Search results

Introduction -- Historical background -- The United Nations -- The International Bill of Human Rights -- The United Nations : organizational structure -- Regional protection of human rights -- Europe -- The Organization of American States -- The African Union -- Monitoring, implementing, and enforcing human rights -- Substantive rights : general comments -- Equality and non-discrimination -- The right to life -- Freedom from torture : cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment -- The rights to liberty of person -- Equality before the law : the right to a fair trial -- The right to self-determination -- Freedom of expression -- The right to work -- The right to education and human rights education -- Minority rights -- Rights for specific categories of persons -- Looking to the future

Introduction to human rights research methods / Rhona Smith -- Human rights based approaches to research / Rhona Smith -- The doctrinal approach in international human rights scholarship / Suzanne Egan -- Legal theory as a research methodology / Lee McConnell -- Qualitative methods / Rhona Smith and Lorna Smith -- Quantitative analysis / Todd Landman -- Critical ethnography and human rights research / William Paul Simmons and Lyndsey Feldman -- Comparative approaches to human rights / Sue Farran -- "Mixing methods" : reflections on compatibility / Rhona Smith and Lee McConnell

Goodwin v. United Kingdom. App. No. 28957/95. At <http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Judgments.htm>.European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, July 11, 2002.I. v. United Kingdom. App. No. 25680/94. At <http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Judgments.htm>. European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, July 11, 2002.Under English law, people may change their names and use those new names for official purposes. At the same time, specified biological criteria determine the sex of individuals under the law for various purposes, including marriage and retirement pensions. In Goodwin v. United Kingdom and I. v. United Kingdom, the question presented was whether such biological criteria impermissibly operate to the prejudice of postoperative transsexuals. The grand chamber of the European Court of Human Rights unanimously concluded that the practice of restricting gender in national law to the one registered at birth infringed both the right to respect for private life and the right to marry, contrary to the guarantees of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.