Suchergebnisse

part PART I: NATURE -- chapter 1 Human Rights Genealogy -- chapter 2 The Concept of Human Rights in International Law -- part PART II: POLITICS -- chapter 3 International Human Rights and Cultural Relativism -- chapter 4 The Ideology of Human Rights -- chapter 5 Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights -- chapter 6 Rethinking the -- part PART III: IMPLEMENTATION -- chapter 7 How is International Human Rights Law Enforced? -- chapter 8 Toward a Theory of Effective Supranational Adjudication -- part PART IV: EXCEPTIONS -- chapter 9 Legal Differentiation and the Concept of the Human Rights Treaty in International Law -- chapter 10 Human Rights Treaties, Invalid Reservations, and State Consent -- part PART V: CHALLENGES -- chapter 11 Globalization and the Convergence of Values -- chapter 12 Globalization and Human Rights.

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.

The traditional scholarly narrative on the relationship between cultural diversity and universal respect for human rights suggests a tension which must, at best, be managed. There is, however, no consensus among scholars as to the best way to reconcile or manage this tension and so creating an intellectual gap between universalist and cultural relativist schools of thought which has come to inform important aspects of diplomatic practice. This article analyses an alternative approach to the management of this tension based on the practice of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies. The working methods of these supervisory bodies, especially the constructive dialogue on national periodic reports, suggest that they adopt a legal approach in which cultural diversity and universal respect for human rights complement and reinforce each other. At the same time, focusing on effective protection, the treaty bodies challenge specific cultural practices that they consider to be harmful or contrary to human rights guarantees. Although the treaty bodies' approach to this subject is still evolving, it reveals interesting doctrinal lessons concerning the universality of human rights norms.

On the premise that democratic government is founded,inter alia, on the accountability of public bodies and their officials, as well as on the popular participation in collective decision-making by the governed at all levels of government, there is merit in the proposition that it is improper to curb open debate, especially in matters which are of public interest. In so far as the work of the judiciary in general, and of judges in particular, is in the public domain and thus of public interest, the value of the freedom of expression applies, in principle, with equal force. Freedom of expression in the legal domain and in relation to the work of judges serves a variety of useful purposes in democratic society. Freedom of expression serves to uphold the integrity of the principles of democracy which require that governmental institutions should be transparent and accountable, and in that sense the judicial domain, very much like other branches of government, benefits from a healthy exchange and interaction of opinions. The administration of justice is better served by well-informed participants than by ignorance, and freedom of expression can contribute to a full and rigorous assessment of information in the judicial context Similarly, in modern democratic society, all individuals, but especially legal journalists, lawyers and other officials of the legal establishment, contribute to the architecture of judicial policy through the expression of their opinions. Freedom of expression in this context can also prove to be an instrument of individual and professional self-fulfilment. This is considered crucial in any society which is dependent upon the participation of the people.