article 8 ECHR for migrants justifiable?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1023263X2110614
Author(s):  
Jennie Edlund ◽  
Václav Stehlík
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Way

The paper analyses the protection granted under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights for different immigration cases. The way the European Court of Human Rights determines compliance with Article 8 for settled migrants differs from the way the Court determines compliance for foreign nationals seeking entry or requesting to regularize their irregular migration status. The paper argues that the European Court of Human Rights application of different principles when determining a States’ positive and negative obligations is contradicting its own case law. It also argues that the absence of justification grounds for the refusal of foreign nationals who are seeking entry lacks legitimacy. By treating all immigration cases under Article 8(2) the paper suggests that the differentiation between cases should be based on how a refusal of entry or an expulsion would impact on the family life. The paper also suggests that more consideration should be given towards the insiders interests when balancing the individual rights against the state's interests. These changes would lead to a more consistent and fair case law and generate a more convergent practice by the states which will increase the precedent value of the Court's judgements.

scholarly journals Khlaifia and Others v. Italy

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-280
Author(s):  
Jill I. Goldenziel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Detention Centers ◽  
European Court ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Arab Spring ◽  
Domestic Law

In Khlaifia and Others v. Italy, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber or Court) released a landmark opinion with broad implications for how states must respect the individual rights of migrants. In the judgment, issued on December 15, 2016, the Court held that Italy's treatment of migrants after the Arab Spring violated the requirement of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) that migrants receive procedural guarantees that enable them to challenge their detention and expulsion. The Court also held that Italy's treatment of migrants in detention centers did not violate the ECHR's prohibition on cruel and inhuman treatment, in part due to the emergency circumstances involved. The Court further held that Italy's return of migrants to Tunisia did not violate the prohibition on collective expulsion in Article 4 of Protocol 4 of the ECHR. Enforcement of the judgment would require many European states to provide a clear basis in domestic law for the detention of migrants and asylum-seekers. Given the global diffusion of state practices involving migrants, and other states’ desires to restrict migration, this case has broad implications for delineating the obligations of states to migrants and the rights of migrants within receiving countries.

scholarly journals The African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance as a Justiciable Instrument

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (S1) ◽  
pp. 39-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Kioko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Cote D'ivoire ◽  
Electoral Systems ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Democratic Institutions ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
African Charter

AbstractThe African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance requires state parties to establish and strengthen democratic institutions, the rule of law, human rights and independent electoral systems. However, the extent to which these provisions can be invoked by individuals and non-governmental organizations before a court of law is uncertain. It is also unclear whether such provisions guarantee “stand-alone” individual rights and as such whether the charter could be considered to be a human rights instrument. This article seeks to analyse whether the charter is a human rights instrument, as well as examining its justiciability in light of the decision of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights in APDH v Côte d'Ivoire. The analysis highlights the court's decision affirming that the charter is a human rights instrument and that individuals and non-governmental organizations can file cases in a court of law seeking its enforcement.

scholarly journals Who is promoting the stability of the human rights pillar? Lessons from our own experience of dictatorship

European View ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-114
Author(s):  
Günter Nooke
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cultural Diversity ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
World Peace ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Individual Human

According to former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, world peace is based on the pillars of security, development and human rights. The defence of human rights is a particular foreign policy strength of both the EU and Germany. Despite advances, human rights are currently under threat from two angles. The first is a tendency to demand so much in the realm of human rights that, in the end, very little is achieved. The second is a growing movement that prioritises the rights of the collective over individual rights. However, it is individual human rights that are paramount and it is possible to extend individual rights without trampling cultural diversity. Given Europe's history of freeing itself from the shackles of dictatorship, its role in the defence of human rights is invaluable.

Implementation of UN Treaty Body Decisions: A Brief Insight for Practitioners

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-192
Author(s):  
Kate Fox Principi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Treaty Body ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Do So ◽  
Individual Human

Abstract The United Nations human rights treaty bodies are independent bodies of experts tasked with monitoring the implementation by states parties of human rights treaties. These bodies monitor the implementation of treaties, inter alia, by making decisions on allegations of individual human rights violations under the individual complaints procedures (these decisions are officially referred to as ‘Views’). The number of complaints to the treaty bodies has increased exponentially since the first complaint was examined by the Human Rights Committee in 1977 and is expected to continue to rise. At the same time, a backlog in cases has increased, as resources have never matched the rise in cases to be considered. In addition, decisions in which the treaty bodies find violations of human rights are not always implemented—that is, states do not necessarily grant the victim of the violation the remedy prescribed by the treaty body examining the case. This current situation is taking place against a global backdrop of increased criticism of human rights: a global pushback against human rights, including from states which have been heretofore human rights supportive. Surely, the response from supporters of human rights should be to reinforce the importance and universality of the treaties as the foundation of human rights norms. This article seeks to demonstrate one way to do so by focusing on implementation of treaty body decisions in individual cases.

scholarly journals People's Right to a Nationality and the Eradication of Statelessness in Africa

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-58
Author(s):  
Darren Ekema Ewumbue Monono
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
African Charter ◽  
The Right

The right to nationality, enshrined in art 15 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, is absent in the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, known as the Banjul Charter. On-going efforts by African institutions to address this gap, with a view to eradicating statelessness in the continent have, however, focused on the right to nationality as an individual right. This has undermined the spirit of the Banjul Charter, which consecrates peoples’ rights as an African specificity. This article highlights the Banjul-led African human rights system and its specificities of human rights, particularly with regard to collective community and peoples’ rights. Based on the recognition and communitarian theories, it examines different concepts related to collective rights and highlights the manifestation of peoples’ rights in African case law. It then analyses the nexus between peoples’ rights to nationality and statelessness in the continent. It concludes that the eradication of statelessness by 2024 in Africa cannot be effective unless the focus is on peoples’ collective rights to nationality.

Part I The International Law of Tainted Money, 6 International Legal Sources V—the UN Security Council Delisting Procedure

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grant Tom
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
National Level ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
International Level ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Individual

This chapter considers a particular aspect of the UN Security Council sanctions regime: the procedure for removing individuals or entities from the Sanctions List. The novelty of the delisting procedure justifies considering it in some detail. The delisting procedure is the main response at the international level to the human rights question raised by the Security Council sanctions regime. Because certain consequences for an individual follow at the national level from the fact of the individual having been listed, a procedure that goes to the listing itself holds particular interest for those to whom the regime might apply. The chapter concludes that the delisting procedure will continue to evolve as the Security Council grapples with procedural fairness and individual rights with which it has not historically had much to do.

Multiculturalism in Canada: Individual vs. Collective Rights  

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meaghan Dalby
Keyword(s):  
Hate Crimes ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Group Rights ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Controversial Topic ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Canadian Culture ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Individual

This essay will look at the controversial topic of multiculturalism in Canada.  It will explore aspects of individual rights compared with group rights.  This is a very important topic to Canadians, as they claim to live in a multicultural nation where many different groups co‐exist.  In order to answer the many questions which arise with this topic, it is first necessary to define multiculturalism as it has developed throughout the nation.  With this background in mind, it will be easier to understand where individual rights stemmed from.  Did they evolve on their own, or do they stem from group rights and traditions which were already in existence? Does this make a difference when we compare the two?  As multiculturalism becomes more prominent in Canadian culture, and the rights of the group come to the forefront, where do individual rights stand?  Immigrants coming to Canada can expect that their cultural differences will be tolerated and respected, yet problems can arise if individual rights are infringed upon.  This essay will specifically look at the case study of Sharia Law infringing on women’s rights in Ontario, and Ernst Zundel who spread hate crimes against the Jews under the pretext of the individual right to free speech. Through these case studies, it will be determined whether Canadians prefer to have their individual rights protected, or respect their cultural and groups rights above all else.   The conclusion will express how Canadians feel about the difference between group and individual rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document