Suchergebnisse

Feminist scholarship in international law has generated debate between feminists, but little engagement from the disciplinary main-stream. This chapter addresses one strand of the internal debate, Janet Halley's argument that feminism has come to exercise considerable powerin international law and its institutions; and that it does so with little self-reflection, indeed denying its own influence by asserting an inauthentic under-dog status. After describing the place of feminist theorising in international law, and then Halley's critique, the chapter considers feminist scholarship and its oscillation between resistance to and compliance with international law in the context of state-building and democratisation. It argues that feminists have been successful in bringing the language of women?s empowerment into international law but less adept at identifying methods to give this language life on the ground

An intriguing episode in the life of the now-defunct United Nations (UN) Commission on Human Rights was its adoption of a series of resolutions on human rights and democracy. In 1999 the Commission adopted a resolution entitled �Promotion of the right to democracy� (CHR Res. 1999/57), in anticipation of the new century and millennium. The resolution endorsed a �right to democratic governance� as including a range of civil and political rights such as those to freedom of expression, thought and association. It also included the rights of �universal and equal suffrage,� free voting procedures, periodic and free elections and �the right of citizens to choose their governmental system through constitutional or other democratic means.� The resolution was introduced by the United States and co-sponsored by almost all 53 members of the Commission. Cuba moved an amendment to the draft to delete the words �the right to� from the title of the resolution, on the grounds that no such right existed, but this failed to garner majority support. In the end, the resolution was adopted without a negative vote, but with China and Cuba abstaining. This was the only occasion on which the Commission, the major UN forum for human rights development, endorsed a specific right to democracy. Later resolutions avoided this language and addressed the relationship between the concepts of human rights and democracy, which became a lightning rod for North�South tensions in the Commission. Some of the subsequent resolutions endorsed the process of democratization of states, focusing on democracy at the national level. They presented �free and fair elections [as] an essential feature of democracy� (e.g., CHR Res. 2001/41). These resolutions were typically supported by the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada as well as some developing states, while states such as China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Syria would abstain from voting.

This chapter explores the conceptual politics of democracy in the area of international law and the institutions in which it is developed, particularly the United Nations. How has the meaning of democracy been fought over and shaped in these con texts? The chapter first sketches the relationship of international law and concepts of democracy. It then examines the way that the United Nations has developed the idea of democracy. The chapter observes that, after a long period of detachment, inter national lawyers and international organisations have created a constrained, institution-based definition of democracy. This has produced an unstable foundation for democracy in cases of international intervention after conflict. International legal approaches to democracy provide a nice case study of some of the conceptual debates identified by the editors in their introduction to this volume. Various understandings of democracy jostle for space in the international arena, from those focused on elections, to those that give priority to the protection of human rights, to versions that focus on institution building. These understandings are theoretically rather muddled and do not fit easily within the standard typologies of democracy. International lawyers tend generally to opt for vagueness rather than precision in this area and avoid discussions of demo�cracy�s meaning and value. The most recent inter national accounts of democracy reject the idea of any type of democracy template and insist that local conditions must influence its design. How ever, the practice of the United Nations in pro�moting democracy after conflict suggests that local concerns and voices in fact occupy an uncertain and insecure place in this enterprise and that more attention is paid to process than to the final democratic product.

AbstractThis paper offers a feminist analysis of the responsibility to protect principle. It outlines some themes in feminist scholarship in international law and then uses these to explore the idea of a responsibility to protect. The paper argues that, despite some resonance with feminist concerns, the doctrine has been developed in a limited context, effectively privileging male elites and masculine modes of reasoning.

This article is partly based on observation of the High Court deliberations on the Koowarta case in 1982 and partly on reflection on its significance in defining the relationship between the Australian legal system and international law. It also contrasts the broad approach of the majority to the external affairs power with its analysis of the races power. The article suggests that the intense legal debates about the proper spheres of international, national and state law contained in the judgments are reflected in political debates today.

This article is partly based on observation of the High Court deliberations on the Koowarta case in 1982 and partly on reflection on its significance in defining the relationship between the Australian legal system and international law. It also contrasts the broad approach of the majority to the external affairs power with its analysis of the races power. The article suggests that the intense legal debates about the proper spheres of international, national and state law contained in the judgments are reflected in political debates today.

Women increasingly bear the major burden of armed conflict. In recent years particular attention has been given to the question of violence against women in armed conflict. The significance of these developments is considerable. However, the focus on violence-in particular on sexual violence-tends to obscure other important aspects of women's experience of armed conflict that to date have been largely ignored. The purpose of this comment is to consider a range of ways in which women are affected by armed conflict and to assess the adequacy of international law in protecting them. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is an ancient, conservative, and relatively inflexible area of international law. The number of challenges posed to its relevance and effectiveness in the last half century has been bewildering. It now must meet the demands of women to truly reflect their life experiences. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) a deeply conservative organization, has special responsibility for the development of IHL and is in danger of losing the initiative in many areas where it should be at the forefront of developments. The ICRC is finally recognizing the need to address the specific needs of women in armed conflict. However, a serious commitment to real change is needed. As the traditional guardian of IHL, the ICRC must take concrete steps to make the law relevant to the lives of the majority of the world's population.

Women increasingly bear the major burden of armed conflict. In recent years particular attention has been given to the question of violence against women in armed conflict. The significance of these developments is considerable. However, the focus on violence-in particular on sexual violence-tends to obscure other important aspects of women's experience of armed conflict that to date have been largely ignored. The purpose of this comment is to consider a range of ways in which women are affected by armed conflict and to assess the adequacy of international law in protecting them. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is an ancient, conservative, and relatively inflexible area of international law. The number of challenges posed to its relevance and effectiveness in the last half century has been bewildering. It now must meet the demands of women to truly reflect their life experiences. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) a deeply conservative organization, has special responsibility for the development of IHL and is in danger of losing the initiative in many areas where it should be at the forefront of developments. The ICRC is finally recognizing the need to address the specific needs of women in armed conflict. However, a serious commitment to real change is needed. As the traditional guardian of IHL, the ICRC must take concrete steps to make the law relevant to the lives of the majority of the world's population.