Human Rights and Space: Reflections on the Implications of Human Activity in Outer Space on Human Rights Law

What are the implications of human activity in outer space for international human rights law? In this article, we reflect on these questions with a view to advancing dialogue on the intersection between space law and human rights. We do so by considering the impact of extra-terrestrial human activities such as access to space and remote-sensing activities, space debris, space mining, the weaponisation and militarization of space, and the assertion of criminal jurisdiction extra-terrestrially. Ultimately, we conclude that human activity in space has significant consequences for the advancement of human rights. While, in our view, existing legal frameworks on international human rights law apply extra-terrestrially, there is still scope for specialist frameworks guarding human rights law in the context of human activity in outer space. "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." ~ Stephen Hawking, Astrophysicist "Space is for everybody. It's not just for a few people in science or math, or for a select group of astronauts. That's our new frontier out there, and it's everybody's business to know about space." ~ Christa McAuliffe, Teacher and Challenger Astronaut

Exploitation of Antarctic Iced Freshwater: A Call To Unfreeze Legal Discourse

While discussed within the Antarctic Treaty System during the 1970s-1980s, the idea of iceberg harvesting was laid on ice due to the lack of adequate technologies and scientific knowledge on the potential environmental implications. However, the State Parties to the ATS envisioned the possibility of reopening the legal discourse. For that purpose, iced freshwater resources exploitation was excluded from the scope of the Madrid Protocol containing a ban on all mineral mining activities within the scope ratione loci of the ATS. However, during the negotiations, it was agreed that if the prospect of iceberg harvesting was ever to be realised, the environmental protection provisions under the Madrid Protocol should apply. The present paper provides an analysis of whether the potential exploitation of iced freshwater resources proves realistic within the existing legal framework under the Antarctic Treaty System and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and discusses which rules States would need to adhere to when engaging in such activities. It arrives at the conclusion that, as to now, there is no prohibition of iceberg harvesting for freshwater use under international law. Nevertheless, both within the scope of the ATS and in the high seas, environmental regulations restrict the implementation of the activity and, therefore, require comprehensive environmental impact assessments to be conducted before the commencement of the activity. Furthermore, as ownership allocation of icebergs is not regulated under the relevant treaties, the present paper examines two legal regimes that may potentially govern iceberg acquisition in the high seas, namely, res nullius and res communis. Finally, as private efforts have become more far-reaching in the recent decades, an overview of the current state of practice is presented, highlighting the observed advantages and potential drawbacks. Conclusively, the present paper advocates for the reopening of the legal discourse on the subject matter before the commencement of exploitation activities so as to ensure that the fragile Antarctic environment is protected and preserved for the benefit of all humankind in accordance with the object and purpose of the ATS.

Environmental Degradation and Human Rights Violation: A Cursory Overview of the Potential of the Existing Frameworks to Hold Multinational Corporations Accountable

It has been reported that an estimated 100,000 multinational corporations (MNCs) account for about a quarter of the global gross domestic product (GDP), generating a turnover which exceeds, by leaps and bounds, the public budget of many countries. Unfortunately, the manner of operation of the ever-expanding MNCs appears to engender rampant environmental degradation and wanton human rights violations in host nations. Even though frameworks aiming to regulate the activities of these corporations are in place, the effectiveness of the said regulatory mechanisms has been vociferously challenged, time and again, by academics and experts across the globe. Drawing on a range of pertinent case law as well as secondary sources, this article attempts to critically explore, and navigate, the extent to which the existing regulatory frameworks have been effective in holding MNCs accountable for their environment and human rights-related transgressions. The article establishes that the extant regulatory mechanisms have, to some extent, however miniscule, helped to promulgate awareness and inculcate environmental and human rights issues into corporate culture. It, however, demonstrates that these frameworks are grossly inadequate owing to the complex nature of the MNCs, the overtly broad and obscure nature of the existing international instruments and the reeking corruption in domestic political and judicial institutions. It recommends the codification of binding documents, backed by adequate compliance mechanisms, and the creation of an International Court having special jurisdiction over all MNCs.

Multilateral Investment Court – a Cure for Investor-State Disputes Under Extra-EU International Investment Agreements?

Both branches of international economic law – international investment and trade law are currently in crisis. Many reforms have been proposed to cure the shortcomings of their dispute resolution mechanisms. Distinctive though they are, it seems that the newest EU’s proposal to establish the Multilateral Investment Court is heavily inspired by the dispute settlement system which exists in the World Trade Organization. The new system has been introduced to replace the investor-State dispute settlement mechanism existing in most investment treaties. In this article, the author assesses the objectives of the reform through the prism of successes and failures of the WTO dispute settlement system.

The Role of Estonian Community Settings for Achieving Independent Living for Persons with Disabilities in Eastern European Countries

This article is dedicated to analysing the implementation of Article 19 (paragraphs ‘b’ and ‘c’) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (hereby: the CRPD) in community settings in Estonia and how Estonian experiences can shift the development of independent living and deinstitutionalization in other non-European Union member countries of Eastern Europe. In this regard, this article depicts the details of independent living for persons with mental health problems according to the UN CRPD Committee. Furthermore, the introduction of Maarja Küla (village) SA and its role in providing independent living has been highlighted as well. Finally, the primary obstacles in Eastern European countries ahead of establishing an independent living as well as solutions for the implementation of Article 19 are underlined, and as an author, I have emphasized how to foster deinstitutionalization in the conclusion. In most congregated community settings where organizational management techniques have relied on the medical model of disability rather than the social model of disability, inhabitants suffer from legal incapacitation in most cases. These community settings had been established before the adoption of the CRPD, but gradually have been developed and adjusted to the fundamental principles of the Convention. In my view, a human rights approach has been emerging in such places, though the UN CRPD Committee has urged to rectify management methods and to promote the social model of disability. This research paper also aims to describe the current situation in community settings that has arisen following the pandemic and to find out scientific and practical solutions to abolish the remaining elements of the medical model of disability and to substitute the human rights approach towards a social model of disability in the management and philosophical views of community settings for persons with disabilities.

The Road Not Taken: Failure to Protect from Atrocity Crimes in Myanmar

In 2005, more than 150 heads of State and government pledged that the world must never witness another Rwanda. They accepted the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) both their own populations, and those of other States from atrocity crimes. Yet, in late August 2017, thousands of Rohingya had to flee from the alleged genocide taking place in their home, northern Rakhine in Myanmar. The international community, equipped with a toolbox developed and refined over the past 12 years, does nothing more than politely asking Myanmar to stop. This begs the question: to what extent can the Responsibility to Protect doctrine be used to save the Rohingya from atrocities committed against them? This article explores the potential application of the R2P in the context of Myanmar by exploring the root causes of the alleged genocide, the legal status of the R2P and various options open to the international community to protect the Rohingya. The case is made that applying the R2P – in its current shape and form – would be in the best interest of the Rohingya. After all, the international community cannot stand by in the wake of another mass atrocity.

A Human Rights View of Maritime Piracy Law: Exploring the Gulf of Guinea

As a result of pirates’ unique modus operandi in the Gulf of Guinea (GoG), the current approach to counter-piracy is mainly securitised and repressive. This approach follows the international provisions on piracy framed based on the customary international law categorising pirates as “enemy of mankind”; which, considering the vicious nature of the crime, is quite justified. Moreover, the increase in piracy activities at sea within the GoG is foreseeable considering the economic recession faced by countries within the region due to the Covid-19 pandemic. This prediction calls for the strengthening of law enforcement operations at sea, which must be justifiable in international human rights law in order to ensure the protection of all persons. Thus, reviewing the current piracy laws and their coherence with international human rights law is a requisite. This paper recognises the repressive counter-piracy approach’s success, but takes a glance from a human rights lens, which raises questions relating to “lawfulness”. Consequently, this paper builds on the existing literature criticising the repressive policy towards countering piracy in the GoG. It also advances the research probing the alignment of counter-piracy operations with human rights obligations. This paper additionally takes it a step further by evaluating the piracy laws in the GoG and their alignment with human rights provisions. These findings set a new course towards a more sustainable approach to countering piracy in the GoG, balancing rights and security approaches towards ensuring the protection of lives at sea.

Identity and Representation: Does ‘Name’ Matter As An Element of Statehood?

No state is born sans a name. The widely accepted view is that a state comprises its population, the geographical territory, the ruling government and capacity to enter into relations with other states. This paper argues that in addition to these traditionally recognised requirements, the name of a state, as the most suitable signifier of its identity, deserves to be recognised as an element of statehood. The reason for establishing a state is to create conditions as well as justification for exercising sovereign power, which ipso facto requires manifestation of its identity. This expected function seems impracticable at least in an international setting if a state does not have any name at all. The name of a state serves as the most efficacious vehicle for manifesting its identity as a legal entity. Moreover, practices concerning the name and naming of the prospective states show that it has been regarded as a crucial desideratum by the actors concerned in the course of attainment of statehood.

Multifaceted Asylum Triangle: Does Fragmentation of the Right to Asylum and the Non-Refoulement Rule Deters the Functioning of Equitable and Predictable Burden- and Responsibility-Sharing Mechanism on Refugees?

The global refugee protection system is founded on two core values, assuring a safe and dignified life away from violent regimes and conflicts: the right to asylum and the non-refoulement rule. While there are no internationally agreed definitions for these concepts, their fragmentation affects the equitable and predictable burden- and responsibility-sharing, and subsequently, successful international cooperation in refugee matters. By analysing the right to asylum in legal theory and examining its application in the jurisprudence of international human rights monitoring bodies, this article seeks to explore the complexity of heterogeneous approaches with regard to refugees. Furthermore, the impediments to the functioning of the current refugee protection regime is identified by analysing the complicated nature of its umbrella maxim - the non-refoulement rule. The article examines how the lack of clarity on the contents of the right to asylum and the non-refoulement rule causes different, sometimes contradictory, approaches regarding the corresponding international obligations of states. It further explores how the diversified understanding of these foundational principles makes it difficult to identify common protection needs and the responsibilities of states with regard to international cooperation and burden- and responsibility-sharing on refugee matters. Eventually, the fragmentation of these core values threatens their unequivocal application and results in failing refugee protection regimes. Consequently, this article argues that a common understanding on the right to asylum and non-refoulement rule represents a condicio sine qua non for securing equitable and predictable burden- and responsibility-sharing mechanism in refugee matters.

International Crimes in the Digital Age: Challenges and Oppor tunities Shaped by Social Media

Due to the growing influence of social media on the dynamics of international criminal law, the investigation and prosecution of international crimes have taken an entirely new dimension. Particularly, the increasing use of these platforms has led to the rise of new types of evidence, namely user-generated evidence thus creating considerable opportunities, but also unique legal challenges. Indeed, while social media became a source of evidence for public authorities, these same platforms are used to fuel offline brutality and atrocities. This article thus provides a comprehensive insight into the advantages and disadvantages produced by the growth of user-generated evidence. It also calls for a necessary legal change to accommodate the digital age. Indeed, it is imperative to adjust the existing legal framework in order to contain the downsides of user-generated evidence on the one hand, and promote their effective use in the International Criminal Court to promote justice and transform UGE in the much needed mine of evidence.