Suchergebnisse

AbstractCritics challenge international courts for their interference with domestic democratic processes and alleged violations of rule of law standards: they claim that these guardians of the rule of law are not well guarded themselves. These concerns should not be dismissed too quickly as mere disgruntled venting by populist politicians. This article focuses on regional human rights courts and argues that the same interests and values that justify rule of law standards of impartiality, independence and accountability domestically also justify similar standards for international courts. Focusing on the European Court of Human Rights and its doctrine of the margin of appreciation, the article demonstrates how this doctrine may contribute to fulfilling the rule of law but at the same time may also endanger it. This requires changes to the doctrine to ensure that the core rule of law standards of predictability and protection against arbitrary discretion are respected.

Abstract Critics challenge international courts for their interference with domestic democratic processes and alleged violations of rule of law standards: they claim that these guardians of the rule of law are not well guarded themselves. These concerns should not be dismissed too quickly as mere disgruntled venting by populist politicians. This article focuses on regional human rights courts and argues that the same interests and values that justify rule of law standards of impartiality, independence and accountability domestically also justify similar standards for international courts. Focusing on the European Court of Human Rights and its doctrine of the margin of appreciation, the article demonstrates how this doctrine may contribute to fulfilling the rule of law but at the same time may also endanger it. This requires changes to the doctrine to ensure that the core rule of law standards of predictability and protection against arbitrary discretion are respected.

Despite substantial growth in past decades, international human rights law faces significant enforcement challenges and threats to legitimacy in many parts of the world. Regional human rights courts, like the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights, represent unique institutions that allow individuals to file formal complaints with an international legal body and render judgments against states. In this book, Jillienne Haglund focuses on regional human rights court deterrence, or the extent to which adverse judgments discourage the commission of future human rights abuses. She argues that regional court deterrence is more likely when the chief executive has the capacity and willingness to respond to adverse regional court judgments. Drawing comparisons across Europe and the Americas, this book uses quantitative data analyses, supplemented with qualitative evidence from many adverse judgments, to explain the conditions under which regional courts deter future rights abuses.

The role and influence human rights in society has been enhanced by its association with international law and yet despite this legal springboard, the scope of its legal nature remains uncertain. By analysing the work of international human rights courts and treaty bodies alongside a brief historical review, this book assesses the distinctive legal dimension of human rights. It concludes that the legalisation of human rights is an unplanned and evolving social construct that continues under the managerial oversight of international human rights courts and treaty bodies which employ the primary.

The role and influence human rights in society has been enhanced by its association with international law and yet despite this legal springboard, the scope of its legal nature remains uncertain. By analysing the work of international human rights courts and treaty bodies alongside a brief historical review, this book assesses the distinctive legal dimension of human rights. It concludes that the legalisation of human rights is an unplanned and evolving social construct that continues under the managerial oversight of international human rights courts and treaty bodies which employ the primary

This unique book examines the role and impact of human rights norms in international courts other than human rights courts. It covers a whole range of courts and jurisdictions, looking at the practice of prominent international courts, such as the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court, as well as various fora of economic adjudication, including the World Trade Organisation, regional integration organisations in Europe and Africa, and investment arbitration. The book systematically explores the role of human rights norms at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, thereby providing an insight into the future evolution of environmental law towards judicial enforcement at the international level. Within each jurisdiction under study, the respective authors, who all are experts within their fields, address the role of different categories of human rights, as well as the range of available modes of operation of human rights norms.

International Human Rights Protection, addressed to judges and lawyers, diplomats and civil servants, researchers and students, is based on the author's personal research and personal involvement with a wide range of subjects, such as the basic concepts of civil and social rights, discrimination and affirmative action, issues of procedure and jurisdiction and issues such as the death penalty and the protection of refugees, minorities and victims of armed conflicts. At the universal level, the book introduces the reader to the labyrinth of United Nations Charter-based and treaty-based procedures. As well as an overview of the Inter-American and African systems, it deals at the regional level particularly with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, and also looks at the national level at the case law of the US Supreme Court and the South African Constitutional Court. This book adopts a particularly critical approach to the so-called dynamic" interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights by the Court of Strasbourg. It is the author's feeling that judges in particular those belonging to courts specialising in human rights have a tendency to systematically support interpretations benefitting the applicants while overlooking too easily the far-reaching implications of judgments for society as a whole. He prefers a more balanced and more realistic approach taking into account the difficulties democratic governments face in coping with the challenges of our present time and with the pressing needs of the realities of today's world. Marc Bossuyt has not only a vast academic experience as Professor of International Law (at the University of Antwerp), as Visiting Professor in universities in Africa America and Asia and as a researcher in the field of International Human Rights Protection. He also has extensive administrative experience (as Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons) diplomatic experience (as Member and Chairperson of United Nations Commissions Committees and Conferences on Human Rights) and judicial experience (as a Judge and President of the Belgian Constitutional Court)

The purpose of this book is to explore the ways in which domestic courts are dealing with international human rights issues in their respective jurisdictions. This volume, however, is not limited to offering a comparative overview. It aims principally at identifying the most common obstacles that still hinder the effective adjudication and enforcement of human rights in domestic law. Ultimately, it aspires to suggest judicial models that may help reduce or remove those obstacles, consistently with the principle, recognised in modern constitutions, that national courts are bound to participate in the implementation process of international law

More and more people are turning to human rights courts to seek protection against prejudice, disadvantage or exclusion on account of their cultural and economic particularities. Human rights courts are thus increasingly faced with the difficult task of deciding these cases, which raise a number of complex and contested legal questions. To what extent can courts accommodate cultural diversity, protect all kinds of groups or interfere in socio-economic policy? This book argues that one of the problems encountered in dealing with such cases is the courts' tendency to assess them from a 'compartmentalised' or fragmentary perspective. This line of reasoning isolates or places into 'boxes' the various interrelated components of the right holder's claim and the norms concerning the case to their detriment. This book critiques this reductionist approach that is out of touch with real life and which, moreover, tends to leave the roots of the alleged violations intact. To counterbalance this tendency, an innovative, integrated and person-centered approach to adjudicating claims of cultural difference and economic disadvantage is put forward. Drawing on the concepts of intersectionality, indivisibility and normative interdependence, the book presents specific notions and methods for approaching the appreciation of rights holders, harms and norms in a holistic manner. A wide selection of case law from both the European and the Inter-American courts of human rights supports the normative framework developed in this book. The sample mostly includes cases brought by Muslims, Roma, Travelers, indigenous peoples, afro-descendants and people living in poverty. Cultural Difference and Economic Disadvantage in Regional Human Rights Courts: An Integrated View combines legal theory with practical insights in analysing both cultural an economic issues, which are rarely addressed together in human rights legal scholarship. It also offers a context-sensitive and relational view of human rights law that puts rights holders at the heart of the legal analysis, taking heed of the social structures within which legal frameworks operate. The book makes for compelling reading for students, academics and practitioners working in the fields of human rights law, jurisprudence, constitutional law, legal theory and feminist and cultural studies. Valeska David is a lawyer from Chile. She holds an LL.M from Utrecht University and a PhD from Ghent University. She has previously worked as a legal consultant, researcher and lecturer for human rights institutions in Latin America and Europe