Queering Reparations Under International Law: Damages, Suffering, and (Heteronormative) Kinship

It is a long-standing principle of international law that every breach of an international obligation that results in harm gives rise to a duty to make adequate reparation. Reparations can take different forms, from the ideal of full restitution to the provision of satisfaction, and the payment of compensation. Notwithstanding reparation's main aim––to ameliorate, if not eradicate, the detrimental consequences of an internationally wrongful act–– it also serves other purposes, such as reinforcing the authority of the norm breached, acknowledging the injury, and recognizing the bearer of harm (the victim). This essay adopts a queer approach to examine the role played by reparation–– in particular, compensation––in determining what (and whose) suffering matters to international law. With a focus on internationally wrongful acts that result in deprivation of life, this piece discusses who is seen as worthy of redress when a violation of the right to life has taken place, as this, in turn, speaks volumes about who is seen as legally entitled to suffer, to mourn and, ultimately, to love. This essay argues that reparation orders from international human rights courts offer a valuable opportunity for re-evaluating––and perhaps even overcoming––heteronormative understandings of kinship.

APOTEOZA SOCIJALNE DRŽAVE: IMPERATIVNI ZAHTJEV OSTVARENJA SOCIJALNE PRAVDE U REPUBLICI HRVATSKOJ

By deliberate choice of the Croatian constitution-makers, the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia protects all economic, social and cultural rights guaranteed by constitutions of developed European democracies and by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to which Croatia is a party. This creates a dual (constitutional and international) obligation for the Croatian legislature to establish a socially just order. Although the constitutional text places both of the human rights generations within the same title, the constitutional jurisprudence adopted a position, whereby socioeconomic rights are excluded from the sphere of organic laws used to elaborate the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights and freedoms. This development notwithstanding, the potential of their protection before the Constitutional Court has not been reduced, as the Court has developed an impressive list of doctrinal positions on the nature of social rights, committing to the concept of social state as a foundational element of European constitutionalism. Still, we would be remiss if we did not emphasize the Constitutional Court's passive stance towards the political branches of the government regarding the social rights and must therefore plead for a more active approach in that regard.

A legal obligation under international law to guarantee access to abortion services in contexts of armed conflict? An analysis of the case of Colombia

This article discusses the existence of an international obligation for the State of Colombia to guarantee access to abortion services for women and girls who are victims of conflict-related sexual violence in the context of the Colombian armed conflict. By examining international humanitarian law rules from an international human rights law lens, it sets out the interdependence between both frameworks from reproductive health and human rights perspectives. Furthermore, the article provides considerations on the recognition and redress of these violations in the transitional justice scenario in Colombia.

Environmental impact assessments in areas beyond national jurisdiction

<p>A state that wishes to proceed with an activity or development has an obligation to undertake an assessment of the risks that activity will have on the environment. This obligation has been generally accepted in domestic and international law, and is often conducted in domestic and trans boundary areas. However, the application of the obligation in marine areas beyond national jurisdiction has been fragmented, with many activities and areas not being assessed. This paper looks at the international obligation to conduct an EIA in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and discusses the possibility of the development of an implementation agreement that would enhance and specify the requirement to conduct an EIA in areas beyond national jurisdiction.</p>

Environmental impact assessments in areas beyond national jurisdiction

<p>A state that wishes to proceed with an activity or development has an obligation to undertake an assessment of the risks that activity will have on the environment. This obligation has been generally accepted in domestic and international law, and is often conducted in domestic and trans boundary areas. However, the application of the obligation in marine areas beyond national jurisdiction has been fragmented, with many activities and areas not being assessed. This paper looks at the international obligation to conduct an EIA in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and discusses the possibility of the development of an implementation agreement that would enhance and specify the requirement to conduct an EIA in areas beyond national jurisdiction.</p>

Non-refoulement and national security: A comparative study of UK, Canada and New Zealand

<p>“International law generally rejects deportation to torture, even where national security interests are at stake.” ¹ There had been a fierce debate when Hassan Ahmed Shaqlane, a Somalian refugee who was sentenced to an 8-year prison term for rape and kidnapping, won his appeal against deportation, upheld by the Deportation Review Tribunal.² Controversy arose again when Al Baiiaty, an Iraqi resettlement refugee was convicted of sexual violation by rape for the fourth time. With the Court of Appeal’s noting that Mr Al Baiiaty poses a serious risk to the community³, the then Minister of Immigration called for a report on the deportation issues raised by the case.⁴ Deportation to torture may deprive a refugee of the right to liberty, security and perhaps life⁵, which is against many states’ domestic laws and international instruments such as the International Conant on Civil and Political Rights⁶ and the Convention against Torture⁷. It has been said that even if Article 33 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees does not categorically reject deportation to torture on its face, it should not be used to deny rights that other legal interments make available to everyone.⁸ It is highly questionable, however, under this broad obligation, if a refugee poses a significant threat to the protecting country’s national security, what action can a state take to protect its own national security and its own people. Are provision in the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT absolute, binding and non derogable? If so, can a state derogate from its international obligation to refoule a refugee to potential torture to protect its national security? On what grounds then, can a state derogate from it? This paper will consider these questions. By doing so, this paper will first outline the international obligations, provided by the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT, what is an international norm and states’ derogation rights in these provisions. The paper then looks at the courts in Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand’s approach in Suresh, EN⁹ and Zaoui¹⁰ when deporting a person who poses threat to national security can lead to torture and arbitrarily deprivation of life and the deportation potentially violates an international obligation or a state’s constitution. The paper will explain their approaches in relation to the different positions of their international obligations. The paper submits its concerns for some specific provisions in the Refugee Convention and the issues in exercising the absolute rights provided by the ICCPR and the CAT, as well as the ECHR. The paper finally submits its preferable approach after observing states’ practice and comparative study of the three approaches.</p>

Non-refoulement and national security: A comparative study of UK, Canada and New Zealand

<p>“International law generally rejects deportation to torture, even where national security interests are at stake.” ¹ There had been a fierce debate when Hassan Ahmed Shaqlane, a Somalian refugee who was sentenced to an 8-year prison term for rape and kidnapping, won his appeal against deportation, upheld by the Deportation Review Tribunal.² Controversy arose again when Al Baiiaty, an Iraqi resettlement refugee was convicted of sexual violation by rape for the fourth time. With the Court of Appeal’s noting that Mr Al Baiiaty poses a serious risk to the community³, the then Minister of Immigration called for a report on the deportation issues raised by the case.⁴ Deportation to torture may deprive a refugee of the right to liberty, security and perhaps life⁵, which is against many states’ domestic laws and international instruments such as the International Conant on Civil and Political Rights⁶ and the Convention against Torture⁷. It has been said that even if Article 33 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees does not categorically reject deportation to torture on its face, it should not be used to deny rights that other legal interments make available to everyone.⁸ It is highly questionable, however, under this broad obligation, if a refugee poses a significant threat to the protecting country’s national security, what action can a state take to protect its own national security and its own people. Are provision in the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT absolute, binding and non derogable? If so, can a state derogate from its international obligation to refoule a refugee to potential torture to protect its national security? On what grounds then, can a state derogate from it? This paper will consider these questions. By doing so, this paper will first outline the international obligations, provided by the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR and the CAT, what is an international norm and states’ derogation rights in these provisions. The paper then looks at the courts in Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand’s approach in Suresh, EN⁹ and Zaoui¹⁰ when deporting a person who poses threat to national security can lead to torture and arbitrarily deprivation of life and the deportation potentially violates an international obligation or a state’s constitution. The paper will explain their approaches in relation to the different positions of their international obligations. The paper submits its concerns for some specific provisions in the Refugee Convention and the issues in exercising the absolute rights provided by the ICCPR and the CAT, as well as the ECHR. The paper finally submits its preferable approach after observing states’ practice and comparative study of the three approaches.</p>

ABOUT FORMS AND METHODS OF INTERNATIONAL VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

The forms and methods of international verification, their varieties and related categories are considered in the paper. It is determined that the key feature of verification forms is a body carrying out verification activities. Consequently, it is proposed to understand the verification form as a way of organization and particularities of this activity. It has been found that the category of subject is often also used for a simple division of verification into types, which does not fully reflect the specifics of verification activities. Two main forms of international verification are distinguished: simple (without the formation of a special body) and institutional (with the formation of a special control body). It is also suggested to distinguish between technologies, methods and procedures of international verification as well, defining verification technologies as tools, mechanisms, devices necessary for control activities, verification methods as ways of applying its means and verification procedures as modes for implementing a verification method or several methods in a combination. The mechanism of international verification is proposed to be seen as the most general term. It comprises not only methods and technologies, but also procedures of international verification, which determine the implementation mode of a verification method or its several methods in the context of a special verification form. Methods and tools of international verification are characterized by different level of efficiency, which is due to different factors, such as: the sphere of international relations, the form of international verification, the scope of powers of verification body, the international legal act, which is the source of international obligation. In this regard, a distinction must be made between the international obligations, the source of which is an international treaty, and other international obligations.

Fishing Quota and International Obligation: Why Has Indonesia been Indicated as a Non-Compliant State

Indonesia committed to conserving the tuna resources by participating in some RFMOs. From all regional organizations where Indonesia has been joined, the CCSBT is the unique one, due to it governs a single tuna species, which is called Southern Bluefin Tuna. This kind of tuna is essential for Indonesia because it is the world’s most expensive tuna and SBT migrates through Indonesian fisheries management zones and goes even further within the territorial waters, where the SBT spawning area is located. This natural characteristic distinguishes Indonesia from other Parties to CCSBT. Nevertheless, the Country has been dealing with its obligation to comply with national quota allocation. For some fishing season periods, the CCSBT indicated Indonesia as a non-compliant. By applying the qualitative approach, this study considers how Indonesia’s non-compliance has been addressed in fishing for shared fish stocks. The data collection was conducted through semi-structured interviews and legal analysis of law and policy instruments. This method leads the elaboration to reveal domestic factors affecting non-compliance by Indonesia. This study argues, the fisheries legislation should consider the provision concerning fishing for resources under quota system, hence, it will provide sufficient legal base to take enforcement measures towards non-compliance with fishing quota.

Honor Killing: A case study of Pakistan

Pakistan along with many other parts of the world has the persistent phenomenon regarding Honor Killing. This research article states the case study of Pakistan in relation to honor killing, its causes and the struggles made by national and international community to reduce such like honor crimes. The effects of several amendments that are previously made have been discussed in the piece of paper stating therein that all the amendments are unable to tackle the deficiencies. There is an actual desire of further improvements and latest amendments that is required to be resolved to eliminate the issues in hand. In the last section of the paper, it is addressed that how Pakistan has made up with the international obligation and its compliance towards the protection of women rights. Analyses of the elements that are keeping the practice of honor killing as well as the recommendation to amend the relevant laws are explained in this research article.