Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The most recent applications before the International Court of Justice (icj) under Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (icerd), Armenia v. Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan v. Armenia, both claim that the destruction of cultural heritage during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict constitutes a violation of the Convention. The applications have met with enthusiasm that icerd offers a potential new avenue for the protection of cultural heritage, as well as scepticism as to whether these claims fall within the scope of the treaty. Armenia and Azerbaijan bypassed the inter-State communications mechanism under Articles 11–13 before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (cerd), as they are legally entitled to do. But the cerd perspective remains important. First, the Articles 11–13 mechanism is available in relation to 182 States Parties, whereas due to reservations, the Article 22 mechanism is available only in relation to 157 States Parties. Second, cerd practice in relation to cultural heritage ought to inform the determination of the Court. This article investigates the cerd approach to the protection of cultural heritage. It draws in related questions such as whether religious cultural heritage comes under a treaty on racial discrimination; the applicability of these protections in situations of armed conflict; and icerd's relationship with other specialised instruments. It offers conclusions as to what extent an avenue for the protection of cultural heritage under icerd exists before the Committee and the Court.

On February 4, 2021, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered its judgment on the preliminary objections raised by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Qatar v. United Arab Emirates). It upheld by eleven votes to six the first preliminary objection raised by the UAE and found that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by Qatar. The case was referred to the Court under Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), and relates to measures taken on June 5, 2017 by the UAE, along with Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Egypt, to cut diplomatic ties with Qatar and impose a blockade, including expelling all Qatari residents and visitors.

Abstract
The 'living instrument' doctrine has emerged as a key vehicle for evolution and innovation within the International Convention on the Elimination of  All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). Originating in the case law of the European Court of   Human Rights, the doctrine has been adopted by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and, it is argued, all the United Nations treaty bodies. Yet its origins and meaning under ICERD have not been explored. This article investigates its first invocation in an individual communication, Hagan v Australia. It contrasts regional case law, where individual judgments set key interpretive standards, with an international individual communications system that has evolved asymmetrically across the United Nations treaties and does not perform the same standard-setting role. The significance of concluding observations and general recommendations in understanding ICERD as a living instrument is detailed. The living instrument approach in recent inter-State complaints before the International Court of Justice and the Committee is discussed. In conclusion, the need to map ICERD as a living instrument across the multiplicity of its supervisory mechanisms is emphasised.

The publication of the "Danish cartoons" generated a continuing conflict between freedom of expression and religious tolerance. The article examines the history of cartoon satire, invoking past examples of racial and religious discrimination in cartoons while emphasizing the important role cartoonists have played in criticizing and checking the exercise of power. The legal implications of the "Danish cartoons" is analyzed through the lens of international human rights law, in particular the concepts of hate speech, racial discrimination and religious defamation. Finally the present movement in the UN towards "cartooning for peace" is promoted.

This is the very first edited collection on ICERD, the oldest of the UN human rights treaties. It provides a unique combination of members of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) and academic and other experts, to discuss the importance of the treaty on its fiftieth anniversary