Suchergebnisse

Reporters Austria: Martin Stefula Belgium: Vincent Sagaert Denmark: Kim Østergaard, Christina Tvarnø, Andreas Tamasauskas England: Walter Cairns France: Bert van Schaick Germany: Matthias Hünert Greece: Eugenia Dacoronia Ireland: Máire Ní Shúilleabháin Italy: Raffaele Caterina Netherlands: Bert van Schaick Portugal: Paulo Mota Pinto Scotland: Laura MacGregor Spain: Miquel Martín-Casals, Jordi Ribot Igualada, Albert Ruda González Switzerland: Anne-Catherine Hahn

Law No. 19 of 2008 concerning the State Shariah Bonds is lex of Law No. 1 of 2004 on the state Treasury and use state assets. SBSN is a product of two dimensions, namely SBSN as an investment product, and SBSN as a country and project financing for the Government and the public interest in containing maqashid as-Shari'ah in order to keep religion, soul, mind, wealth, and honor.

When establishing human rights violations committed by the state, should it be violation of internationally protected rights or constitutional rights, the violator is obliged to compensate for the harm caused. In the meantime, neither international sources, nor national legal acts and case law answer the question whether the obligation to compensate is exhausted by the compensation awarded in accordance with a decision of an international judicial body or such a payment has punitive nature, and the state keeps the obligation to compensate the damage within the frameworks of national proceedings. Following the first part of opening remarks the second part of the article studies universal international law approach towards the state obligation to compensate for human rights violations, it reviews positions of the International Court of Justice, the model established in international customary law of international responsibility. The third part discusses the compensation mechanism of the European Court of Human Rights and a number of cases where the Russian Federation was the respondent state. The forth part considers national regulation of the Council of Europe states and case law thereof. The author argues that the established international case law in respect of awarding compensations for human rights violations is too restrictive – it does not take into account a complex nature of this phenomenon which includes both correction of the individual applicant situation (restitution of the pre-existed situation) and prevention of similar situations in the future. It is concluded that awarding the compensation by an international body primarily constitutes a measure of international responsibility whereas consideration by a national court is a more effective means of restitution of the applicants rights and that the national court shall not deny consideration of applicants claims due to the fact that they have already been awarded compensation by the international judicial body including the European Court of Human Rights.

Weiss and Minear explore the problems associated with attempting to operationalize the evolving international humanitarian norm that civilians, regardless of location, are entitled to sustenance and medical assistance. In a host of recent civil wars in Africa, the attention of the international community has been drawn to the use of food deprivation by both governments and insurgents. The use of such deprivation has traditionally been part of the arsenals of warring factions, but the widespread and active mobilization of international public opinion against such tactics is relatively new. The authors argue that, while all historical situations are in some sense unique, Sudan is not so idiosyncratic that the lessons and the precedents cannot be replicated elsewhere to protect civilians caught between warring sides in civil wars.